I wrote the article below in 2007. SJG
---------------------------------------
Do some of the “good” corporate citizens have no conscience, no morals, no ethics and no principles?
Examples: They invest in countries like communist China where slave labour has been used. They shut down plants in democratic countries in order to take advantage of cheap labour in communist China. Polluted and poisoned goods from China have been exported to other countries. The communist dictators in China brook no dissent. Dissidents have reportedly been tortured, and a one child policy in China results in forced abortions. Some Chinese people have been forced from their homes for the 2008 Olympic Games, but hey, this will be a good venue for the “good” corporate citizens to advertise at, and also celebrate.
Some of the “good” corporate citizens also like a “good” celebration in North America. Their company logos can be seen in “parades of pride” where men have marched naked and some in the parade can be seen making obscene gestures. One “good” corporate company was even going to give a pornography service on their cell phones. (which they later withdrew after protests by decent people.) Some also sponsor TV programs that promote pornography.
“The once underground pornography industry is now very much aboveground and impossible to avoid.”
“Profiting from that industry now are major corporations and mainstream entertainment companies. Annual revenues for the porn industry are estimated at about $10 billion a year.” [1]
Still, these “good” corporate citizens must believe they are providing a “good” public service?
Some other services the “good” corporate citizens have provided over the years has been investing in the communist Soviet Union before the fall of communism. While they were telling all and sundry about the dangers of communism.
“There is no incentive to place optimistic bets on the future when the companies who are today most committed to the [communist] East are the very same which cooperated with the Nazi system.” [2]
But hey, the corporate communists/fascists have to make an honest dollar somewhere! And during the second world war some of them even had business interests with the Nazis. But, money has no conscience: The Financial Post of December 28, 1996 had a headline, “BIS received Nazi gold stolen from Belgium- and knew it,” the article goes on to say: “The Bank for International Settlements received clearly marked bars of Belgian government gold stolen by Nazi Germany during the Second World War and refused to return it to Belgium unless all future claims for stolen assets were renounced,…”
Money has no allegiance to any country that’s why many “good” corporate citizens use offshore tax havens. There are no tax havens for the working people of today’s society. Sure, they get miniscule tax breaks on their tax returns, but the offshore outlaws get a free lunch at taxpayers expense. ‘…Tax havens are the seedy back street bars of the financial world, where corporations and multi-millionaires huddle in shadowy corners to pursue their business out of sight of respectable citizens.’ [3]
Citizens of many countries supposedly elect democratic governments and expect their political representatives to pursue good policies for their countries. Yet, are we seeing “good” policies? These elected rulers are allowing the “good” corporate citizens to proliferate pornography. They allow them to manipulate the tax system through offshore tax havens. They even bail them out with taxpayers dollars as witness the sub prime mortgage debacle in the United States. And some politicians after leaving politics finish up on corporate boards where they become a part of the “good” corporate citizenry
Stephen J. Gray
August 31, 2007.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.slis.indiana.edu/news/story.php?story_id=705
[2] Charles Levinson in his book,“Vodka-Cola” page 207.)
[3 http://www.uniset.ca/microstates/g_taxhavens.htm
(Books worth reading): “Vodka- Cola” by Charles Levinson and “Trading with the Enemy” by Charles Higham)
Thursday, November 5, 2009
Tuesday, November 3, 2009
The Debasers and the Destroyers of Freedom in Canada
To understand how freedom is being debased and destroyed in Canada one has to go back a number of years to the beginning.
Trade Unions
The loss of personal freedoms in Canada had its roots in a decision by an appointed Supreme Court judge. His name was Ivan C. Rand. This judge was the instigator of compulsory union dues by a decision he made in 1946, this was known as “The Rand Decision.” A person did not have to “belong” to the union but must pay union dues for collective bargaining.
Now collective bargaining has evolved into collective coercion, and compulsory union dues are being used by the trade unions for all kinds of causes and policies unrelated to the workplace. Some of these issues are as follows: abortion clinics, so-called same-sex marriage, socialism, the abortionist, Morgentaler, National Action Committee on the Status of Women and numerous other organizations unrelated to collective bargaining. Trade union leaders keep insisting that these non-workplace issues are decided “democratically” at conventions. Which begs the question: How can one have COMPULSORY democracy: when the so-called Charter of Rights and Freedoms lists, “freedom of association” as a “fundamental freedom?”
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms
This Charter was imposed by the political elites of the day. The ordinary people who are ruled by it did not get to vote on whether they wanted this Charter of Pierre Trudeau’s.
“…the Charter was a ruse. Trudeau wanted to consolidate power in the Supreme Court of Canada and weaken Parliament.” [1]
And weak parliaments have now succumbed to rule by appointed the judges. Here are some examples.
The judges say the Charter is a “living tree” and the people have to live with the rotten fruit it produces.
Then from the “living tree” come the great new “rights” found in the charter.
An abortionist who consistently broke the law was finally given clearance to ply his abominable trade of killing the child in the womb, after a majority of judges struck down the abortion law. Now the country has no law on abortion and the killing of the innocents is declared a “choice.”
Another judge declares that anyone arriving on the shores of the country be they criminals, terrorists, drug dealers or whatever have “rights” under the charter.
Another judge states that criminals are “morally worthy” to vote.
Another “learned” judge has a hallucination and “reads in” words not written in the Charter.
A judicial threesome then “discovers” a “right” in the Charter that men can “marry” men and that women can “marry” women. The politicians then tell the people that under the charter “same-sex marriage” is a “right.” Of course this nonsense was never in the Charter, but what’s a big lie amongst the elites.
Another judge states that orgies are okay as long as no “harm” is done. And the country is now open for orgies everywhere. These are just some examples of the abominations imposed by judges and accepted by politicians as “normal” for the country.
Human Rights Commissions (HRC)
These HRCs have no place in a free society. They have become another form of insidious dictatorship where free speech can be called a “hate crime.”
The Canadian Jewish News of 29 October, 2009 said this:
“The federal anti-hate law that ‘official Jews’ lobbied for and got passed has, 32 years later, backfired, sowing the seeds for political correctness, media chill and censorship…” [2]
And the Canadian “conservative” government has been an intervenor against free speech.
“The Attorney General of Canada, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre and B'nai Brith Canada will be
intervening in the Lemire case in support of Section 13, arguing that it is a reasonable restriction on freedom of speech” (Canadian Constitution Foundation Letter of April 28, 2008.)
Freedom of expression is a right guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms; yet, the Attorney General of Canada along with others is an intervenor in the Lemire case. Free speech is either FREE or it isn’t. We already have laws on the books if people defame or libel other people, why do we need these HRCs?
We may not like what people say but in the words of Voltaire, “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” In Canada today, we are seeing the death of free speech. People are being harassed, and dragged before these undemocratic, appointed HRCs. Some of those who have been persecuted are: Mark and Connie Fournier of the Free Dominion website, Chris Kempling, Scott Brockie, Knights of Columbus, Stephen Boissoin, Bishop Henry, Fr. De Valk, editor of Catholic Insight magazine, the Christian Heritage Party and MacLean’s magazine among others. Nobody is safe from these appointed interrogators of totalitarian bent. Anything you say may be taken down and used against you and reported to unelected, appointed, Human Rights Commissars (HRCs). Those dragged before these Stalinist tribunals have to pay for their own lawyers and their own defence. Meanwhile, their accusers are given a free ride, and the politicians sit back and allow this perversion of democracy.
University Campuses
Free speech on Canadian campuses is constantly under attack; that is, if pro-life people dare to attempt to present the evidence of abortion. Anyone daring to show pictures of the killing of the innocent child in the womb, or to even talk about it, is often subject to having their presentation disrupted, destroyed, broken up, or shouted down by the little jackbooted brown shirts who masquerade under the banner of “choice.” These are so-called students who are in favor of “freedom of choice,” but when it comes to showing the victims of choice, that choice is denied.
See these two videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eulKIaVM9DE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lTXw6zIHRQ
Universities are supposed to be places of higher learning where free discussion and opinion are supposed to exist. But, they do not exist in most of the universities in Canada, if anyone dares to show or speak the truth about abortion. This state of affairs has been going on for years.
The Politicians
Politicians brought HRCs into being and gave them legitimacy. Now the politicians sit back and allow these Human Rights Commissars which they created, to run roughshod over us all. Which makes one wonder just who is really running the country? And why do we bother having elections? Oh, I forgot, we live in a “democracy,” Yeah, sure!
In summing up, one has to say, the people of Canada are being forced to ride along with this motley gang of unelected appointed judges and human rights commissions; trade unions with compulsory membership and jackbooted thugs on Canadian university campuses, and cowardly politicians who will not defend freedom. There is no freedom if you are not politically correct. The so-called Charter of Rights is a farce. This farcical Charter has become a judicial monster that devours freedom, morality and decency and vomits compulsion, filth and depravity. We now live in a pretend democracy, and we are seeing the continual debasement and destruction of freedom in Canada.
Stephen J. Gray
November 3, 2009.
Endnotes:
[1] Joe C.W. Armstrong, in his book “Farewell the Peaceful Kingdom” page 75.
[2] http://www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17912&Itemid=86
Trade Unions
The loss of personal freedoms in Canada had its roots in a decision by an appointed Supreme Court judge. His name was Ivan C. Rand. This judge was the instigator of compulsory union dues by a decision he made in 1946, this was known as “The Rand Decision.” A person did not have to “belong” to the union but must pay union dues for collective bargaining.
Now collective bargaining has evolved into collective coercion, and compulsory union dues are being used by the trade unions for all kinds of causes and policies unrelated to the workplace. Some of these issues are as follows: abortion clinics, so-called same-sex marriage, socialism, the abortionist, Morgentaler, National Action Committee on the Status of Women and numerous other organizations unrelated to collective bargaining. Trade union leaders keep insisting that these non-workplace issues are decided “democratically” at conventions. Which begs the question: How can one have COMPULSORY democracy: when the so-called Charter of Rights and Freedoms lists, “freedom of association” as a “fundamental freedom?”
The Charter of Rights and Freedoms
This Charter was imposed by the political elites of the day. The ordinary people who are ruled by it did not get to vote on whether they wanted this Charter of Pierre Trudeau’s.
“…the Charter was a ruse. Trudeau wanted to consolidate power in the Supreme Court of Canada and weaken Parliament.” [1]
And weak parliaments have now succumbed to rule by appointed the judges. Here are some examples.
The judges say the Charter is a “living tree” and the people have to live with the rotten fruit it produces.
Then from the “living tree” come the great new “rights” found in the charter.
An abortionist who consistently broke the law was finally given clearance to ply his abominable trade of killing the child in the womb, after a majority of judges struck down the abortion law. Now the country has no law on abortion and the killing of the innocents is declared a “choice.”
Another judge declares that anyone arriving on the shores of the country be they criminals, terrorists, drug dealers or whatever have “rights” under the charter.
Another judge states that criminals are “morally worthy” to vote.
Another “learned” judge has a hallucination and “reads in” words not written in the Charter.
A judicial threesome then “discovers” a “right” in the Charter that men can “marry” men and that women can “marry” women. The politicians then tell the people that under the charter “same-sex marriage” is a “right.” Of course this nonsense was never in the Charter, but what’s a big lie amongst the elites.
Another judge states that orgies are okay as long as no “harm” is done. And the country is now open for orgies everywhere. These are just some examples of the abominations imposed by judges and accepted by politicians as “normal” for the country.
Human Rights Commissions (HRC)
These HRCs have no place in a free society. They have become another form of insidious dictatorship where free speech can be called a “hate crime.”
The Canadian Jewish News of 29 October, 2009 said this:
“The federal anti-hate law that ‘official Jews’ lobbied for and got passed has, 32 years later, backfired, sowing the seeds for political correctness, media chill and censorship…” [2]
And the Canadian “conservative” government has been an intervenor against free speech.
“The Attorney General of Canada, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre and B'nai Brith Canada will be
intervening in the Lemire case in support of Section 13, arguing that it is a reasonable restriction on freedom of speech” (Canadian Constitution Foundation Letter of April 28, 2008.)
Freedom of expression is a right guaranteed by the Charter of Rights and Freedoms; yet, the Attorney General of Canada along with others is an intervenor in the Lemire case. Free speech is either FREE or it isn’t. We already have laws on the books if people defame or libel other people, why do we need these HRCs?
We may not like what people say but in the words of Voltaire, “I may not agree with what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.” In Canada today, we are seeing the death of free speech. People are being harassed, and dragged before these undemocratic, appointed HRCs. Some of those who have been persecuted are: Mark and Connie Fournier of the Free Dominion website, Chris Kempling, Scott Brockie, Knights of Columbus, Stephen Boissoin, Bishop Henry, Fr. De Valk, editor of Catholic Insight magazine, the Christian Heritage Party and MacLean’s magazine among others. Nobody is safe from these appointed interrogators of totalitarian bent. Anything you say may be taken down and used against you and reported to unelected, appointed, Human Rights Commissars (HRCs). Those dragged before these Stalinist tribunals have to pay for their own lawyers and their own defence. Meanwhile, their accusers are given a free ride, and the politicians sit back and allow this perversion of democracy.
University Campuses
Free speech on Canadian campuses is constantly under attack; that is, if pro-life people dare to attempt to present the evidence of abortion. Anyone daring to show pictures of the killing of the innocent child in the womb, or to even talk about it, is often subject to having their presentation disrupted, destroyed, broken up, or shouted down by the little jackbooted brown shirts who masquerade under the banner of “choice.” These are so-called students who are in favor of “freedom of choice,” but when it comes to showing the victims of choice, that choice is denied.
See these two videos:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eulKIaVM9DE
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lTXw6zIHRQ
Universities are supposed to be places of higher learning where free discussion and opinion are supposed to exist. But, they do not exist in most of the universities in Canada, if anyone dares to show or speak the truth about abortion. This state of affairs has been going on for years.
The Politicians
Politicians brought HRCs into being and gave them legitimacy. Now the politicians sit back and allow these Human Rights Commissars which they created, to run roughshod over us all. Which makes one wonder just who is really running the country? And why do we bother having elections? Oh, I forgot, we live in a “democracy,” Yeah, sure!
In summing up, one has to say, the people of Canada are being forced to ride along with this motley gang of unelected appointed judges and human rights commissions; trade unions with compulsory membership and jackbooted thugs on Canadian university campuses, and cowardly politicians who will not defend freedom. There is no freedom if you are not politically correct. The so-called Charter of Rights is a farce. This farcical Charter has become a judicial monster that devours freedom, morality and decency and vomits compulsion, filth and depravity. We now live in a pretend democracy, and we are seeing the continual debasement and destruction of freedom in Canada.
Stephen J. Gray
November 3, 2009.
Endnotes:
[1] Joe C.W. Armstrong, in his book “Farewell the Peaceful Kingdom” page 75.
[2] http://www.cjnews.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=17912&Itemid=86
Tuesday, October 27, 2009
The Last Free Man: Is This What is to Come?
Charlie was thinking, where did it all begin? How had freedom become lost?
As a child, his parents had had a chip transplanted in his body to save him from kidnappers, and all the “experts” said this was a good thing, because he could be tracked and traced. Later it had become normal for everybody to be chipped. There were chips in one’s driving license, chips in all the credit cards, chips in the medical cards; people were tracked everywhere. Everybody had a number as well as a chip. But, WHO was in charge. WHO was The World Healthy Organization and it now had more power than governments. The WHO had a mandate to declare a pandemic and everybody had to be vaccinated in an emergency. Now there were emergencies all the time and the people were lining up to be inoculated. There were even fights in some places by people jumping the queue and clamoring to get the needle. Charlie thought so many vaccinations over the years has conditioned us to accept the WHO declarations.
Every time there was a WHO declaration of a pandemic, the big multi-national drug companies salivated at their corporate mouths. And the people, now conditioned to accept whatever they were told, considered the latest needle their saviour. The “news” propaganda machines also worked overtime every time a pandemic was declared and the people lined up to get the needle. After all, the vaccine was FREE they were told by the corporate media. Of course this was a big lie, because the taxpayers everywhere paid for this “free” vaccine.
The vaccines were “safe” the people were told, and everybody wanted to be safe. Safety was now a WHO needle. Some rebellious people had complained they did not trust the WHO about the vaccinations, but they were classed as a danger to society and unpatriotic. Many were shamed into acceptance or reported to the Human Rights Commissions for endangering the rights of others.
Some others had fled into the hills to escape the WHO but were tracked down because they were already chipped and numbered. There was no escape from the WHO. Charlie had thought of escaping, but where could he go? The land was a peaceful prison. To flee the country needed a passport and every passport had to be stamped as having the latest WHO needle and the WHO controlled most of the “free” world. This really needled Charlie and was causing him to think that he was a prisoner of the system.
Stephen J. Gray
October 27, 2009.
As a child, his parents had had a chip transplanted in his body to save him from kidnappers, and all the “experts” said this was a good thing, because he could be tracked and traced. Later it had become normal for everybody to be chipped. There were chips in one’s driving license, chips in all the credit cards, chips in the medical cards; people were tracked everywhere. Everybody had a number as well as a chip. But, WHO was in charge. WHO was The World Healthy Organization and it now had more power than governments. The WHO had a mandate to declare a pandemic and everybody had to be vaccinated in an emergency. Now there were emergencies all the time and the people were lining up to be inoculated. There were even fights in some places by people jumping the queue and clamoring to get the needle. Charlie thought so many vaccinations over the years has conditioned us to accept the WHO declarations.
Every time there was a WHO declaration of a pandemic, the big multi-national drug companies salivated at their corporate mouths. And the people, now conditioned to accept whatever they were told, considered the latest needle their saviour. The “news” propaganda machines also worked overtime every time a pandemic was declared and the people lined up to get the needle. After all, the vaccine was FREE they were told by the corporate media. Of course this was a big lie, because the taxpayers everywhere paid for this “free” vaccine.
The vaccines were “safe” the people were told, and everybody wanted to be safe. Safety was now a WHO needle. Some rebellious people had complained they did not trust the WHO about the vaccinations, but they were classed as a danger to society and unpatriotic. Many were shamed into acceptance or reported to the Human Rights Commissions for endangering the rights of others.
Some others had fled into the hills to escape the WHO but were tracked down because they were already chipped and numbered. There was no escape from the WHO. Charlie had thought of escaping, but where could he go? The land was a peaceful prison. To flee the country needed a passport and every passport had to be stamped as having the latest WHO needle and the WHO controlled most of the “free” world. This really needled Charlie and was causing him to think that he was a prisoner of the system.
Stephen J. Gray
October 27, 2009.
Monday, October 26, 2009
The Disruptions of Free Speech on Canadian University Campuses
Free speech on Canadian campuses is constantly under attack; that is, if pro-life people dare to attempt to present the evidence of abortion. Anyone daring to show pictures of the killing of the innocent child in the womb, or to even talk about it, is often subject to having their presentation disrupted, destroyed, broken up, or shouted down by the little jackbooted brown shirts who masquerade under the banner of “choice.” These are so-called students who are in favor of “freedom of choice,” but when it comes to showing the victims of choice, that choice is denied.
Universities are supposed to be places of higher learning where free discussion and opinion are supposed to exist. But, they do not exist in most of the universities in Canada. today, if anyone dares to show or speak the truth about abortion. This state of affairs has been going on for years.
In November 1999, pro-life students at the University of British Columbia (UBC) held a Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) display; this was attacked and trashed by three pro-abortion students on campus. One of the leaders of this assault on the GAP display was a “founder of Students for Choice, a group formed in opposition to GAP…” (The Ubyssey magazine, November 26,1999). This incident was captured on video and can be seen here:
http://www.abortionno.org/GAP/violence/violence.html
These students who trashed the pro-life display were taken to court by the pro-life students who were awarded damages of $5000 against them. To this day none of these pro-abort vandals have paid up and the pro-life students had to pay their own court costs. This is justice in Canada?
Another disruption by the supporters of “choice” was at Saint Mary’s university in Halifax, where a presentation by Jojo Ruba of the Canadian Center for Bio-Ethical Reform (CCBR) was shouted down by student thugs. (See article here: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/mar/09030208.html )
A video of these pro-abort thugs can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eulKIaVM9DE
Another invasion by pro-abort thugs happened at McGill University on October 9, 2009. Jojo Ruba again had his presentation destroyed and was told to “f-ck off.”
See video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lTXw6zIHRQ
These are just some examples, there are many more, of what is happening on Canadian campuses today. The campuses are in the hands of jackbooted young thugs, who want to suppress any free discussion or free debate of the abortion issue. I believe there needs to be an investigation into just who is supporting these young thugs, and their intolerant behaviour must not be permitted to continue.
Stephen J. Gray
October 26, 2009.
Note: See the slaughtered victims of abortion that many people want to suppress at this link: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Universities are supposed to be places of higher learning where free discussion and opinion are supposed to exist. But, they do not exist in most of the universities in Canada. today, if anyone dares to show or speak the truth about abortion. This state of affairs has been going on for years.
In November 1999, pro-life students at the University of British Columbia (UBC) held a Genocide Awareness Project (GAP) display; this was attacked and trashed by three pro-abortion students on campus. One of the leaders of this assault on the GAP display was a “founder of Students for Choice, a group formed in opposition to GAP…” (The Ubyssey magazine, November 26,1999). This incident was captured on video and can be seen here:
http://www.abortionno.org/GAP/violence/violence.html
These students who trashed the pro-life display were taken to court by the pro-life students who were awarded damages of $5000 against them. To this day none of these pro-abort vandals have paid up and the pro-life students had to pay their own court costs. This is justice in Canada?
Another disruption by the supporters of “choice” was at Saint Mary’s university in Halifax, where a presentation by Jojo Ruba of the Canadian Center for Bio-Ethical Reform (CCBR) was shouted down by student thugs. (See article here: http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/mar/09030208.html )
A video of these pro-abort thugs can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eulKIaVM9DE
Another invasion by pro-abort thugs happened at McGill University on October 9, 2009. Jojo Ruba again had his presentation destroyed and was told to “f-ck off.”
See video here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5lTXw6zIHRQ
These are just some examples, there are many more, of what is happening on Canadian campuses today. The campuses are in the hands of jackbooted young thugs, who want to suppress any free discussion or free debate of the abortion issue. I believe there needs to be an investigation into just who is supporting these young thugs, and their intolerant behaviour must not be permitted to continue.
Stephen J. Gray
October 26, 2009.
Note: See the slaughtered victims of abortion that many people want to suppress at this link: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Sunday, October 18, 2009
The “Recovery” after the Robbery?
Was it the biggest robbery in the history of the planet? Many of the inhabitants had seen their pension funds and investments lose some, or nearly all their value, some had seen their jobs destroyed, their homes repossessed, all blamed in the name of the “recession.”
How did the robbery, oops, I mean “recession” happen? It happened, when the money changers and the financial “experts” packaged and sold “assets” which were really debt. They sold this debt under nice sounding names to various financial institutions and each other. Then these financial “experts” proceeded to sell this debt to the workers pension funds, local governments and other funds that people had invested in. Other investors were also persuaded to accept these toxic assets, oops, I mean “troubled assets.” After all, these were the finest minds in the financial system selling them, and who would not trust the money changers?
The money changers charged fees for selling this debt and the financial system was swamped with this worthless paper. The toxic paper manipulators, the movers and shakers of the financial system of the planet; many of them have subsidiaries offshore in tax free havens. Therefore, the question must be asked: Did some of them transfer their monetary gains from these “troubled assets” to their offshore banking accounts? After all, would they really put their money in banks that they knew would soon need taxpayer bailouts. Some had even received huge bonuses for presiding over this financial debacle. And the citizens of the world were left holding the empty bags of their looted economies in these times of change.
There was no spare change left in the money system. So, what could be done? Some governments were now being advised by those who had broke the system, no pun intended, and so it was decided that the tax dollars of the people would be used to bail out, oops, I mean “stimulate” the system. After all, stimulate sounds better than bail out. But, I digress.
Bailout packages, I mean “stimulus packages” of taxpayers trillions were given to some of the elite money changers. Cynics were thinking, was this robbery, without violence, of taxpayers dollars? The same people who had caused the “recession” were now being rewarded. But hey, who better to fix the system than those who had robbed it, I mean, broke it?
But, good news had now arrived. The word was out that the “recession” was now over. It would be a “jobless recovery.” And how true that statement was. Unemployment was rising and was reportedly the highest in years in some of the world’s countries. But it was not all gloom and doom. The money changers were back in “business.” Some of the bailed out, oops, I mean stimulated financial institutions were now handing out huge bonuses, after being stimulated by taxpayers dollars. The only losers were the taxpayers, but hey, somebody has to pay to keep the money changers afloat in this sea of financial toilet paper.
Now there was talk of flushing out the system by the peoples’ governments. Of course, this was just talk to appease the masses. After all, what could governments do? The same financial elites who crashed the system were now advising these same governments. The financial foxes were in the political henhouse, and the chickens might be plucked once again, at the appropriate time.
Anyway, at this point in time, the good news is, the greatest robbery, oops I mean greatest “recession” in the history of mankind is now in “recovery” mode. But, be cautious, don’t bank on it.
Stephen J. Gray
October 18, 2009.
How did the robbery, oops, I mean “recession” happen? It happened, when the money changers and the financial “experts” packaged and sold “assets” which were really debt. They sold this debt under nice sounding names to various financial institutions and each other. Then these financial “experts” proceeded to sell this debt to the workers pension funds, local governments and other funds that people had invested in. Other investors were also persuaded to accept these toxic assets, oops, I mean “troubled assets.” After all, these were the finest minds in the financial system selling them, and who would not trust the money changers?
The money changers charged fees for selling this debt and the financial system was swamped with this worthless paper. The toxic paper manipulators, the movers and shakers of the financial system of the planet; many of them have subsidiaries offshore in tax free havens. Therefore, the question must be asked: Did some of them transfer their monetary gains from these “troubled assets” to their offshore banking accounts? After all, would they really put their money in banks that they knew would soon need taxpayer bailouts. Some had even received huge bonuses for presiding over this financial debacle. And the citizens of the world were left holding the empty bags of their looted economies in these times of change.
There was no spare change left in the money system. So, what could be done? Some governments were now being advised by those who had broke the system, no pun intended, and so it was decided that the tax dollars of the people would be used to bail out, oops, I mean “stimulate” the system. After all, stimulate sounds better than bail out. But, I digress.
Bailout packages, I mean “stimulus packages” of taxpayers trillions were given to some of the elite money changers. Cynics were thinking, was this robbery, without violence, of taxpayers dollars? The same people who had caused the “recession” were now being rewarded. But hey, who better to fix the system than those who had robbed it, I mean, broke it?
But, good news had now arrived. The word was out that the “recession” was now over. It would be a “jobless recovery.” And how true that statement was. Unemployment was rising and was reportedly the highest in years in some of the world’s countries. But it was not all gloom and doom. The money changers were back in “business.” Some of the bailed out, oops, I mean stimulated financial institutions were now handing out huge bonuses, after being stimulated by taxpayers dollars. The only losers were the taxpayers, but hey, somebody has to pay to keep the money changers afloat in this sea of financial toilet paper.
Now there was talk of flushing out the system by the peoples’ governments. Of course, this was just talk to appease the masses. After all, what could governments do? The same financial elites who crashed the system were now advising these same governments. The financial foxes were in the political henhouse, and the chickens might be plucked once again, at the appropriate time.
Anyway, at this point in time, the good news is, the greatest robbery, oops I mean greatest “recession” in the history of mankind is now in “recovery” mode. But, be cautious, don’t bank on it.
Stephen J. Gray
October 18, 2009.
Tuesday, September 15, 2009
The Tax Slaves
The Tax Slaves
Slave: “a person entirely under the domination of some influence…” [1]
In the middle ages the ordinary people were called serfs and literally taxed unto death. The rulers of the serfs were kings and queens and the nobility class who ruled over various fiefdoms.
Now fast forward to the present day where we have a political class ruling over us. They may not have the title king or queen or be of the nobility class, though some believe they are political nobles, but they impose taxes upon us and their titles are “right honorable” and “honorable. The only changes from the days of old are that our “rulers” no longer ride horses or live in castles or wear strange attire. Instead, they wear suits and dresses and some have chauffeur driven limousines and they rule from what have become, “Houses of ill Repute.” From these houses they levy crippling taxes upon the modern day tax slaves who gave them power.
This power is achieved not by the brute force of olden days, but by the political force of unbridled power. The political powers promise the tax slaves some of their own money back if they vote for them in an “election.” Then, after being elected, they proceed to punish the people by imposing upon them more taxes.
The ruling class, appetite for taxes is voracious. One tax imposed by them is the “Goods
and Services Tax” (GST) whose more realistic name should be the Gouging for Services
Tax (GST). This tax was imposed by one government and another government promised to get rid of it, if elected. They did get elected, but guess what, they kept the gouging tax. So much for political honesty! But hey, can the people expect any honesty from tax addicted politicians?
Another tax imposed by some of the political barons is the “Provincial Sales Tax” (PST).
A more apt name for this tax would be Punish the Slaves Tax (PST). And now, the political parasites have dreamed up another tax, called the “Harmonized Sales Tax” (HST), where just about everything purchased will be subject to this tax. The
real name of this tax is Hammer the Slaves Tax (HST) and the peoples’ resources are being sucked dry by these political parasites who literally feed off the peoples’ taxes.
Taxes have become the weapon by which the people are being hammered into submission. We live in an age of political bondage where the people are prisoners of an out of control tax system. This system is lorded over by political charlatans who have become tax tyrants, just like the rulers of olden days, and thus, the people are prisoners of a structure imposed by politicians that has turned them into tax slaves.
Stephen J. Gray
September 15, 2009.
Endnote:
[1] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/slave
Slave: “a person entirely under the domination of some influence…” [1]
In the middle ages the ordinary people were called serfs and literally taxed unto death. The rulers of the serfs were kings and queens and the nobility class who ruled over various fiefdoms.
Now fast forward to the present day where we have a political class ruling over us. They may not have the title king or queen or be of the nobility class, though some believe they are political nobles, but they impose taxes upon us and their titles are “right honorable” and “honorable. The only changes from the days of old are that our “rulers” no longer ride horses or live in castles or wear strange attire. Instead, they wear suits and dresses and some have chauffeur driven limousines and they rule from what have become, “Houses of ill Repute.” From these houses they levy crippling taxes upon the modern day tax slaves who gave them power.
This power is achieved not by the brute force of olden days, but by the political force of unbridled power. The political powers promise the tax slaves some of their own money back if they vote for them in an “election.” Then, after being elected, they proceed to punish the people by imposing upon them more taxes.
The ruling class, appetite for taxes is voracious. One tax imposed by them is the “Goods
and Services Tax” (GST) whose more realistic name should be the Gouging for Services
Tax (GST). This tax was imposed by one government and another government promised to get rid of it, if elected. They did get elected, but guess what, they kept the gouging tax. So much for political honesty! But hey, can the people expect any honesty from tax addicted politicians?
Another tax imposed by some of the political barons is the “Provincial Sales Tax” (PST).
A more apt name for this tax would be Punish the Slaves Tax (PST). And now, the political parasites have dreamed up another tax, called the “Harmonized Sales Tax” (HST), where just about everything purchased will be subject to this tax. The
real name of this tax is Hammer the Slaves Tax (HST) and the peoples’ resources are being sucked dry by these political parasites who literally feed off the peoples’ taxes.
Taxes have become the weapon by which the people are being hammered into submission. We live in an age of political bondage where the people are prisoners of an out of control tax system. This system is lorded over by political charlatans who have become tax tyrants, just like the rulers of olden days, and thus, the people are prisoners of a structure imposed by politicians that has turned them into tax slaves.
Stephen J. Gray
September 15, 2009.
Endnote:
[1] http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/slave
Wednesday, September 9, 2009
Politicians Don’t Lie: Do they?
There are those who say politicians lie; surely this is not true? After all, they do boast the title of “right honorable” and “honorable.” And surely anyone who bears the title, “right honorable” and “honorable” would not lie? Here in B.C. there is a public outcry over the Harmonized Sales Tax (HST), which will be brought in by the Campbell government in July 2010.The Province newspaper of July 28, 2009 said, “The [Campbell] Liberals provided written statements during the spring campaign to restaurant owners and home builders that they had ‘no plans’ to implement the controversial HST.”
Yet, Scampbell, oops, pardon me, I mean Campbell and his government after being re- elected, plan to bring in the HST. Some cynical people are calling this about face lying, but hey, “honorable” politicians do not lie, do they? In fact Campbell’s finance minister said this about the HST, "It was not on our radar before the election," (The Province, July 30, 2009.)
So there you have it, it just appeared on their “radar” after the election. Which raises the question, do they have faulty radar? Was there a malfunction of their equipment? Or is this just an excuse for stiffing the people with another tax? Still, politicians are “honorable” people, are they not, and they would not cheat or lie to the people, would they?
The politicians will be reaping a tax bonanza from this Hammer the Suckers Tax (HST). Just about every dollar people spend will be hammered with this tax. Some might call it political robbery by deceitful politicians, but hey, politicians are called “right honorable“ and “honorable,” therefore political banditry and deceiving the taxpayers are surely wrong words to use? After all, these are “honorable” members of the political class, and what really happened was a malfunction of their “radar.”
And talking about faulty “radar,” Premier Scampbell, oops, I mean Campbell, and his finance minister, appear to have miscalculated the deficit. The Vancouver Province of September 2, 2009 said, “Finance Minister Colin Hansen admitted Tuesday the 2009/10 Budget deficit will be $2.8 billion — five times greater than the $495-million projection in February that Premier Gordon Campbell claimed was a ‘maximum’ deficit during the May election campaign.”
Hey, an election campaign is all about good news. Hammer the Suckers Tax (HST) was not on the “radar” during the election and the deficit was only going to be a projected “$495-million.” Now it will be “$2.8billion.” Not to worry, Hammer the Suckers Tax (HST) will be a goldmine for Scampbell’s oops, I mean Campbell’s government. And during the next election, four years down the road, they will be boasting once again about how they managed your tax dollars. I wonder then if the people will realize at this time how much of their hard earned money was confiscated by these “right honorable” and “honorable” politicians and re-elect them one more time. After all, politicians don’t lie…do they?
Stephen. J. Gray
September 9, 2009.
Yet, Scampbell, oops, pardon me, I mean Campbell and his government after being re- elected, plan to bring in the HST. Some cynical people are calling this about face lying, but hey, “honorable” politicians do not lie, do they? In fact Campbell’s finance minister said this about the HST, "It was not on our radar before the election," (The Province, July 30, 2009.)
So there you have it, it just appeared on their “radar” after the election. Which raises the question, do they have faulty radar? Was there a malfunction of their equipment? Or is this just an excuse for stiffing the people with another tax? Still, politicians are “honorable” people, are they not, and they would not cheat or lie to the people, would they?
The politicians will be reaping a tax bonanza from this Hammer the Suckers Tax (HST). Just about every dollar people spend will be hammered with this tax. Some might call it political robbery by deceitful politicians, but hey, politicians are called “right honorable“ and “honorable,” therefore political banditry and deceiving the taxpayers are surely wrong words to use? After all, these are “honorable” members of the political class, and what really happened was a malfunction of their “radar.”
And talking about faulty “radar,” Premier Scampbell, oops, I mean Campbell, and his finance minister, appear to have miscalculated the deficit. The Vancouver Province of September 2, 2009 said, “Finance Minister Colin Hansen admitted Tuesday the 2009/10 Budget deficit will be $2.8 billion — five times greater than the $495-million projection in February that Premier Gordon Campbell claimed was a ‘maximum’ deficit during the May election campaign.”
Hey, an election campaign is all about good news. Hammer the Suckers Tax (HST) was not on the “radar” during the election and the deficit was only going to be a projected “$495-million.” Now it will be “$2.8billion.” Not to worry, Hammer the Suckers Tax (HST) will be a goldmine for Scampbell’s oops, I mean Campbell’s government. And during the next election, four years down the road, they will be boasting once again about how they managed your tax dollars. I wonder then if the people will realize at this time how much of their hard earned money was confiscated by these “right honorable” and “honorable” politicians and re-elect them one more time. After all, politicians don’t lie…do they?
Stephen. J. Gray
September 9, 2009.
Sunday, August 16, 2009
Did Campbell’s Liberal Government Deceive the People?
“Leadership requires for people to be up front.” [1]
Gordon Campbell, Premier of B.C. during televised debate.
Was Gordon Campbell “upfront” before the election about bringing in the Harmonized Sales Tax (HST)? I believe the answer is NO. So what kind of “leadership” are we getting from this guy?
Journalist, Kent Spencer, in the Province newspaper of July 28, 2009 said,
“The Liberals provided written statements during the spring campaign to restaurant owners and home builders that they had ‘no plans’ to implement the controversial HST.” [2]
Journalist, Michael Smyth writing in the Province of August 9, 2009 in his article headlined, “How a GST rebel turned into the HST thief” wrote this,
“Remember back when Gordon Campbell was a tax-fighter? The guy who said your money was better off in your own pocket than in the slush funds of government?
Now he's the guy who loves the GST so much that he's merging our provincial sales tax with it and slamming it on dozens of PST-exempt goods and services….
Oh, how the worm has turned! Now he is the tax-grabbing politician turning a deaf ear to the people.”[3]
I believe he is doing more than “turning a deaf ear to the people,” he is going to confiscate more of our hard earned money and savings. But hey, we are told it’s “revenue neutral.” Yeah sure, there is nothing “neutral’ about another tax grab by tax hungry, less than truthful politicians. Why did he not have the courage to bring this HST before the people during the election campaign? Was he afraid he would be defeated? Did he care more about deceiving the people to get their vote, rather than being honest with them on the election trail?
Journalist Tom Fletcher writing in the Abbotsford News of August 12, 2009 had this to say, “Much has been written about Premier Gordon Campbell and Finance Minister Colin Hansen’s bald-faced effort to convince voters that they had a sudden conversion to a harmonized sales tax after the election. This is just as believable as Hansen’s last fart in the elevator….” [4]
I believe this harmonized tax smells of polluted politics, and the people getting suffocated are the taxpayers of BC. We need a mechanism to rid us of untrustworthy politicians who say one thing then do another. Politicians should have to sign a conditions of employment, and if they violate it, they should be instantly dismissed. Waiting four years for another election should not be an option. If you deceived your employer at work you would be fired on the spot; therefore, the people should be able to fire politicians when they deceive them. They are supposed to serve the people, but instead make the people into tax paying serfs. HST may be the name politicians call it to make it sound nice, but the people are not in agreement with it. The real name of this regressive tax is Hit the Suckers Tax (HST) and people are fed up being played for suckers by deceitful politicians.
Stephen J. Gray
August 16, 2009.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.straight.com/article-218179/ndps-carole-james-delivers-spellbinding-performance-leaders-debate
[2] http://www.theprovince.com/news/Liberals+they+didn+break+promise+just+changed+their+minds/1834571/story.html
[3] ] http://www.theprovince.com/travel/rebel+turned+into+thief/1875052/story.html
[4] http://www.bclocalnews.com/fraser_valley/abbynews/opinion/53072607.html
Gordon Campbell, Premier of B.C. during televised debate.
Was Gordon Campbell “upfront” before the election about bringing in the Harmonized Sales Tax (HST)? I believe the answer is NO. So what kind of “leadership” are we getting from this guy?
Journalist, Kent Spencer, in the Province newspaper of July 28, 2009 said,
“The Liberals provided written statements during the spring campaign to restaurant owners and home builders that they had ‘no plans’ to implement the controversial HST.” [2]
Journalist, Michael Smyth writing in the Province of August 9, 2009 in his article headlined, “How a GST rebel turned into the HST thief” wrote this,
“Remember back when Gordon Campbell was a tax-fighter? The guy who said your money was better off in your own pocket than in the slush funds of government?
Now he's the guy who loves the GST so much that he's merging our provincial sales tax with it and slamming it on dozens of PST-exempt goods and services….
Oh, how the worm has turned! Now he is the tax-grabbing politician turning a deaf ear to the people.”[3]
I believe he is doing more than “turning a deaf ear to the people,” he is going to confiscate more of our hard earned money and savings. But hey, we are told it’s “revenue neutral.” Yeah sure, there is nothing “neutral’ about another tax grab by tax hungry, less than truthful politicians. Why did he not have the courage to bring this HST before the people during the election campaign? Was he afraid he would be defeated? Did he care more about deceiving the people to get their vote, rather than being honest with them on the election trail?
Journalist Tom Fletcher writing in the Abbotsford News of August 12, 2009 had this to say, “Much has been written about Premier Gordon Campbell and Finance Minister Colin Hansen’s bald-faced effort to convince voters that they had a sudden conversion to a harmonized sales tax after the election. This is just as believable as Hansen’s last fart in the elevator….” [4]
I believe this harmonized tax smells of polluted politics, and the people getting suffocated are the taxpayers of BC. We need a mechanism to rid us of untrustworthy politicians who say one thing then do another. Politicians should have to sign a conditions of employment, and if they violate it, they should be instantly dismissed. Waiting four years for another election should not be an option. If you deceived your employer at work you would be fired on the spot; therefore, the people should be able to fire politicians when they deceive them. They are supposed to serve the people, but instead make the people into tax paying serfs. HST may be the name politicians call it to make it sound nice, but the people are not in agreement with it. The real name of this regressive tax is Hit the Suckers Tax (HST) and people are fed up being played for suckers by deceitful politicians.
Stephen J. Gray
August 16, 2009.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.straight.com/article-218179/ndps-carole-james-delivers-spellbinding-performance-leaders-debate
[2] http://www.theprovince.com/news/Liberals+they+didn+break+promise+just+changed+their+minds/1834571/story.html
[3] ] http://www.theprovince.com/travel/rebel+turned+into+thief/1875052/story.html
[4] http://www.bclocalnews.com/fraser_valley/abbynews/opinion/53072607.html
Thursday, August 13, 2009
The Red Tories, oops, I mean “Conservatives” Win Media Approval
“The Conservatives have made themselves electable by making themselves indistinguishable from the Liberals.” (Columnist Richard Gwyn, The Toronto Star, 22 March 2005.)
Gee, isn’t it grand to know the Red Tories, oops, I mean the “Conservatives” are now “electable?” So what does it take to get “electable” and media approval? First of all you must state clearly that on the issue of abortion you will not pass a law. Then the abortion supporting media will give you praise for getting rid of an “extremist” principle and being on the proper road to becoming government and being a “mainstream” alternative to the Liberals.
Don’t you love this liberal media? They criticize pro-life people for being “one issue” people yet as soon as Harper and the Red Tories, oops, I mean “Conservatives,” say they will not legislate on abortion they go into ecstasy mode and declare the “Conservative” convention a success. A Quebec paper had this to say about the Tory convention: “They also appeared moderate enough to govern, on most of the contentious issues on the floor, none more so than abortion. Harper supported a resolution that a Conservative government would not introduce abortion legislation, and when it passed, another resolution to ban late term abortions became moot.” (The Gazette, Montreal, March 21, 2005.)
Still it’s not only the liberal media that is back on side, even old Progressive Conservatives are filled with Red Tory joy. A Tory Senator had this to say: “Senator Pierre Claude Nolin boasted that members from Quebec had helped draw the party to the centre of the political spectrum, to a point where it is not far from his former party, the Progressive Conservatives.” He went on to say: "The things we adopted suit me, and I consider myself pretty progressive," he said.” ( National Post, March 21, 2005. )
Wow, it really is a relief to know that the Senator is on side. Can they now expect a “Conservative” landslide in Quebec in the next election after this endorsement? This is starting to sound like a Red Tory love in! Perhaps we’ll get approval from Joe Clark next? Where are you Joe now that they need you? They need your political expertise and confirmation that things are now “pretty progressive.” This would really seal the full meal deal. Anyway it’s good to know Quebec is on side. It was a good idea to hold the convention there, it lets them know that this is not an “intolerant” or “bigoted’ party. A Quebec delegate had this to say: "We've finally put the whole social conservatism thing to rest, and we have a strong, moderate policy platform to build on, this has been a good convention for us all around," said Dany Renauld, a long-time Tory organizer and one of 500 Quebec delegates.” ( The Toronto Star, 21 March 2005 )
Quebec was also at the forefront on the abortion issue: “ Quebec-based Tories were mostly buoyant at the convention's end. The reason? Delegates from the province mustered their troops to lobby hard - and successfully - in ensuring the party opposed legislating on abortion.” (The Toronto Star, March 21, 2005.)
With Quebec on side the next election should be a walkover. Who needs those silly western policies like recall and referendum anyway? Bury them, and they did: A Quebec newspaper article said this: “Two basic tenets of the old Reform movement, recall and referendums, were given an unceremonious burial.” The article went on to say: “The Quebec delegates, mostly remnants of the former PCs, got what they demanded from Harper's office to organize a provincial wing. They also got what they wanted in one resolution recognizing the fiscal imbalance between Ottawa and the provinces, and another supporting official bilingualism.” ( The Gazette, Montreal, March 21, 2005.)
Well, isn’t that nice and good to know that official bilingualism will still be maintained even though its costing the taxpayers billions over the years it has been in operation. Still, it is money well spent, isn’t it? And that’s what counts, eh? Now the Red Tories, oops, I mean “Conservatives” cannot be accused of being fiscal conservatives when they endorse expensive official bilingualism. Heck, the way they are trashing all the “neanderthal” populist policies they used to have; “same-sex marriage” is the only one keeping them from being “mainstream.” The Toronto Star had this to say: “As for his opposition to same-sex marriages, it's fair to guess that Harper has only adopted this stance as a sop to his considerable number of ex-Reform/Alliance social conservatives. In exchange, he's been able to abandon the party's opposition to abortion and to junk all its Reform-type populist notions, such as voter recall and citizen-initiated referendums.” (Toronto Star, 22 March, 2005.)
In summing up these are great days to be a Red Tory, oops, I mean “Conservative.” Everything went almost smoothly at the convention except for a bit of a blow up over “equality of ridings”, but this was solved after the Deputy Leader of the party stuck to his Red Tory “principles.” And a resolution went down to defeat that would have given clout to ridings with more members. This resolution was: “The one the PC wing of the party needed to win, and the one Harper passed the word it must win, was the defeat of a resolution tying riding representation to the number of members, rather than all ridings being equally represented.” ( The Gazette, Montreal, March 21, 2005.)
A cynic might say this was how the West got done, and delivered to the Red Tories.
Anyway the “ Conservative family” is back together again. Brian even sent best wishes and Senator Pat was on stage at the end of the convention. Most of the media are on side and it is all systems go. The Red Tories, oops, I mean “Conservatives” are, according to a media pundit, “indistinguishable from the Liberals.” So the “Conservatives” are in “good” liberal shape, to have won media approval.
Stephen J. Gray
March 29, 2005.
Gee, isn’t it grand to know the Red Tories, oops, I mean the “Conservatives” are now “electable?” So what does it take to get “electable” and media approval? First of all you must state clearly that on the issue of abortion you will not pass a law. Then the abortion supporting media will give you praise for getting rid of an “extremist” principle and being on the proper road to becoming government and being a “mainstream” alternative to the Liberals.
Don’t you love this liberal media? They criticize pro-life people for being “one issue” people yet as soon as Harper and the Red Tories, oops, I mean “Conservatives,” say they will not legislate on abortion they go into ecstasy mode and declare the “Conservative” convention a success. A Quebec paper had this to say about the Tory convention: “They also appeared moderate enough to govern, on most of the contentious issues on the floor, none more so than abortion. Harper supported a resolution that a Conservative government would not introduce abortion legislation, and when it passed, another resolution to ban late term abortions became moot.” (The Gazette, Montreal, March 21, 2005.)
Still it’s not only the liberal media that is back on side, even old Progressive Conservatives are filled with Red Tory joy. A Tory Senator had this to say: “Senator Pierre Claude Nolin boasted that members from Quebec had helped draw the party to the centre of the political spectrum, to a point where it is not far from his former party, the Progressive Conservatives.” He went on to say: "The things we adopted suit me, and I consider myself pretty progressive," he said.” ( National Post, March 21, 2005. )
Wow, it really is a relief to know that the Senator is on side. Can they now expect a “Conservative” landslide in Quebec in the next election after this endorsement? This is starting to sound like a Red Tory love in! Perhaps we’ll get approval from Joe Clark next? Where are you Joe now that they need you? They need your political expertise and confirmation that things are now “pretty progressive.” This would really seal the full meal deal. Anyway it’s good to know Quebec is on side. It was a good idea to hold the convention there, it lets them know that this is not an “intolerant” or “bigoted’ party. A Quebec delegate had this to say: "We've finally put the whole social conservatism thing to rest, and we have a strong, moderate policy platform to build on, this has been a good convention for us all around," said Dany Renauld, a long-time Tory organizer and one of 500 Quebec delegates.” ( The Toronto Star, 21 March 2005 )
Quebec was also at the forefront on the abortion issue: “ Quebec-based Tories were mostly buoyant at the convention's end. The reason? Delegates from the province mustered their troops to lobby hard - and successfully - in ensuring the party opposed legislating on abortion.” (The Toronto Star, March 21, 2005.)
With Quebec on side the next election should be a walkover. Who needs those silly western policies like recall and referendum anyway? Bury them, and they did: A Quebec newspaper article said this: “Two basic tenets of the old Reform movement, recall and referendums, were given an unceremonious burial.” The article went on to say: “The Quebec delegates, mostly remnants of the former PCs, got what they demanded from Harper's office to organize a provincial wing. They also got what they wanted in one resolution recognizing the fiscal imbalance between Ottawa and the provinces, and another supporting official bilingualism.” ( The Gazette, Montreal, March 21, 2005.)
Well, isn’t that nice and good to know that official bilingualism will still be maintained even though its costing the taxpayers billions over the years it has been in operation. Still, it is money well spent, isn’t it? And that’s what counts, eh? Now the Red Tories, oops, I mean “Conservatives” cannot be accused of being fiscal conservatives when they endorse expensive official bilingualism. Heck, the way they are trashing all the “neanderthal” populist policies they used to have; “same-sex marriage” is the only one keeping them from being “mainstream.” The Toronto Star had this to say: “As for his opposition to same-sex marriages, it's fair to guess that Harper has only adopted this stance as a sop to his considerable number of ex-Reform/Alliance social conservatives. In exchange, he's been able to abandon the party's opposition to abortion and to junk all its Reform-type populist notions, such as voter recall and citizen-initiated referendums.” (Toronto Star, 22 March, 2005.)
In summing up these are great days to be a Red Tory, oops, I mean “Conservative.” Everything went almost smoothly at the convention except for a bit of a blow up over “equality of ridings”, but this was solved after the Deputy Leader of the party stuck to his Red Tory “principles.” And a resolution went down to defeat that would have given clout to ridings with more members. This resolution was: “The one the PC wing of the party needed to win, and the one Harper passed the word it must win, was the defeat of a resolution tying riding representation to the number of members, rather than all ridings being equally represented.” ( The Gazette, Montreal, March 21, 2005.)
A cynic might say this was how the West got done, and delivered to the Red Tories.
Anyway the “ Conservative family” is back together again. Brian even sent best wishes and Senator Pat was on stage at the end of the convention. Most of the media are on side and it is all systems go. The Red Tories, oops, I mean “Conservatives” are, according to a media pundit, “indistinguishable from the Liberals.” So the “Conservatives” are in “good” liberal shape, to have won media approval.
Stephen J. Gray
March 29, 2005.
Wednesday, August 5, 2009
The Undermining of Faith and Morals From Within The Catholic Church
August 5, 2009.
Please note the article below was written in November 2003 by me. I feel it is pertinent to re-issue it as Lifesite News has done an excellent job recently regarding the controversy regarding Development and Peace. Stephen J. Gray
The Undermining of Faith and Morals From Within The Catholic Church
"One of the most ominous symptoms of decay in the Church today is the increasing acceptance of modern amoralism"
Dietrich von Hildebrand, writing in his book: "Trojan Horse In The City Of God."
For years people in the Catholic church have been writing letters and protesting abortion and homosexuality only to see their efforts undermined by other Catholics within the church. Some Catholics have even been persecuted and criticized by trade unions and special interest groups for standing up for their Catholic faith. The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops(CCCB) worked with some of these groups and unions. More on this later in the article.
The Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace (CCODP) sometimes called Development and Peace solicits funds from the Catholic faithful and some of this money has been handed over to other organizations. One wonders how those unsuspecting Catholics feel about some of their "Share Lent" money being shared with radical groups.
Catholic Insight magazine, June 2001 issue, page 26, stated the following regarding CCODP: "On the heels of the revelation of its $135,000 donation to the World March of Women-2000 event last year, comes the news of a Catholic Development and Peace donation of $140,000 to the Peoples Summit of the Americas held in Quebec City...." One wonders if there are other groups out there who have received money from Development and Peace. Perhaps it’s time this organization has had to detail where all its money has gone over the last number of years.
Regarding The World March of Women: Catholic Insight, June 2000 issue had this to say: "...the Canadian organizers were the usual proponents of abortion, lesbianism and other feminist demands..." The National Post of May 15, 2000, stated: " The Canadian Womens March Committee...includes abortion activist groups such as the Canadian Abortion Rights Action League." The Interim newspaper May 2000 issue had the headline on page 2: "March coordinator says pro-life groups not welcome."
The Catholic Womens League (CWL) which is supposed to uphold the teachings of the church made a submission to a government committee on so-called "same sex marriage" that undermines Catholic teaching. Life site news of April 16, 2003, stated that: "CWL National President Marie Cameron, who in her own presentation before the committee demanded the legal recognition of homosexual civil unions." Still the leadership of the CWL is no stranger to controversy. B.C. Report magazine of Aug. 26, 1996 had an article headlined, "No friend of Catholicism." The subject of the article was Hedy Fry who was "the federal minister responsible for the status of women" at the time and had been invited by the "CWL’s national executive" to address their convention.
The article went on to say: "Dr. Fry,... is a noted champion of pro-abortion and homosexual-rights policies, both of which explicitly contradict basic church doctrine."
Ms. Fry is also a supporter of same sex marriage and was on the committee hearing submissions on this insane proposal. One wonders if there is a virus out there eating brain cells. Why else would supposedly intelligent politicians be discussing such nonsense?!
In the annual report of the Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women (CACSW), (1989-1990), its new president Glenda Sims had this to say: "the federal government, among others, has acknowledged that sexual orientation should be read into the general open-ended language of section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms..." and of course a judge did "read in" this a few years later. One is reminded of that old saying: Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.
Didn’t the politicians blame the judges for "reading in" sexual orientation? Yet Ms. Sims tells us "the federal government... acknowledged" it should be read in. Obviously there was discussion around this and it eventually came to fruition in the courts. This report goes on to say: "abortion is a health issue." One wonders when people began thinking pregnancy was a disease? A CWL member is listed as belonging and being a council member in this CACSW annual report.
Less anyone thinks this undermining of Catholic teaching is a recent phenomenon it is worth checking out the book " Behind The Mitre" by Tony Clarke. Mr. Clarke was "social policy adviser for the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops [CCCB] for 21 years." He was eventually dismissed.
We are told in his book page 101, how a "Social Solidarity project" was formed and "endorsed in principle... by the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Canadian Labour Congress, the Confederation of Canadian Unions,... the National Action Committee on the Status of Women,..." and others. Which raises the question, why would the CCCB be endorsing or working with pro-abortion organizations like the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) or the National Action Committee on the Status of Women (NAC)?
The B.C. Catholic of Dec. 15, 1996 had the headline, "CCCB secretary defends NAC donation." The article says, "The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops gladly donated $2000..." to NAC for a "March against Poverty." Interestingly enough this march was also "co-sponsored by the Canadian Labour Congress." Trade unions have been financial supporters of NAC and many other groups over the years with their memberships compulsory union dues. In fact, the National Post of June 7, 1999, stated: "NAC expects to receive $741,692 in revenue next year, of which $642,892 is in the form of government and labour union grants as well as from direct mail campaigns..."
I headed an organization called Save the Union Movement and published a newsletter for 11 years, exposing the misuse of trade union time and money. The connections between the CCCB, trade unions and special interest groups a few years ago was quite common according to Mr. Clarke in his book "Behind The Mitre." In fact, the CCCB put out a pamphlet called "Supporting Labour Unions." On Feb. 22, 1994, I wrote the CCCB (at the time their Chairman was Bishop Faber MacDonald). I explained how trade unions were funding abortion clinics, homosexuality and other special interest groups and asked the CCCB to put out a pastoral letter informing Catholic union members about the misuse of their union dues. The CCCB would not do it, even though some Catholic union members had been persecuted for standing up for their faith and for speaking out against union support of abortion and homosexuality. Some had even spent their own money fighting the unions on these issues.
I had also written the CCCB as far back as 1992 when Archbishop Gervais was President, and was told: "The issue you raise is, of course, of great importance to Canadian society, and it will be given attention." The letter was signed by Msgr. James Weisgerber, General Secretary. I am still waiting for this "attention" from the CCCB.
I had also written Bishop Remi De Roo, and in a letter dated Jan.7, 1992, from his executive assistant these words were written: "Bishop Remi De Roo has asked me to acknowledge receipt of your Dec. 30th letter." 1992 was the year Bishop De Roo was addressing his union and special interest friends in Action Canada Network (see his quote later on in this article). Perhaps asking him to speak out was to near the mark as he was involved with these groups I was exposing.
I had also written Archbishop Ambrozic of Toronto, who wrote me on Sept. 16, 1992, and said: "I received the information you had sent me and apologize for my failure to acknowledge it. One reason for this failure is my inability to see clearly what can be done about it all and whether your prescription is the correct way to go about it."
I had also had a meeting in 1992 with Archbishop Exner of Vancouver and informed him about the trade unions involvement in abortion and homosexuality; I also had correspondence with him over a period of time. In one of my letters I informed Archbishop Exner that the B.C Federation of Labour had said that, "Public funds should not be used to finance private education or private institutions." Archbishop Exner in a letter to me of Nov. 14, 1992 said he "raised the concerns of the Save the Union Movement at the most recent Ecumenical Bishops meeting on October 19, 1992." The Archbishop wrote me on October 30,1993, and referred me to a Mr. Farrell who was Executive Director of Catholic Charities Central Office. I did meet with Mr. Farrell on Dec. 1, 1993. On Feb. 21, 1994, I had a phone call from Mr. Farrell saying that Archbishop Exner had written Archbishop Faber MacDonald of the CCCB with the concerns I had raised. All that was ever asked of all these Bishops was a pastoral letter informing Catholic union members of the misuse of their union dues or to speak out. Yet none of these Bishops would do it. Yet as I mentioned earlier, the CCCB has no problem putting out a pamphlet in support of unions but would not speak out when these same unions were involved in immoral activities. One wonders why? If the Bishops had had the courage to speak out and taken action and mobilized the Catholic faithful in 1992, would we have had the problems that we have today.... problems such as unions like the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) interfering in Catholic education with the Marc Hall case, and unions objecting to a Catholicity clause at a Catholic school in B.C.
We can also see the undermining of Catholic beliefs in the affiliation of the Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association (OECTA) with the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC). (The affiliation was reported in the communist newspaper The Peoples Voice April 1996 issue.) In fact the present Boss of the CLC, Ken Georgetti, sent out a letter soliciting funds for abortion clinics when he was president of the B.C. Federation of Labour (BCFL). He stated in this letter that "in a short time, funds have been raised to pay the down payment on the $237,000 medical clinic." He goes on to say: "the Executive Council urges all affiliates to send donations, consider loans or monthly pledges." The B.C. Coalition for Abortion Clinics stated in a brochure that " the B.C. Federation of Labour and the Canadian Labour Congress, along with other labour organizations have long supported womens right to choice on abortion, free standing abortion clinics and medicare coverage for abortion." The Ontario Coalition for Abortion Clinics (OCAC) has also received money from trade unions. It is stated in the book, Social Movements, Social Change, The Politics and Practice of Organizing that "at various labour conventions in 1982 and 1983, OCAC activists were involved in garnering support for choice." This book also states that "many unions have contributed financial and material support to OCAC." Abortionist Henry Morgentaler, that great supporter of "freedom of choice" has also had his share of compulsory union dues. The book, The Charter of Rights and the Legalization of Politics in Canada, page 301, states that "... the Ontario Federation of Labour has donated thousands of dollars to the Morgentaler defence..." OECTA is also a member of the Ontario Federation of Labour. This makes catholic union members brothers and sisters in solidarity with abortionists, and of course their affiliation fees will help pay for the special interest groups funded by the CLC.
The radical feminists also boast about the power they have in trade unions. The book, Union Sisters states: "We have pushed unions to be more responsive to the needs and concerns of women; to fight on issues they have traditionally shied away from - issues like...support of lesbian and gay rights and abortion..."
B.C. Report magazine of April 10, 2000, page18, gives an example of these radical feminists in action. A group called "Collectif Autnome Feministe" were protesting in front of Cathedral of Mary Queen of the World in Montreal. They were protesting, "about the church’s anti-abortion , anti-sex-education, anti-homosexuality tendencies." The article goes on to say a number of people "entered the church. They spray painted Religion a trap for fools on the facade and No Gods, no masters on the altar itself. Condoms and underwear were strewn everywhere....Soiled tampons were stuck to paintings. The missal and two altar cloths were taken; hundreds of hymn books were shredded." The article also states, "The police will not say whether the vandalism within the church was connected to the protest by the Collectif..."
There is an old hymn called "Onward Christian soldiers marching off to war": make no mistake, war is being waged in Canada today on Catholics and other Christians. Our schools, our beliefs, our churches are under attack and many of our Catholic and Christian leaders have fled the battlefield. This war is financed by our own tax dollars, our own compulsory union dues, some of our own church donations and some of our leaders are co-operating with the enemy. The weapons being used are the courts, so called human rights commissions, trade union bureaucracies controlled by special interests, and political parties with no principles.
One party, the NDP, has been the recipient of millions of dollars over the years in compulsory union dues; this is the socialists captive financial support base in this war. This is also the party that helped start the war on traditional family life. It led the charge for abortion and homosexuality and has been joined by most of the other political parties.
According to Statistics Canada, 1991 census, over 80% of the people in Canada claim Christian affiliation. If this is true, the time has come to get out of our pews and into our marching shoes. Nobody attacks our Jewish brethren with impunity. Why should we surrender to this virulent minority who are attacking all that we hold dear? Though it would appear some are not prepared to fight.
In fact, in a letter dated April 7, 1994 to Archbishop Exner of Vancouver, Bishop MacDonald stated, "Organizations like the Save the Union Movement May Well play into the Hands of Forces in Society that Favour Laissez-Faire Capitalism." He also says in this letter, "It needs to be stressed that every union measure supporting abortion or other activities offensive to Catholics was the result of a democratic vote of the membership." (the underlining was in the quote.) He goes on to say that Save the Union Movement "would in fact end up assisting the enemies of free trade unionism." Union dues are compulsory, as is membership, so "free trade unionism" is a misnomer. Also how can you have compulsory democracy? Bishop MacDonald also stated in his letter, "When this whole issue came up in 1985, the Social Affairs Commission of the Ontario Bishops debated it. At that time, the labour union advisers to the Commission advised against a frontal attack on the offensive resolutions..." The Bishops are supposed to be teachers of faith and morals yet they defer to "labour union advisers." All that was ever asked of the CCCB was to write a pastoral letter about unions supporting abortion and homosexuality. The question needs to be asked of the CCCB: just who is playing into "the hands of forces in society" by not speaking out when members of the Catholic faith are attacked for living up to their faith? Was it because the CCCB had already been a part of these union and special interest group projects? Were they already compromised and perhaps were now afraid to criticize trade unions and some of these special interest groups? Which makes one wonder, does solidarity come before morality?
Perhaps some in these coalitions would also point out the role of the CCCB in their "Social Solidarity project." For as Mr. Clarke writes on page 102, of "Behind The Mitre," "the Social Solidarity project provided a unique opportunity to forge links between progressive social movements in Quebec and the rest of Canada." The quote below by Bishop Remi De Roo shows that he was in favour of "developing alliances."
" it is only by developing alliances between peoples organizations and building a broad based social movement in this country that we have any chance of effectively replacing the corporate agenda with our own dynamic peoples agenda."
Bishop Remi De Roo quoted in Accent magazine March 1992. PEI, Union of Public Sector Employees.
Note: The bishop was speaking at an event sponsored by Action Canada Network (ACN) and the Canadian Labour Congress. ACN was a coalition of unions and special interest groups headed up by Tony Clarke. Mr. Clarke was chair of the ACN while he was still working for the CCCB. Many of these groups were pro-abortion and supporters of the lesbian and homosexual lifestyle.
Mr. Clarke states in the preface of his book: "As co-director of the social affairs department of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops from the late seventies to the early nineties, I was responsible for working with a team of bishops and staff in developing a plan of action for taking moral leadership [emphasis added] on national economic and social policy issues." Oh really? One would have thought only the Bishops would be in charge of "moral leadership." Instead Catholics had 21 years of Mr. Clarke helping with "moral leadership."
Mr. Clarke goes on to write in his book on page 102: "the Social Solidarity project helped to lay the groundwork for the building of a broad-based social movement..." The World March of Women consisted of some of these so-called "broad based social movements" including NAC and the CLC; this twosome pops up all the time. The March was also supported by the CWL. This was done by the CWL "without consulting its members."(Catholic Insight, page 7, June 2000 issue.) And of course the CWL never consulted its members when it made its submission to the committee on so called, "same sex marriage" but "demanded the legal recognition of homosexual civil unions" as stated earlier in this article.
Mr. Clarke has this to say on page 194 of his book regarding a "prophetic alliance," "the active participation of Development and Peace would be essential, not only because it has a relatively strong network of Catholic activists and significant resources for campaign activities, but for the key role it could play in forging active links with partners in Central and Latin America." Development and Peace obviously has "significant resources" when as mentioned earlier they contributed $135,000 and $140,000 to the World March of Women and The Peoples Summit of the Americas respectively. In fact Development and Peace had a Total Revenue of $23,870,755 for 2001-2002; this information comes from their own publication.
Mr. Clarke is now director of an organization called the Polaris Institute and his organization is a participating member of the Solidarity Network (www.solidaritynetwork.ca) as is Development and Peace. Other notable member organizations are: Canadian Religious Conference, National Action Committee on the Status of Women (NAC) and the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) - it seems you can’t have one without the other- a whole bunch of unions and other special interest groups, some of whom also receive government grants. It reads like a "whose-who" of the social and political left. Many of the groups listed are the same ones that were members of the ACN of which Mr. Clarke was chair.
The website states, "Our National Solidarity Assemblies and workshops bring together equality-seeking groups including public and private sector unions and Aboriginal/First Nations, anti-poverty, anti-racist, cultural, environmental, faith, farming, health, immigrant and refugee, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, peace, seniors and pensioners, students, women, and youth organizations." I wonder how many people out there know they are being counted as members. The website also states: "organizations are asked to commit monthly or annual financial contributions to the Solidarity Network..." Which raises the question: how much money, if any, has Development and Peace given to this Solidarity Network? Does the CCCB know, and does it condone Development and Peace associating and working with pro-abortion and pro-homosexual organizations?
"For thirty years pro-life activists have battled one government after another while a politically - correct Bishops Conference remained silent. As for individual bishops, with very few exceptions they haven’t so much as dared question, let alone oppose, pro-abortion or pro-sodomite Catholic politicians and deny them Catholic institutional support."
-Father Alphonse de Valk, writing in Catholic Insight magazine November 2000.
To the above quote by Father de Valk I would add trade unions and their special interest group allies. The Bishops haven’t dared question or oppose them either. In fact the CCCB gave them "institutional support." Could this be a case of "Solidarity Forever?" An editorial in Catholic New Times of October 5, 2003. had this to say about the CCCB statement on marriage: "The bishops' statement does not repeat Vatican language like 'homosexual practices are sins gravely contrary to chastity,'" the editorial goes on to say about homosexual relationships; 'Might this not be a road to holiness?' We have now reached a critical stage in this country where religious people are under constant attack and their beliefs trashed from within and without. The undermining of society and the anti-social agenda has also been achieved in big part by trade unions using compulsory union dues and special interest groups using our tax dollars; some of these groups also receive union funding. Their networks are extensive and their connections are interwoven.
Catholic politicians and other politicians seem to be afraid to stand up for what is right and put an end to this perversion of the system. Though there are a few exceptions among the politicians.
The question has to be asked: were some of our religious leaders and their organizations duped into consorting with some of these groups, giving some of them money and giving them legitimacy by taking part in their "Social Solidarity project"? Or were they in fact, in Lenin’s words, "useful idiots." Meanwhile, people who stood up for their faith got very little support, if any, from the CCCB and were hung out to dry as the saying goes. I myself spent 11 years and thousands of dollars of my own money fighting and exposing these injustices. Then I realized it was futile to ask the CCCB to take a stand for they were part of the problem. Answers are needed and perhaps even an inquiry on this undermining of faith and morals in the Catholic Church in Canada.
Stephen J. Gray
Nov. 15, 2003.
Some Info on the Author: Stephen Gray is a writer and researcher on various topics. He published a newsletter for 11 years exposing the misuse of trade union time and money.
Please note the article below was written in November 2003 by me. I feel it is pertinent to re-issue it as Lifesite News has done an excellent job recently regarding the controversy regarding Development and Peace. Stephen J. Gray
The Undermining of Faith and Morals From Within The Catholic Church
"One of the most ominous symptoms of decay in the Church today is the increasing acceptance of modern amoralism"
Dietrich von Hildebrand, writing in his book: "Trojan Horse In The City Of God."
For years people in the Catholic church have been writing letters and protesting abortion and homosexuality only to see their efforts undermined by other Catholics within the church. Some Catholics have even been persecuted and criticized by trade unions and special interest groups for standing up for their Catholic faith. The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops(CCCB) worked with some of these groups and unions. More on this later in the article.
The Canadian Catholic Organization for Development and Peace (CCODP) sometimes called Development and Peace solicits funds from the Catholic faithful and some of this money has been handed over to other organizations. One wonders how those unsuspecting Catholics feel about some of their "Share Lent" money being shared with radical groups.
Catholic Insight magazine, June 2001 issue, page 26, stated the following regarding CCODP: "On the heels of the revelation of its $135,000 donation to the World March of Women-2000 event last year, comes the news of a Catholic Development and Peace donation of $140,000 to the Peoples Summit of the Americas held in Quebec City...." One wonders if there are other groups out there who have received money from Development and Peace. Perhaps it’s time this organization has had to detail where all its money has gone over the last number of years.
Regarding The World March of Women: Catholic Insight, June 2000 issue had this to say: "...the Canadian organizers were the usual proponents of abortion, lesbianism and other feminist demands..." The National Post of May 15, 2000, stated: " The Canadian Womens March Committee...includes abortion activist groups such as the Canadian Abortion Rights Action League." The Interim newspaper May 2000 issue had the headline on page 2: "March coordinator says pro-life groups not welcome."
The Catholic Womens League (CWL) which is supposed to uphold the teachings of the church made a submission to a government committee on so-called "same sex marriage" that undermines Catholic teaching. Life site news of April 16, 2003, stated that: "CWL National President Marie Cameron, who in her own presentation before the committee demanded the legal recognition of homosexual civil unions." Still the leadership of the CWL is no stranger to controversy. B.C. Report magazine of Aug. 26, 1996 had an article headlined, "No friend of Catholicism." The subject of the article was Hedy Fry who was "the federal minister responsible for the status of women" at the time and had been invited by the "CWL’s national executive" to address their convention.
The article went on to say: "Dr. Fry,... is a noted champion of pro-abortion and homosexual-rights policies, both of which explicitly contradict basic church doctrine."
Ms. Fry is also a supporter of same sex marriage and was on the committee hearing submissions on this insane proposal. One wonders if there is a virus out there eating brain cells. Why else would supposedly intelligent politicians be discussing such nonsense?!
In the annual report of the Canadian Advisory Council on the Status of Women (CACSW), (1989-1990), its new president Glenda Sims had this to say: "the federal government, among others, has acknowledged that sexual orientation should be read into the general open-ended language of section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms..." and of course a judge did "read in" this a few years later. One is reminded of that old saying: Oh, what a tangled web we weave when first we practice to deceive.
Didn’t the politicians blame the judges for "reading in" sexual orientation? Yet Ms. Sims tells us "the federal government... acknowledged" it should be read in. Obviously there was discussion around this and it eventually came to fruition in the courts. This report goes on to say: "abortion is a health issue." One wonders when people began thinking pregnancy was a disease? A CWL member is listed as belonging and being a council member in this CACSW annual report.
Less anyone thinks this undermining of Catholic teaching is a recent phenomenon it is worth checking out the book " Behind The Mitre" by Tony Clarke. Mr. Clarke was "social policy adviser for the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops [CCCB] for 21 years." He was eventually dismissed.
We are told in his book page 101, how a "Social Solidarity project" was formed and "endorsed in principle... by the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops, the Canadian Labour Congress, the Confederation of Canadian Unions,... the National Action Committee on the Status of Women,..." and others. Which raises the question, why would the CCCB be endorsing or working with pro-abortion organizations like the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) or the National Action Committee on the Status of Women (NAC)?
The B.C. Catholic of Dec. 15, 1996 had the headline, "CCCB secretary defends NAC donation." The article says, "The Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops gladly donated $2000..." to NAC for a "March against Poverty." Interestingly enough this march was also "co-sponsored by the Canadian Labour Congress." Trade unions have been financial supporters of NAC and many other groups over the years with their memberships compulsory union dues. In fact, the National Post of June 7, 1999, stated: "NAC expects to receive $741,692 in revenue next year, of which $642,892 is in the form of government and labour union grants as well as from direct mail campaigns..."
I headed an organization called Save the Union Movement and published a newsletter for 11 years, exposing the misuse of trade union time and money. The connections between the CCCB, trade unions and special interest groups a few years ago was quite common according to Mr. Clarke in his book "Behind The Mitre." In fact, the CCCB put out a pamphlet called "Supporting Labour Unions." On Feb. 22, 1994, I wrote the CCCB (at the time their Chairman was Bishop Faber MacDonald). I explained how trade unions were funding abortion clinics, homosexuality and other special interest groups and asked the CCCB to put out a pastoral letter informing Catholic union members about the misuse of their union dues. The CCCB would not do it, even though some Catholic union members had been persecuted for standing up for their faith and for speaking out against union support of abortion and homosexuality. Some had even spent their own money fighting the unions on these issues.
I had also written the CCCB as far back as 1992 when Archbishop Gervais was President, and was told: "The issue you raise is, of course, of great importance to Canadian society, and it will be given attention." The letter was signed by Msgr. James Weisgerber, General Secretary. I am still waiting for this "attention" from the CCCB.
I had also written Bishop Remi De Roo, and in a letter dated Jan.7, 1992, from his executive assistant these words were written: "Bishop Remi De Roo has asked me to acknowledge receipt of your Dec. 30th letter." 1992 was the year Bishop De Roo was addressing his union and special interest friends in Action Canada Network (see his quote later on in this article). Perhaps asking him to speak out was to near the mark as he was involved with these groups I was exposing.
I had also written Archbishop Ambrozic of Toronto, who wrote me on Sept. 16, 1992, and said: "I received the information you had sent me and apologize for my failure to acknowledge it. One reason for this failure is my inability to see clearly what can be done about it all and whether your prescription is the correct way to go about it."
I had also had a meeting in 1992 with Archbishop Exner of Vancouver and informed him about the trade unions involvement in abortion and homosexuality; I also had correspondence with him over a period of time. In one of my letters I informed Archbishop Exner that the B.C Federation of Labour had said that, "Public funds should not be used to finance private education or private institutions." Archbishop Exner in a letter to me of Nov. 14, 1992 said he "raised the concerns of the Save the Union Movement at the most recent Ecumenical Bishops meeting on October 19, 1992." The Archbishop wrote me on October 30,1993, and referred me to a Mr. Farrell who was Executive Director of Catholic Charities Central Office. I did meet with Mr. Farrell on Dec. 1, 1993. On Feb. 21, 1994, I had a phone call from Mr. Farrell saying that Archbishop Exner had written Archbishop Faber MacDonald of the CCCB with the concerns I had raised. All that was ever asked of all these Bishops was a pastoral letter informing Catholic union members of the misuse of their union dues or to speak out. Yet none of these Bishops would do it. Yet as I mentioned earlier, the CCCB has no problem putting out a pamphlet in support of unions but would not speak out when these same unions were involved in immoral activities. One wonders why? If the Bishops had had the courage to speak out and taken action and mobilized the Catholic faithful in 1992, would we have had the problems that we have today.... problems such as unions like the Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) interfering in Catholic education with the Marc Hall case, and unions objecting to a Catholicity clause at a Catholic school in B.C.
We can also see the undermining of Catholic beliefs in the affiliation of the Ontario English Catholic Teachers Association (OECTA) with the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC). (The affiliation was reported in the communist newspaper The Peoples Voice April 1996 issue.) In fact the present Boss of the CLC, Ken Georgetti, sent out a letter soliciting funds for abortion clinics when he was president of the B.C. Federation of Labour (BCFL). He stated in this letter that "in a short time, funds have been raised to pay the down payment on the $237,000 medical clinic." He goes on to say: "the Executive Council urges all affiliates to send donations, consider loans or monthly pledges." The B.C. Coalition for Abortion Clinics stated in a brochure that " the B.C. Federation of Labour and the Canadian Labour Congress, along with other labour organizations have long supported womens right to choice on abortion, free standing abortion clinics and medicare coverage for abortion." The Ontario Coalition for Abortion Clinics (OCAC) has also received money from trade unions. It is stated in the book, Social Movements, Social Change, The Politics and Practice of Organizing that "at various labour conventions in 1982 and 1983, OCAC activists were involved in garnering support for choice." This book also states that "many unions have contributed financial and material support to OCAC." Abortionist Henry Morgentaler, that great supporter of "freedom of choice" has also had his share of compulsory union dues. The book, The Charter of Rights and the Legalization of Politics in Canada, page 301, states that "... the Ontario Federation of Labour has donated thousands of dollars to the Morgentaler defence..." OECTA is also a member of the Ontario Federation of Labour. This makes catholic union members brothers and sisters in solidarity with abortionists, and of course their affiliation fees will help pay for the special interest groups funded by the CLC.
The radical feminists also boast about the power they have in trade unions. The book, Union Sisters states: "We have pushed unions to be more responsive to the needs and concerns of women; to fight on issues they have traditionally shied away from - issues like...support of lesbian and gay rights and abortion..."
B.C. Report magazine of April 10, 2000, page18, gives an example of these radical feminists in action. A group called "Collectif Autnome Feministe" were protesting in front of Cathedral of Mary Queen of the World in Montreal. They were protesting, "about the church’s anti-abortion , anti-sex-education, anti-homosexuality tendencies." The article goes on to say a number of people "entered the church. They spray painted Religion a trap for fools on the facade and No Gods, no masters on the altar itself. Condoms and underwear were strewn everywhere....Soiled tampons were stuck to paintings. The missal and two altar cloths were taken; hundreds of hymn books were shredded." The article also states, "The police will not say whether the vandalism within the church was connected to the protest by the Collectif..."
There is an old hymn called "Onward Christian soldiers marching off to war": make no mistake, war is being waged in Canada today on Catholics and other Christians. Our schools, our beliefs, our churches are under attack and many of our Catholic and Christian leaders have fled the battlefield. This war is financed by our own tax dollars, our own compulsory union dues, some of our own church donations and some of our leaders are co-operating with the enemy. The weapons being used are the courts, so called human rights commissions, trade union bureaucracies controlled by special interests, and political parties with no principles.
One party, the NDP, has been the recipient of millions of dollars over the years in compulsory union dues; this is the socialists captive financial support base in this war. This is also the party that helped start the war on traditional family life. It led the charge for abortion and homosexuality and has been joined by most of the other political parties.
According to Statistics Canada, 1991 census, over 80% of the people in Canada claim Christian affiliation. If this is true, the time has come to get out of our pews and into our marching shoes. Nobody attacks our Jewish brethren with impunity. Why should we surrender to this virulent minority who are attacking all that we hold dear? Though it would appear some are not prepared to fight.
In fact, in a letter dated April 7, 1994 to Archbishop Exner of Vancouver, Bishop MacDonald stated, "Organizations like the Save the Union Movement May Well play into the Hands of Forces in Society that Favour Laissez-Faire Capitalism." He also says in this letter, "It needs to be stressed that every union measure supporting abortion or other activities offensive to Catholics was the result of a democratic vote of the membership." (the underlining was in the quote.) He goes on to say that Save the Union Movement "would in fact end up assisting the enemies of free trade unionism." Union dues are compulsory, as is membership, so "free trade unionism" is a misnomer. Also how can you have compulsory democracy? Bishop MacDonald also stated in his letter, "When this whole issue came up in 1985, the Social Affairs Commission of the Ontario Bishops debated it. At that time, the labour union advisers to the Commission advised against a frontal attack on the offensive resolutions..." The Bishops are supposed to be teachers of faith and morals yet they defer to "labour union advisers." All that was ever asked of the CCCB was to write a pastoral letter about unions supporting abortion and homosexuality. The question needs to be asked of the CCCB: just who is playing into "the hands of forces in society" by not speaking out when members of the Catholic faith are attacked for living up to their faith? Was it because the CCCB had already been a part of these union and special interest group projects? Were they already compromised and perhaps were now afraid to criticize trade unions and some of these special interest groups? Which makes one wonder, does solidarity come before morality?
Perhaps some in these coalitions would also point out the role of the CCCB in their "Social Solidarity project." For as Mr. Clarke writes on page 102, of "Behind The Mitre," "the Social Solidarity project provided a unique opportunity to forge links between progressive social movements in Quebec and the rest of Canada." The quote below by Bishop Remi De Roo shows that he was in favour of "developing alliances."
" it is only by developing alliances between peoples organizations and building a broad based social movement in this country that we have any chance of effectively replacing the corporate agenda with our own dynamic peoples agenda."
Bishop Remi De Roo quoted in Accent magazine March 1992. PEI, Union of Public Sector Employees.
Note: The bishop was speaking at an event sponsored by Action Canada Network (ACN) and the Canadian Labour Congress. ACN was a coalition of unions and special interest groups headed up by Tony Clarke. Mr. Clarke was chair of the ACN while he was still working for the CCCB. Many of these groups were pro-abortion and supporters of the lesbian and homosexual lifestyle.
Mr. Clarke states in the preface of his book: "As co-director of the social affairs department of the Canadian Conference of Catholic Bishops from the late seventies to the early nineties, I was responsible for working with a team of bishops and staff in developing a plan of action for taking moral leadership [emphasis added] on national economic and social policy issues." Oh really? One would have thought only the Bishops would be in charge of "moral leadership." Instead Catholics had 21 years of Mr. Clarke helping with "moral leadership."
Mr. Clarke goes on to write in his book on page 102: "the Social Solidarity project helped to lay the groundwork for the building of a broad-based social movement..." The World March of Women consisted of some of these so-called "broad based social movements" including NAC and the CLC; this twosome pops up all the time. The March was also supported by the CWL. This was done by the CWL "without consulting its members."(Catholic Insight, page 7, June 2000 issue.) And of course the CWL never consulted its members when it made its submission to the committee on so called, "same sex marriage" but "demanded the legal recognition of homosexual civil unions" as stated earlier in this article.
Mr. Clarke has this to say on page 194 of his book regarding a "prophetic alliance," "the active participation of Development and Peace would be essential, not only because it has a relatively strong network of Catholic activists and significant resources for campaign activities, but for the key role it could play in forging active links with partners in Central and Latin America." Development and Peace obviously has "significant resources" when as mentioned earlier they contributed $135,000 and $140,000 to the World March of Women and The Peoples Summit of the Americas respectively. In fact Development and Peace had a Total Revenue of $23,870,755 for 2001-2002; this information comes from their own publication.
Mr. Clarke is now director of an organization called the Polaris Institute and his organization is a participating member of the Solidarity Network (www.solidaritynetwork.ca) as is Development and Peace. Other notable member organizations are: Canadian Religious Conference, National Action Committee on the Status of Women (NAC) and the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) - it seems you can’t have one without the other- a whole bunch of unions and other special interest groups, some of whom also receive government grants. It reads like a "whose-who" of the social and political left. Many of the groups listed are the same ones that were members of the ACN of which Mr. Clarke was chair.
The website states, "Our National Solidarity Assemblies and workshops bring together equality-seeking groups including public and private sector unions and Aboriginal/First Nations, anti-poverty, anti-racist, cultural, environmental, faith, farming, health, immigrant and refugee, lesbian, gay, bisexual, transgender, peace, seniors and pensioners, students, women, and youth organizations." I wonder how many people out there know they are being counted as members. The website also states: "organizations are asked to commit monthly or annual financial contributions to the Solidarity Network..." Which raises the question: how much money, if any, has Development and Peace given to this Solidarity Network? Does the CCCB know, and does it condone Development and Peace associating and working with pro-abortion and pro-homosexual organizations?
"For thirty years pro-life activists have battled one government after another while a politically - correct Bishops Conference remained silent. As for individual bishops, with very few exceptions they haven’t so much as dared question, let alone oppose, pro-abortion or pro-sodomite Catholic politicians and deny them Catholic institutional support."
-Father Alphonse de Valk, writing in Catholic Insight magazine November 2000.
To the above quote by Father de Valk I would add trade unions and their special interest group allies. The Bishops haven’t dared question or oppose them either. In fact the CCCB gave them "institutional support." Could this be a case of "Solidarity Forever?" An editorial in Catholic New Times of October 5, 2003. had this to say about the CCCB statement on marriage: "The bishops' statement does not repeat Vatican language like 'homosexual practices are sins gravely contrary to chastity,'" the editorial goes on to say about homosexual relationships; 'Might this not be a road to holiness?' We have now reached a critical stage in this country where religious people are under constant attack and their beliefs trashed from within and without. The undermining of society and the anti-social agenda has also been achieved in big part by trade unions using compulsory union dues and special interest groups using our tax dollars; some of these groups also receive union funding. Their networks are extensive and their connections are interwoven.
Catholic politicians and other politicians seem to be afraid to stand up for what is right and put an end to this perversion of the system. Though there are a few exceptions among the politicians.
The question has to be asked: were some of our religious leaders and their organizations duped into consorting with some of these groups, giving some of them money and giving them legitimacy by taking part in their "Social Solidarity project"? Or were they in fact, in Lenin’s words, "useful idiots." Meanwhile, people who stood up for their faith got very little support, if any, from the CCCB and were hung out to dry as the saying goes. I myself spent 11 years and thousands of dollars of my own money fighting and exposing these injustices. Then I realized it was futile to ask the CCCB to take a stand for they were part of the problem. Answers are needed and perhaps even an inquiry on this undermining of faith and morals in the Catholic Church in Canada.
Stephen J. Gray
Nov. 15, 2003.
Some Info on the Author: Stephen Gray is a writer and researcher on various topics. He published a newsletter for 11 years exposing the misuse of trade union time and money.
Monday, July 13, 2009
Making an Ass of the Law
Who would have believed that in a supposedly law abiding nation, that people would be allowed to parade and march naked, some even simulating sexual intercourse and making lewd gestures. And the reason for their doing so would be that they would be displaying their “pride.” These displays of “pride” have also been known to be led by police chiefs and other police marching in lockstep with the participants. One wonders, whatever happened to law and order and obeying the Criminal Code? Are some people above the law? Still, never mind, one newspaper described these parades as “…in general, laudable for their family friendliness.” But hey, that’s the state of the propagandized “news” in the country today. Some politicians have also been known to take part in these parades of “pride” though so far they have kept their clothes on. But, when our ruling political emperors’ already have no clothes, what’s the big deal! The politicians even take pride in giving taxpayer’s dollars to these parades. Some of them will do and say anything for votes and participating in these types of parades where nudity and grossness is present shows what kind of principles they have in this tolerant land.
This is a land where orgies are okay as long as no “harm” is done, said an Obscene Court, oops, I mean Supreme Court, Judge. And of course another “respected” judge told us a pervert’s work had “artistic merit.” And still other judges declared, “same-sex marriage” was a right under The Charter. And another judge declared The Charter was a “living tree;” now its diseased branches have spread across the land into all walks of life.
Life in this land of The Charter is disposable and there is no law on abortion. The innocent child in the womb can be slaughtered right up to the moment of birth if it is unwanted. This is called “freedom of choice” by the politicians and others who support this type of killing. Now euthanasia has raised its ugly head and the push is on to kill those considered in need of termination, though the killing will be disguised as “death with dignity.” No doubt it will become acceptable, for this is a land that has lost its moral compass. Just about everything that once was decent and true has been replaced by depravity, debauchery and lies.
Speaking the truth can get a person accused of a “hate crime” and free speech has been suppressed by human rights commissars appointed by the political class. Most of the political class, I believe, are a danger to a free people. Why else would they allow these human rights commissars to use their jackboots on the people of the land?
The land is supposedly going to have another election soon, but over 40% of the people don’t bother to vote anymore; perhaps they realize it’s a farce, and those that do vote still believe they live in a “democracy.” In this “democracy” the people are ruled by The Charter, a document the ordinary people did not get to vote on. It was imposed by the political elites and now anything can be found in this document by a judge hallucinating and “reading in” whatever is needed for those who wish to impose their agenda on the country.
In this country criminals are “morally worthy” to vote, so said another “respected” judge. Judges are appointed and park their posteriors on the bench until they are 75 years of age, and the damage some of them can do is irreparable. So can this land be repaired? We are sinking ever deeper into the depths of depravity and perversion, camouflaged as “rights.” One can only ask the question where will it all end? In total tyranny or rebellion?
Stephen J. Gray
July 13, 2009.
This is a land where orgies are okay as long as no “harm” is done, said an Obscene Court, oops, I mean Supreme Court, Judge. And of course another “respected” judge told us a pervert’s work had “artistic merit.” And still other judges declared, “same-sex marriage” was a right under The Charter. And another judge declared The Charter was a “living tree;” now its diseased branches have spread across the land into all walks of life.
Life in this land of The Charter is disposable and there is no law on abortion. The innocent child in the womb can be slaughtered right up to the moment of birth if it is unwanted. This is called “freedom of choice” by the politicians and others who support this type of killing. Now euthanasia has raised its ugly head and the push is on to kill those considered in need of termination, though the killing will be disguised as “death with dignity.” No doubt it will become acceptable, for this is a land that has lost its moral compass. Just about everything that once was decent and true has been replaced by depravity, debauchery and lies.
Speaking the truth can get a person accused of a “hate crime” and free speech has been suppressed by human rights commissars appointed by the political class. Most of the political class, I believe, are a danger to a free people. Why else would they allow these human rights commissars to use their jackboots on the people of the land?
The land is supposedly going to have another election soon, but over 40% of the people don’t bother to vote anymore; perhaps they realize it’s a farce, and those that do vote still believe they live in a “democracy.” In this “democracy” the people are ruled by The Charter, a document the ordinary people did not get to vote on. It was imposed by the political elites and now anything can be found in this document by a judge hallucinating and “reading in” whatever is needed for those who wish to impose their agenda on the country.
In this country criminals are “morally worthy” to vote, so said another “respected” judge. Judges are appointed and park their posteriors on the bench until they are 75 years of age, and the damage some of them can do is irreparable. So can this land be repaired? We are sinking ever deeper into the depths of depravity and perversion, camouflaged as “rights.” One can only ask the question where will it all end? In total tyranny or rebellion?
Stephen J. Gray
July 13, 2009.
Monday, July 6, 2009
The Planned Killing
The professional killer had made his decision: He would kill another innocent victim. He had watched and studied his victim on camera where he'd seen the young victim moving around in her abode. She was sucking her finger as she peacefully relaxed in her safe haven. The victim was unaware of being watched, or of her impending doom. She was now sleeping peacefully, innocently unaware of what was to come.
The killer put on his gloves and arranged his instruments of death. He had committed this deadly deed many times before and felt confident of having another successful killing. He had killed younger victims than this one using other methods. The killer made his move. His victim tried to move away from the executioner’s deadly weapon, but to no avail. This licensed professional killer was stronger, and the victim had no place to escape to. The assassin struck and the little victim thrashed in agony and pain. Her young heart beat faster in her death throes; then it stopped. The killer started cutting her small body, disemboweling, dismembering and decapitating her. Finally the atrocity was completed. The little hands and feet, the head, and the torso were bloodstained evidence of this slaughter of an innocent by a professional killer.
The human butcher removed his bloodstained gloves and threw them into the garbage bucket that also contained the human remains of the slaughtered victim. There would be many more victims of this licensed killer. He would be paid for his deadly work and endorsed by some in the media who would call him a hero. The politicians and courts would consider his behaviour legal and it would even be paid for by the citizens' taxes. For in this sick and perverted land the killer and his killings were called “freedom of choice.”
Stephen J. Gray
July 6, 2009.
Note: See the innocent victims slaughtered by abortion at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
The killer put on his gloves and arranged his instruments of death. He had committed this deadly deed many times before and felt confident of having another successful killing. He had killed younger victims than this one using other methods. The killer made his move. His victim tried to move away from the executioner’s deadly weapon, but to no avail. This licensed professional killer was stronger, and the victim had no place to escape to. The assassin struck and the little victim thrashed in agony and pain. Her young heart beat faster in her death throes; then it stopped. The killer started cutting her small body, disemboweling, dismembering and decapitating her. Finally the atrocity was completed. The little hands and feet, the head, and the torso were bloodstained evidence of this slaughter of an innocent by a professional killer.
The human butcher removed his bloodstained gloves and threw them into the garbage bucket that also contained the human remains of the slaughtered victim. There would be many more victims of this licensed killer. He would be paid for his deadly work and endorsed by some in the media who would call him a hero. The politicians and courts would consider his behaviour legal and it would even be paid for by the citizens' taxes. For in this sick and perverted land the killer and his killings were called “freedom of choice.”
Stephen J. Gray
July 6, 2009.
Note: See the innocent victims slaughtered by abortion at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Friday, July 3, 2009
The Revenge of the Aborted?
“Canadian families do not make babies like they used to. A dramatic decline in fertility in recent decades, combined with an aging population, has the potential to transform every aspect of Canadian society, from schools and housing to social attitudes toward family.” [1]
In the National Post there were four articles over four days examining the dearth of a younger generation in Canada. Nowhere in these articles was the issue of abortion raised as a factor in this issue of a “childless culture.” Instead we saw the words “low fertility” used to describe the lack of a younger generation. Abortion in Canada surely has had a role in the cause of “low fertility” and less children going to school.
“With Canadian families producing fewer babies than ever, school officials in every province have to figure out what to do with thousands of empty classrooms built for Baby Boomers and their children but left vacant by the generation that is following in much smaller numbers.” [2]
The issue of schools closing in some places was raised because of declining enrollment. Yet, the teachers unions are on record as favoring abortion. We are also told there is a scarcity of skilled workers, and the Canadian Labor Congress (CLC), which claims to speak for all its members, is on record as supporting “choice” on abortion. One could argue that trade unions which depend on a constant supply of new members are in fact cutting their own throats by supporting the killing of the child in the womb under the banner of “choice.” Are they in fact supporting the killing off of future members?
There are over 100,000 abortions a year in Canada. If one goes back to the year 1992 where there were 102,085 [3] abortions and this number has been increasing yearly ever since, one could say on average from 1992 until 2005 we have killed off at least 1.3 million innocent lives that would have gone to school, perhaps been future union members and future taxpayers in society.
Now governments at the provincial and federal levels are raising the alarm about having an imbalance of elderly people and more retirees, which will put more strain on our healthcare system. “In less than a decade, seniors will outnumber children in Canada; in just 15 years, deaths may outnumber births.” [4]
So what will the solution be if “deaths outnumber births”? How will society deal with the “problem” of too many seniors many of whom could be retired and in poor health? We have seen the issue of euthanasia being raised recently in parliament, but of course that is only for people who want to die. And of course euthanasia could never be “acceptable.” Could it? Well, at one time abortion was considered a heinous crime, and those who practiced it were considered pariahs. Now the abortionists are hailed as “practitioners” of “choice.” And the killing of the child in the womb is sacrificed on the altar of political expediency as a “right.” So will it be “expedient” to exercise “choice” on our burgeoning elderly population and call it “death with dignity”? After all, when the killing of the child in the womb is now “normal” who is to say that killing people out of the womb and in the “golden years” of their lives could not also become “normal.”
There is an old and wise saying, “We reap what we sow.” Over the last number of years we have sown death in Canada through abortion. Society’s acceptance of abortion has given credence to the idea that parents can kill their unborn children if they are deemed to be unwanted. Now, some born children may start killing their parents if they believe them to be unwanted. Could this be called the revenge of the aborted?
Stephen J. Gray
February 25, 2006.
Note: To see the truth about abortion go to http://www.AbortionNO.org
Endnotes:
1 http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=13e220f0-b53a-4a38-bca9-66481d9b8f89
2 http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/bodyandhealth/story.html?id=aefa5ecf-227e-4f38-8f06-6f77cd4eb99f
3 http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/971105/d971105.htm#ART2
4 http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=13e220f0-b53a-4a38-bca9-66481d9b8f89
In the National Post there were four articles over four days examining the dearth of a younger generation in Canada. Nowhere in these articles was the issue of abortion raised as a factor in this issue of a “childless culture.” Instead we saw the words “low fertility” used to describe the lack of a younger generation. Abortion in Canada surely has had a role in the cause of “low fertility” and less children going to school.
“With Canadian families producing fewer babies than ever, school officials in every province have to figure out what to do with thousands of empty classrooms built for Baby Boomers and their children but left vacant by the generation that is following in much smaller numbers.” [2]
The issue of schools closing in some places was raised because of declining enrollment. Yet, the teachers unions are on record as favoring abortion. We are also told there is a scarcity of skilled workers, and the Canadian Labor Congress (CLC), which claims to speak for all its members, is on record as supporting “choice” on abortion. One could argue that trade unions which depend on a constant supply of new members are in fact cutting their own throats by supporting the killing of the child in the womb under the banner of “choice.” Are they in fact supporting the killing off of future members?
There are over 100,000 abortions a year in Canada. If one goes back to the year 1992 where there were 102,085 [3] abortions and this number has been increasing yearly ever since, one could say on average from 1992 until 2005 we have killed off at least 1.3 million innocent lives that would have gone to school, perhaps been future union members and future taxpayers in society.
Now governments at the provincial and federal levels are raising the alarm about having an imbalance of elderly people and more retirees, which will put more strain on our healthcare system. “In less than a decade, seniors will outnumber children in Canada; in just 15 years, deaths may outnumber births.” [4]
So what will the solution be if “deaths outnumber births”? How will society deal with the “problem” of too many seniors many of whom could be retired and in poor health? We have seen the issue of euthanasia being raised recently in parliament, but of course that is only for people who want to die. And of course euthanasia could never be “acceptable.” Could it? Well, at one time abortion was considered a heinous crime, and those who practiced it were considered pariahs. Now the abortionists are hailed as “practitioners” of “choice.” And the killing of the child in the womb is sacrificed on the altar of political expediency as a “right.” So will it be “expedient” to exercise “choice” on our burgeoning elderly population and call it “death with dignity”? After all, when the killing of the child in the womb is now “normal” who is to say that killing people out of the womb and in the “golden years” of their lives could not also become “normal.”
There is an old and wise saying, “We reap what we sow.” Over the last number of years we have sown death in Canada through abortion. Society’s acceptance of abortion has given credence to the idea that parents can kill their unborn children if they are deemed to be unwanted. Now, some born children may start killing their parents if they believe them to be unwanted. Could this be called the revenge of the aborted?
Stephen J. Gray
February 25, 2006.
Note: To see the truth about abortion go to http://www.AbortionNO.org
Endnotes:
1 http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=13e220f0-b53a-4a38-bca9-66481d9b8f89
2 http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/bodyandhealth/story.html?id=aefa5ecf-227e-4f38-8f06-6f77cd4eb99f
3 http://www.statcan.ca/Daily/English/971105/d971105.htm#ART2
4 http://www.canada.com/nationalpost/news/story.html?id=13e220f0-b53a-4a38-bca9-66481d9b8f89
Friday, June 26, 2009
Are Harper and his “conservative” government hypocrites?
“Individual freedom is something Conservatives value…
What exactly are those conservative values?
I think we all instinctively recognize them when we see them, although it is sometimes difficult to define them. I like to summarize my idea of conservatism in three "Fs" --freedom, family and faith.” Stephen Harper [1]
Mr. Harper says he believes in “freedom,” yet his government sided with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) and was an intervenor with others against free speech:
“The Attorney General of Canada, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre and B'nai Brith Canada will be intervening in the Lemire case in support of Section 13, arguing that it is a reasonable restriction on freedom of speech” (Canadian Constitution Foundation Letter of April 28, 2008).
The words “reasonable restriction on freedom of speech” have become a weapon to punish decent, law-abiding Canadians for daring to have an opinion in a so-called “free society.”
Free speech is either free or it is not free. We already have laws on the books if people libel or defame others. I believe cowardly politicians have abdicated their responsibilities to unelected, appointed “Human Rights Commissions.”
Mr. Harper is on record as saying this:
“Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society,” says Stephen Harper, president of the National Citizens' Coalition. “It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff.” [2]
Mr. Harper also says this: “Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms…” Yet, his government is an intervenor against free speech, and sides with the CHRC and powerful special interest groups, rather than defending freedom for the people of Canada. Meanwhile decent people across Canada are being dragged before these Stalinist commissions and have to pay their own costs while their accusers get a free ride. If this is “freedom” in Harper’s Canada then I believe it is a farce.
Mr. Harper says he believes in “family.” Yeah sure! His government recently gave $400,000 dollars to the Toronto Gay Pride parade where men and women have been known to march naked and make obscene gestures. The Gay and Lesbian newspaper Xtra of Toronto June 16, 2009 said this:
“In what is surely an effort to make Toronto's Pride festival as fabulous as possible Canada's federal government has announced a plan to dish over $400,000 to Pride Toronto.” [3]
Life site News of June 24, 2009 had this headline:
“Formerly Pro-Family Finance Minister Jim Flaherty Expresses Support for Homosexual Agenda.” The article stated,
“Maclean’s magazine reported on June 18 that Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, once supported by pro-family advocates, has expressed support for the homosexual agenda in a congratulatory letter to Conservative strategist Jaime Watt. Watt was awarded Egale’s inaugural Leadership award for homosexual rights at Egale’s gala last week….” [4]
But hey, Mr. Harper and his government believes in “family!” And yet, he and his government did not have the courage to defend the traditional family on the nonsense called, “same-sex marriage.” Oh sure, he and most of his government voted against it in a lukewarm motion in Parliament. The truth is so-called “same-sex marriage” was never in the Charter and is an invention of nonsensical words. Mr. Harper and his government could have used the not-withstanding clause. But, Mr. Harper is on record as saying the following regarding this nonsense called same-sex marriage, “I will never use the notwithstanding clause on that issue”[5] (Lifesite News December 16, 2005.)
And on the greatest moral issue of our time, the killing of the innocent child in the womb, Mr. Harper is on record as saying this:
“The Conservative government won't be initiating or supporting abortion legislation, and I'll use whatever influence I have in Parliament to be sure that such a matter doesn't come to a vote…” [6] Lifesite News, January 17, 2006
And we thought we lived in a democracy!
Still, Mr. Harper has “faith.” Unfortunately, based on the evidence, thinking people must surely have little faith in Mr. Harper or his government. Somebody once said, “By their actions you will know them.” Therefore, I ask the question, are Harper and his “conservative” government hypocrites?
Stephen J. Gray
June 26,2009.
Endnotes:
[1]
http://www.nationalpost.com/scripts/story.html?id=1547376
[2] B.C. Report, magazine article by Terry O’Neill) http://www.axionet.com/bcreport/web/990111f.html
[3] http://www.xtra.ca/public/Toronto/Federal_government_announces_400000_for_Pride_Toronto-6944.aspx
[4] http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jun/09062412.html
[5] http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/dec/051216.html
[6 http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jan/06011707.html
What exactly are those conservative values?
I think we all instinctively recognize them when we see them, although it is sometimes difficult to define them. I like to summarize my idea of conservatism in three "Fs" --freedom, family and faith.” Stephen Harper [1]
Mr. Harper says he believes in “freedom,” yet his government sided with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) and was an intervenor with others against free speech:
“The Attorney General of Canada, the Canadian Human Rights Commission, the Canadian Jewish Congress, the Simon Wiesenthal Centre and B'nai Brith Canada will be intervening in the Lemire case in support of Section 13, arguing that it is a reasonable restriction on freedom of speech” (Canadian Constitution Foundation Letter of April 28, 2008).
The words “reasonable restriction on freedom of speech” have become a weapon to punish decent, law-abiding Canadians for daring to have an opinion in a so-called “free society.”
Free speech is either free or it is not free. We already have laws on the books if people libel or defame others. I believe cowardly politicians have abdicated their responsibilities to unelected, appointed “Human Rights Commissions.”
Mr. Harper is on record as saying this:
“Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society,” says Stephen Harper, president of the National Citizens' Coalition. “It is in fact totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff.” [2]
Mr. Harper also says this: “Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms…” Yet, his government is an intervenor against free speech, and sides with the CHRC and powerful special interest groups, rather than defending freedom for the people of Canada. Meanwhile decent people across Canada are being dragged before these Stalinist commissions and have to pay their own costs while their accusers get a free ride. If this is “freedom” in Harper’s Canada then I believe it is a farce.
Mr. Harper says he believes in “family.” Yeah sure! His government recently gave $400,000 dollars to the Toronto Gay Pride parade where men and women have been known to march naked and make obscene gestures. The Gay and Lesbian newspaper Xtra of Toronto June 16, 2009 said this:
“In what is surely an effort to make Toronto's Pride festival as fabulous as possible Canada's federal government has announced a plan to dish over $400,000 to Pride Toronto.” [3]
Life site News of June 24, 2009 had this headline:
“Formerly Pro-Family Finance Minister Jim Flaherty Expresses Support for Homosexual Agenda.” The article stated,
“Maclean’s magazine reported on June 18 that Canadian Finance Minister Jim Flaherty, once supported by pro-family advocates, has expressed support for the homosexual agenda in a congratulatory letter to Conservative strategist Jaime Watt. Watt was awarded Egale’s inaugural Leadership award for homosexual rights at Egale’s gala last week….” [4]
But hey, Mr. Harper and his government believes in “family!” And yet, he and his government did not have the courage to defend the traditional family on the nonsense called, “same-sex marriage.” Oh sure, he and most of his government voted against it in a lukewarm motion in Parliament. The truth is so-called “same-sex marriage” was never in the Charter and is an invention of nonsensical words. Mr. Harper and his government could have used the not-withstanding clause. But, Mr. Harper is on record as saying the following regarding this nonsense called same-sex marriage, “I will never use the notwithstanding clause on that issue”[5] (Lifesite News December 16, 2005.)
And on the greatest moral issue of our time, the killing of the innocent child in the womb, Mr. Harper is on record as saying this:
“The Conservative government won't be initiating or supporting abortion legislation, and I'll use whatever influence I have in Parliament to be sure that such a matter doesn't come to a vote…” [6] Lifesite News, January 17, 2006
And we thought we lived in a democracy!
Still, Mr. Harper has “faith.” Unfortunately, based on the evidence, thinking people must surely have little faith in Mr. Harper or his government. Somebody once said, “By their actions you will know them.” Therefore, I ask the question, are Harper and his “conservative” government hypocrites?
Stephen J. Gray
June 26,2009.
Endnotes:
[1]
http://www.nationalpost.com/scripts/story.html?id=1547376
[2] B.C. Report, magazine article by Terry O’Neill) http://www.axionet.com/bcreport/web/990111f.html
[3] http://www.xtra.ca/public/Toronto/Federal_government_announces_400000_for_Pride_Toronto-6944.aspx
[4] http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2009/jun/09062412.html
[5] http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/dec/051216.html
[6 http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jan/06011707.html
Monday, June 22, 2009
The “Great” O-Scam-a
The “great” O-scam-a arrived in a blaze of glory
Change was his only story
Clever words with no real meaning
Had the media in adulation screaming
One person in the media compared O-scam-a to a God
But, the media is notorious for being a fraud
Propaganda merchants beyond compare
They produce an abundance of hot air
Many of the masses were also overcome
Change was a magic word for some
O-scam-a spoke and many were fooled
Now the people will be ruled
“An empty vessel makes the most sound”
And the crowds bayed praise out loud
O-scam-a, O-scam-a our lord and master
But, others thought this guy was a disaster
But hey, at least he will bring change
And the peoples' lives he will arrange
They will pay for this political trauma
Because they elected the “great” O-scam-a
Stephen J. Gray
June 22, 2009.
Change was his only story
Clever words with no real meaning
Had the media in adulation screaming
One person in the media compared O-scam-a to a God
But, the media is notorious for being a fraud
Propaganda merchants beyond compare
They produce an abundance of hot air
Many of the masses were also overcome
Change was a magic word for some
O-scam-a spoke and many were fooled
Now the people will be ruled
“An empty vessel makes the most sound”
And the crowds bayed praise out loud
O-scam-a, O-scam-a our lord and master
But, others thought this guy was a disaster
But hey, at least he will bring change
And the peoples' lives he will arrange
They will pay for this political trauma
Because they elected the “great” O-scam-a
Stephen J. Gray
June 22, 2009.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
An Imaginary Letter From a Very Worried Politician
Dear honorable members of all parties,
Thank goodness no election was called. But, I keep hearing there will be an election in the fall and that some of you intend to bring down the government. Have you all gone quite mad? What is the matter with you all? We are paid around $150,000 a year plus perks and expenses to do it to the people, oops, I mean do the people’s business, and some of you want to give all this up for a fall election?! For what? Just so some party can have a seat or two more or a seat or two less; and who knows, some of you might not even have a seat after the election.
We are all sitting pretty right now and having the summer off. Why would any of you risk losing the nice, cushy, comfortable jobs you have? Some of you are making more money than you ever dreamed of. You never had it so good, as one former politician once told the people. Now for the sake of making silly political points some of you want a fall election! Come on, climb down off your platforms, forget your visions rhetoric, file your plans away, and stop gibbering. It’s too early to go to the people. Some of us are still trying to get our pension time in and you selfish ones with seniority want an election. Where is the political solidarity?
Politics is a game—as you all know, or should know. The different party labels are just choices for the people; it gives them an alternative. We are nearly all the same under our political skins, but the game is the thing. The people get to place an X in the ballot box at election time and this allows them to participate in the game; however, this game is still being played and we do not want it stopped just yet. It would be a political tragedy of mammoth proportions if some of us got voted out of the game. Surely none of you want to be voted off this political island just yet, right?!
Think about it like this: You win some arguments you lose some arguments in the House, but it’s all good fun. We even get to be on television during question period, asking each other silly questions for the benefit of the people who care to watch us. And we can let off steam by banging our desks at each other when some of us make stupid comments. It’s all good political fun. Some of us have even appeared on comedy shows and put on a good performance. Are we all clowns at heart? The show must go on, and we the performers are still on stage. The people are the audience and they pay for our performances, and some of you want to give all this up for a fall election?
Think about it: We all would have to go on the campaign trail promising the people goodies with their own tax money. We would have to have silly debates with each other over party policy differences, when we all know there are very few differences, if any. Only political scrooges would want an election.
A fall election, if it happened, might also bring a vote near Christmas and this would surely destroy our Christmas party on the Hill. There would be no turkeys around, except for you political turkeys who want an election. So do you birds get the message? Please no fall election. All our needs are met right now. If we want to cross the floor we do it. If we want to re-cross the floor we could do it. This house is our political home, and just like any home it has its arguments and differences of opinion. So please don’t go to the people for approval. Some of us don’t want to be evicted just yet.
This letter is respectfully submitted by a worried honorable member, who likes serving the people and needs the job.
Stephen J. Gray
June 21, 2009
Thank goodness no election was called. But, I keep hearing there will be an election in the fall and that some of you intend to bring down the government. Have you all gone quite mad? What is the matter with you all? We are paid around $150,000 a year plus perks and expenses to do it to the people, oops, I mean do the people’s business, and some of you want to give all this up for a fall election?! For what? Just so some party can have a seat or two more or a seat or two less; and who knows, some of you might not even have a seat after the election.
We are all sitting pretty right now and having the summer off. Why would any of you risk losing the nice, cushy, comfortable jobs you have? Some of you are making more money than you ever dreamed of. You never had it so good, as one former politician once told the people. Now for the sake of making silly political points some of you want a fall election! Come on, climb down off your platforms, forget your visions rhetoric, file your plans away, and stop gibbering. It’s too early to go to the people. Some of us are still trying to get our pension time in and you selfish ones with seniority want an election. Where is the political solidarity?
Politics is a game—as you all know, or should know. The different party labels are just choices for the people; it gives them an alternative. We are nearly all the same under our political skins, but the game is the thing. The people get to place an X in the ballot box at election time and this allows them to participate in the game; however, this game is still being played and we do not want it stopped just yet. It would be a political tragedy of mammoth proportions if some of us got voted out of the game. Surely none of you want to be voted off this political island just yet, right?!
Think about it like this: You win some arguments you lose some arguments in the House, but it’s all good fun. We even get to be on television during question period, asking each other silly questions for the benefit of the people who care to watch us. And we can let off steam by banging our desks at each other when some of us make stupid comments. It’s all good political fun. Some of us have even appeared on comedy shows and put on a good performance. Are we all clowns at heart? The show must go on, and we the performers are still on stage. The people are the audience and they pay for our performances, and some of you want to give all this up for a fall election?
Think about it: We all would have to go on the campaign trail promising the people goodies with their own tax money. We would have to have silly debates with each other over party policy differences, when we all know there are very few differences, if any. Only political scrooges would want an election.
A fall election, if it happened, might also bring a vote near Christmas and this would surely destroy our Christmas party on the Hill. There would be no turkeys around, except for you political turkeys who want an election. So do you birds get the message? Please no fall election. All our needs are met right now. If we want to cross the floor we do it. If we want to re-cross the floor we could do it. This house is our political home, and just like any home it has its arguments and differences of opinion. So please don’t go to the people for approval. Some of us don’t want to be evicted just yet.
This letter is respectfully submitted by a worried honorable member, who likes serving the people and needs the job.
Stephen J. Gray
June 21, 2009
Monday, June 15, 2009
Your Words Are Killing Me: An Imaginary Letter from An Unborn Child
If the child in the womb could share her thoughts on the horrific killing and dismembering of millions of her fellow innocents, this surely would be what she might say:
“Dear fellow human beings, I know there are some people out there who want to be ‘non-confrontational’ about my fellow little innocents being slaughtered by abortionists. They believe they have a ‘new,’ ‘wise,’ and ‘strategic’ approach to this heinous crime. Their words sound nice and reassuring. But, of course, they are not the ones being killed. Don’t they realize that there is nothing ‘compassionate’ about killing us? And if they are ‘not concerned with the law,’ (there is no law) or any law prohibiting abortion, then they should be. And so, these murderous atrocities perpetrated on we the innocent continue unabated in depraved acts of lawlessness.
“There are some in the judiciary who call the killings ‘terminations’ and advocate that an abortionist should be paid for his bloody slaughter. They even honored this butcher, with his country’s top award, and some even called him a ‘hero.’ Then there are some in the media who are supposedly ‘searching for truth,’ but when it comes to the awful truth of the abortion slaughter they hide the truth with lies like ‘freedom of choice’ to make it look like killing us is acceptable.
“And while there are some courageous souls who expose the atrocities committed against us, they are vilified and criticized by abortion supporters. There are others who say they are against abortion, yet they describe those who expose this horrific injustice as acting ‘confrontationally.’ My question to them and their strategists is this: If you are against the murderous slaughter of we the innocent unborn who have committed no crime, why are you against the showing of the gory atrocities visited upon us? Are you afraid to show the truth? Why would you send a confused signal by keeping the facts vague, just like abortion supporters do?
“We the innocents in the womb have no choice. We are carved up, cut to pieces, torn apart and some of us have even been born alive and left to die. So how can a ‘low key’ approach to abortion, without showing the evidence of the crime, be an ‘exciting strategy?’ The killing needs to be exposed. Our massacred, bloodied, dismembered bodies cry out for justice. And justice always tries to show in truthful words and deeds the horror that the victims experienced. If you really care about the awful slaughter perpetrated against us, have some courage and publish these horrific atrocities being committed against us. Politically correct pablum does not cut it (no pun intended). Nor does, as has happened in some pro-life circles, approval from a former politician whose credibility is questionable. And for those who have money to burn, instead of simply handing over money to the pro-abortion media who will only publish politically-correct ads, why don’t you publish the truth about this atrocity committed in the name of ‘choice’?”
Sincerely,
An innocent unborn child hoping for justice, not for death by politically correct words
Note: See the killing of the innocents at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Stephen J. Gray
June 15, 2009.
“Dear fellow human beings, I know there are some people out there who want to be ‘non-confrontational’ about my fellow little innocents being slaughtered by abortionists. They believe they have a ‘new,’ ‘wise,’ and ‘strategic’ approach to this heinous crime. Their words sound nice and reassuring. But, of course, they are not the ones being killed. Don’t they realize that there is nothing ‘compassionate’ about killing us? And if they are ‘not concerned with the law,’ (there is no law) or any law prohibiting abortion, then they should be. And so, these murderous atrocities perpetrated on we the innocent continue unabated in depraved acts of lawlessness.
“There are some in the judiciary who call the killings ‘terminations’ and advocate that an abortionist should be paid for his bloody slaughter. They even honored this butcher, with his country’s top award, and some even called him a ‘hero.’ Then there are some in the media who are supposedly ‘searching for truth,’ but when it comes to the awful truth of the abortion slaughter they hide the truth with lies like ‘freedom of choice’ to make it look like killing us is acceptable.
“And while there are some courageous souls who expose the atrocities committed against us, they are vilified and criticized by abortion supporters. There are others who say they are against abortion, yet they describe those who expose this horrific injustice as acting ‘confrontationally.’ My question to them and their strategists is this: If you are against the murderous slaughter of we the innocent unborn who have committed no crime, why are you against the showing of the gory atrocities visited upon us? Are you afraid to show the truth? Why would you send a confused signal by keeping the facts vague, just like abortion supporters do?
“We the innocents in the womb have no choice. We are carved up, cut to pieces, torn apart and some of us have even been born alive and left to die. So how can a ‘low key’ approach to abortion, without showing the evidence of the crime, be an ‘exciting strategy?’ The killing needs to be exposed. Our massacred, bloodied, dismembered bodies cry out for justice. And justice always tries to show in truthful words and deeds the horror that the victims experienced. If you really care about the awful slaughter perpetrated against us, have some courage and publish these horrific atrocities being committed against us. Politically correct pablum does not cut it (no pun intended). Nor does, as has happened in some pro-life circles, approval from a former politician whose credibility is questionable. And for those who have money to burn, instead of simply handing over money to the pro-abortion media who will only publish politically-correct ads, why don’t you publish the truth about this atrocity committed in the name of ‘choice’?”
Sincerely,
An innocent unborn child hoping for justice, not for death by politically correct words
Note: See the killing of the innocents at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Stephen J. Gray
June 15, 2009.
Friday, June 12, 2009
Questions about the Bailouts of General Motors (GM)
Billions of taxpayers’ dollars have been handed over to GM by the Canadian and United States governments. Some reports have the figures totaling as high as $60.4 billion (see information below). This is a colossal amount of money being handed over to a multi- national corporation that had subsidiaries in offshore tax havens. The Huffington Post of January 16, 2009 stated this:
“General Motors Corp., which received $13.4 billion from the [U.S.] federal rescue package, had 11 offshore subsidiaries…” [1]
Meanwhile, here in Canada the Canadian government has also participated in this billion dollar bailout bonanza for a “free enterprise” multi-national corporation that had subsidiaries in offshore tax havens. In fact, the Canadian Government is on record as saying this about the handover of taxpayers dollars:
“Ottawa doesn't expect to get back the billions in taxpayers' dollars it's investing in General Motors… It's regrettable that public money is funding the $10.5-billion bailout of GM but the move is a necessary one amid a global recession, said [PM] Harper.”
(Source: Keith Leslie, THE CANADIAN PRESS, published 01 06 2009) [2]
One wonders if PM Harper’s government checked out how much money GM had in its “11 offshore subsidiaries” before it started doling out Canadian Taxpayers dollars? Surely, the taxpayers of Canada should be privy to how much money is in these “11 offshore subsidiaries” of GM. After all, he who pays the piper calls the tune, or so the saying goes. Or are the taxpayers of Canada not allowed this information from their own government?
The United States government’s taxpayers are also participants in this billion dollar delivery to a multi-national corporation of a tsunami of money. The Financial Post of June 1, 2009 stated:
“The U.S. government has already provided $19.8 billion U.S. to GM and will inject another $30.1 billion U.S. as the 100-year-old automaker works through its restructuring.” [3]
Meanwhile GM appears to be prospering in Communist China. An article in China Daily of June 2, 2009, stated this: “General Motors Corp.'s fast-growing China operation will be unaffected by the parent company's bankruptcy and plans to open a new factory within five years will not change even as the automaker closes US facilities, the unit's president said Tuesday.” [4]
GM has closed facilities in Canada and the United States, yet it plans to export cars from China and “import them into the United States” according to the Telegraph, U.K. Newspaper of May 14, 2009. In the same article a union lobbyist had this to say: “‘GM should not be taking taxpayer's money simply to finance the outsourcing of jobs to other countries,’ said Alan Reuther, a lobbyist for the United Auto Workers union.” [5]
There are, I believe, many unanswered questions regarding the billions of taxpayers’ monies handed over to GM. For instance, how much money did GM have in its “11 offshore subsidiaries”? Do we know for sure that the bailout billions of taxpayers’ dollars will stay in Canada and the United States? Are there any safeguards in place to make sure that none of this money goes offshore? Could any of this bailout money go to GM’s China operation? If GM in communist China is going to import their China made cars to the United States, how will this affect GM’s operations in North America that has been bailed out by taxpayers dollars? And finally is it in the public interest of taxpayers everywhere that offshore tax havens are used as places to conceal money? I believe answers are needed to these questions.
Stephen J. Gray
June 12, 2009.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/16/over-8-in-10-corporations_n_158693.html
[2] http://www.autonet.ca/autos/news/2009/06/01/9639056-cp.html
[3] http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=1652295
[4] http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2009-06/02/content_7963892.htm
[5] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/general-motors/5323274/GM-plans-to-export-cars-from-China-to-the-US.html
Other info at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/17/business/17tax.html
U.S. Subsidiaries in Offshore Tax Havens
By LYNNLEY BROWNING Published: January 16, 2009
…
“General Motors Corp., which received $13.4 billion from the [U.S.] federal rescue package, had 11 offshore subsidiaries…” [1]
Meanwhile, here in Canada the Canadian government has also participated in this billion dollar bailout bonanza for a “free enterprise” multi-national corporation that had subsidiaries in offshore tax havens. In fact, the Canadian Government is on record as saying this about the handover of taxpayers dollars:
“Ottawa doesn't expect to get back the billions in taxpayers' dollars it's investing in General Motors… It's regrettable that public money is funding the $10.5-billion bailout of GM but the move is a necessary one amid a global recession, said [PM] Harper.”
(Source: Keith Leslie, THE CANADIAN PRESS, published 01 06 2009) [2]
One wonders if PM Harper’s government checked out how much money GM had in its “11 offshore subsidiaries” before it started doling out Canadian Taxpayers dollars? Surely, the taxpayers of Canada should be privy to how much money is in these “11 offshore subsidiaries” of GM. After all, he who pays the piper calls the tune, or so the saying goes. Or are the taxpayers of Canada not allowed this information from their own government?
The United States government’s taxpayers are also participants in this billion dollar delivery to a multi-national corporation of a tsunami of money. The Financial Post of June 1, 2009 stated:
“The U.S. government has already provided $19.8 billion U.S. to GM and will inject another $30.1 billion U.S. as the 100-year-old automaker works through its restructuring.” [3]
Meanwhile GM appears to be prospering in Communist China. An article in China Daily of June 2, 2009, stated this: “General Motors Corp.'s fast-growing China operation will be unaffected by the parent company's bankruptcy and plans to open a new factory within five years will not change even as the automaker closes US facilities, the unit's president said Tuesday.” [4]
GM has closed facilities in Canada and the United States, yet it plans to export cars from China and “import them into the United States” according to the Telegraph, U.K. Newspaper of May 14, 2009. In the same article a union lobbyist had this to say: “‘GM should not be taking taxpayer's money simply to finance the outsourcing of jobs to other countries,’ said Alan Reuther, a lobbyist for the United Auto Workers union.” [5]
There are, I believe, many unanswered questions regarding the billions of taxpayers’ monies handed over to GM. For instance, how much money did GM have in its “11 offshore subsidiaries”? Do we know for sure that the bailout billions of taxpayers’ dollars will stay in Canada and the United States? Are there any safeguards in place to make sure that none of this money goes offshore? Could any of this bailout money go to GM’s China operation? If GM in communist China is going to import their China made cars to the United States, how will this affect GM’s operations in North America that has been bailed out by taxpayers dollars? And finally is it in the public interest of taxpayers everywhere that offshore tax havens are used as places to conceal money? I believe answers are needed to these questions.
Stephen J. Gray
June 12, 2009.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/01/16/over-8-in-10-corporations_n_158693.html
[2] http://www.autonet.ca/autos/news/2009/06/01/9639056-cp.html
[3] http://www.financialpost.com/story.html?id=1652295
[4] http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/world/2009-06/02/content_7963892.htm
[5] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/finance/newsbysector/transport/general-motors/5323274/GM-plans-to-export-cars-from-China-to-the-US.html
Other info at:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/01/17/business/17tax.html
U.S. Subsidiaries in Offshore Tax Havens
By LYNNLEY BROWNING Published: January 16, 2009
…
Monday, May 18, 2009
Is Butchering Humans by Abortion "Safe Medical Services"?
“Thank you for your correspondence concerning Canada’s abortion laws. It is the longstanding view of the Liberal Party of Canada that women must have the right to choose, and this party will take no step that limits, or opens the door to limiting, access to safe medical services for women across Canada.”
The Office of Michael Ignatieff, M.P. Leader of the Opposition
It would appear that the leader of the opposition in Canada believes that the “right to choose” to kill the innocents in the womb in Canada can be described as “safe medical services.” One wonders what is “safe” about cutting to pieces, tearing apart by powerful suction devices, beheading, poisoning [in the case of a saline abortion], and then disposing of these little innocents slaughtered by abortionists, like some kind of garbage? Surely calling this atrocity “safe medical services” is very unsafe and deadly for the innocent life in the womb? I believe that a more apt description would be legalized slaughter aided and abetted by those in Canada in positions of power, who would rather use politically correct words to disguise what “the right to choose” really means.
The Liberal party of Canada is not the only party to attempt to camouflage the horror of abortion by politically correct words. Stephen Harper, prime minister and leader of the Conservative Party of Canada is on record as saying this on abortion:
“Let me be very clear on the positions I’ve have taken on that. I want there to be no misunderstanding. I’ve said repeatedly, that I will not, that my Conservative government will not be tabling any legislation impacting in any way a woman’s right to choose” (June 27, 2006 LifeSiteNews.com http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jun/060627a.html).
And the leader of the NDP, Jack Layton, supports freedom of choice on abortion and had this to say about Canada’s foremost abortionist: “On behalf of the New Democratic Party of Canada, I salute Dr. Henry Morgentaler as one of the 2008 recipients of the Order of Canada” (July 2, 2008 http://www.ndp.ca/page/6561).
Canada today has no law on abortion. The little innocents in the womb can be killed right up to the moment of birth, and those in positions of power boast they are in favor of the “right to choose” to kill these innocents! Therefore the question has to be asked: Do we live in a sick society? Most certainly. The evidence for the humanity of the unborn child is irrefutable. We can see them on ultrasound; there are pictures of them sucking their thumbs in the womb, and we even operate on them (when they are "wanted," that is) to correct some medical problems. In fact, click here to see a picture of an unborn baby grasping his surgeon's finger:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/fetaldevelopment/samuel.html)
“A woman’s right to choose” rolling off the tongues of politicians makes this heinous act of slaughtering vulnerable unborn human beings sound like something on a menu. So what does it really mean? The politicians, being politicians, don’t like to go into detail about this slaughter by “choice,” so instead they would rather parrot political phrases about being in favor of “freedom of choice;” however, the reality is that supporting “choice” on abortion actually means cutting the unborn to pieces, suctioning their bodies apart, or injecting potassium chloride into their hearts. Other unborn children are murdered by having their skulls pierced by sharp scissors and their brains suctioned out (partial birth abortion). Some have been born alive but are left to die. Barbarity is being practiced and human sacrifices are made.
The “right to choose” spoken of by politicians of all political stripes is a political perversion of words for killing by choice on abortion. For any politician to describe the heinous act of abortion as “safe medical services” is surely to demonstrate a sick corruption of words. The Roman politician Seneca said it well when he said, “Where the speech is corrupted, the mind is also.”
Note: See the innocents slaughtered by “safe medical services” at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Stephen J. Gray
May 18, 2009.
The Office of Michael Ignatieff, M.P. Leader of the Opposition
It would appear that the leader of the opposition in Canada believes that the “right to choose” to kill the innocents in the womb in Canada can be described as “safe medical services.” One wonders what is “safe” about cutting to pieces, tearing apart by powerful suction devices, beheading, poisoning [in the case of a saline abortion], and then disposing of these little innocents slaughtered by abortionists, like some kind of garbage? Surely calling this atrocity “safe medical services” is very unsafe and deadly for the innocent life in the womb? I believe that a more apt description would be legalized slaughter aided and abetted by those in Canada in positions of power, who would rather use politically correct words to disguise what “the right to choose” really means.
The Liberal party of Canada is not the only party to attempt to camouflage the horror of abortion by politically correct words. Stephen Harper, prime minister and leader of the Conservative Party of Canada is on record as saying this on abortion:
“Let me be very clear on the positions I’ve have taken on that. I want there to be no misunderstanding. I’ve said repeatedly, that I will not, that my Conservative government will not be tabling any legislation impacting in any way a woman’s right to choose” (June 27, 2006 LifeSiteNews.com http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jun/060627a.html).
And the leader of the NDP, Jack Layton, supports freedom of choice on abortion and had this to say about Canada’s foremost abortionist: “On behalf of the New Democratic Party of Canada, I salute Dr. Henry Morgentaler as one of the 2008 recipients of the Order of Canada” (July 2, 2008 http://www.ndp.ca/page/6561).
Canada today has no law on abortion. The little innocents in the womb can be killed right up to the moment of birth, and those in positions of power boast they are in favor of the “right to choose” to kill these innocents! Therefore the question has to be asked: Do we live in a sick society? Most certainly. The evidence for the humanity of the unborn child is irrefutable. We can see them on ultrasound; there are pictures of them sucking their thumbs in the womb, and we even operate on them (when they are "wanted," that is) to correct some medical problems. In fact, click here to see a picture of an unborn baby grasping his surgeon's finger:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/fetaldevelopment/samuel.html)
“A woman’s right to choose” rolling off the tongues of politicians makes this heinous act of slaughtering vulnerable unborn human beings sound like something on a menu. So what does it really mean? The politicians, being politicians, don’t like to go into detail about this slaughter by “choice,” so instead they would rather parrot political phrases about being in favor of “freedom of choice;” however, the reality is that supporting “choice” on abortion actually means cutting the unborn to pieces, suctioning their bodies apart, or injecting potassium chloride into their hearts. Other unborn children are murdered by having their skulls pierced by sharp scissors and their brains suctioned out (partial birth abortion). Some have been born alive but are left to die. Barbarity is being practiced and human sacrifices are made.
The “right to choose” spoken of by politicians of all political stripes is a political perversion of words for killing by choice on abortion. For any politician to describe the heinous act of abortion as “safe medical services” is surely to demonstrate a sick corruption of words. The Roman politician Seneca said it well when he said, “Where the speech is corrupted, the mind is also.”
Note: See the innocents slaughtered by “safe medical services” at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Stephen J. Gray
May 18, 2009.
Tuesday, May 12, 2009
Exposing “Choice” Causes a Frenzy of Criticism
The greatest homage we can pay to truth is to use it. - Emerson
Showing the visual truth of the slaughtered innocents of abortion alongside victims of other genocides and atrocities upsets abortionists, they go into a frenzy when the truth of “choice” is exposed. [The disruption of a talk by a pro-life speaker at St. Mary’s University, Halifax is but one example of many. See videos: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=Joerugby07&view=videos ] “Choice is about freedom,” scream the pro-abortionists! “We support ‘freedom of choice!’” has been the mantra of pro-abortionists, many politicians, many in the media, leaders of many trade unions and others in society. Now that “choice” is being exposed by the Genocide Awareness Project (GAP), the mounting frenzy can be heard across the land. After all, the pictures of bloodstained babies torn apart with severed limbs, headless torsos and small bloodied hands and feet show the atrocities of this heinous act of “choice” across our nation.
But hey, we are a “civilized nation” and the pictorial evidence of the GAP pictures are not for “intelligent” people. Journalist Barbara Kay states in the National Post of February 4, 2009,
“I am not opposed in principle to legal abortion.” She then goes on to say this: “I am here to offer the prospect of an alliance between pro-lifers and those, like myself, I would call cultural reformists. Abortion should be a serious moral decision, and undertaken with a heavy heart, with all options carefully weighed beforehand, rather than the rushed, banalized service of convenience it has become. Cultural reformists do not oppose legal abortion, but hope to see Canada become a more life-respectful society.”
Wow, is that a mixed message from Ms. Kay? On one hand she is “not opposed in principle to legal abortion,” but wants “a more life-respectful society.” Could this be called having your Kay, oops, I mean cake and eating it, as the saying goes? Could the slogan, “Cultural reformists” mean being nice about the horrendous act of abortion, so let’s all smile and be happy together and not show the disgusting truth of abortion?
Still, Ms. Kay is not the only journalist who does not like the GAP pictures showing the truth of abortion. Another journalist, Deborah Gyapong, who spent “12 years as a producer for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s [CBC] television news and current affairs programming” had this to say about GAP. “Frankly, I cringe when I see the pictures of aborted fetuses…”[1] She goes on to say about the GAP pictures. “I mean, talk about turning off the already converted. Barbara [Kay] is dead on.” So here we have a journalist, who, when she sees pictures of dead aborted babies, goes into “cringe” mode. And so she should “cringe,” as should other people who have turned a blind eye to the reality of “choice.”
This horrendous act called “choice” needs to be exposed visually and continually for what it is; premeditated slaughter of the innocent unwanted. Those who criticize the GAP exposure of the truth of the killing by abortionists should ask themselves a question:
Why the condemnation of courageous people for showing the truth, is it because the critics would rather be “nice” about abortion and they lack the courage to show its gory evidence? For in the words of Confucius: “To see what is right and not do it, is want of courage.”
Stephen J. Gray
February 12, 2009.
Note: See the innocents slaughtered by abortion at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Endnote:
[1]
http://deborahgyapong.blogspot.com/2009/02/barbara-kay-on-genesis-awareness.html
Showing the visual truth of the slaughtered innocents of abortion alongside victims of other genocides and atrocities upsets abortionists, they go into a frenzy when the truth of “choice” is exposed. [The disruption of a talk by a pro-life speaker at St. Mary’s University, Halifax is but one example of many. See videos: http://www.youtube.com/profile?user=Joerugby07&view=videos ] “Choice is about freedom,” scream the pro-abortionists! “We support ‘freedom of choice!’” has been the mantra of pro-abortionists, many politicians, many in the media, leaders of many trade unions and others in society. Now that “choice” is being exposed by the Genocide Awareness Project (GAP), the mounting frenzy can be heard across the land. After all, the pictures of bloodstained babies torn apart with severed limbs, headless torsos and small bloodied hands and feet show the atrocities of this heinous act of “choice” across our nation.
But hey, we are a “civilized nation” and the pictorial evidence of the GAP pictures are not for “intelligent” people. Journalist Barbara Kay states in the National Post of February 4, 2009,
“I am not opposed in principle to legal abortion.” She then goes on to say this: “I am here to offer the prospect of an alliance between pro-lifers and those, like myself, I would call cultural reformists. Abortion should be a serious moral decision, and undertaken with a heavy heart, with all options carefully weighed beforehand, rather than the rushed, banalized service of convenience it has become. Cultural reformists do not oppose legal abortion, but hope to see Canada become a more life-respectful society.”
Wow, is that a mixed message from Ms. Kay? On one hand she is “not opposed in principle to legal abortion,” but wants “a more life-respectful society.” Could this be called having your Kay, oops, I mean cake and eating it, as the saying goes? Could the slogan, “Cultural reformists” mean being nice about the horrendous act of abortion, so let’s all smile and be happy together and not show the disgusting truth of abortion?
Still, Ms. Kay is not the only journalist who does not like the GAP pictures showing the truth of abortion. Another journalist, Deborah Gyapong, who spent “12 years as a producer for the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation’s [CBC] television news and current affairs programming” had this to say about GAP. “Frankly, I cringe when I see the pictures of aborted fetuses…”[1] She goes on to say about the GAP pictures. “I mean, talk about turning off the already converted. Barbara [Kay] is dead on.” So here we have a journalist, who, when she sees pictures of dead aborted babies, goes into “cringe” mode. And so she should “cringe,” as should other people who have turned a blind eye to the reality of “choice.”
This horrendous act called “choice” needs to be exposed visually and continually for what it is; premeditated slaughter of the innocent unwanted. Those who criticize the GAP exposure of the truth of the killing by abortionists should ask themselves a question:
Why the condemnation of courageous people for showing the truth, is it because the critics would rather be “nice” about abortion and they lack the courage to show its gory evidence? For in the words of Confucius: “To see what is right and not do it, is want of courage.”
Stephen J. Gray
February 12, 2009.
Note: See the innocents slaughtered by abortion at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Endnote:
[1]
http://deborahgyapong.blogspot.com/2009/02/barbara-kay-on-genesis-awareness.html
Monday, May 4, 2009
The Power and The Money
The Power and The Money
The monied and powerful elites who use the world’s tax free havens were all together at their luxury retreat for a meeting. Opening the meeting was the esteemed Mr. Power one of the world’s richest and most powerful. Mr. Power ambled up to the podium and commenced his speech.
“Another year has gone by and we continue to bask in our ever increasing wealth. Governments are receptive to our input in their economies and listen when we speak, and talking about governments, we have a former government leader with us today. Stand up Mr. Tony and let us see you.” Mr. Tony stands up, and smiles and bows to the assembled.
Mr. Power continues, “ Let me just say a few words about Mr. Tony. He took his country to war to preserve our freedoms and some of us made money and continue to make money in the weapons industry. There is no recession in the business of war! But, more on Mr. Tony, his party was called the New Socialist Party; however, we all know labels are for the ordinary people so that they can have somebody to vote for in our managed democracies. Political labels really mean nothing, but, I digress. Mr. Tony is no longer in government, his country is in a shambles after years of his government’s New Socialist policies. Mr.Tony’s useless, oops pardon me, I mean useful work continues. He is now an emissary for peace, has got religion and has become a self imposed expert on theology. He is also on the board of one of our biggest financial institutions. He is now an esteemed person and hopefully one day a Nobel Peace Prize could be in the works. So, lets all give a big hand to Mr. Tony for services rendered.”[ A huge round of applause entails, and Mr. Tony once again bows, waves, and smiles to the assembled.]
Mr. Power continues:
“ I see some leaders of governments amongst our invited guests. Let me just say to them, if you all follow the example of Mr. Tony, there could be a place for you in our inner sanctum. Some of you are doing great work and have used your countries taxpayers monies to bail out some of our operations due to that nasty ‘toxic paper’ oops I mean ’troubled assets’ fiasco. Still, it did help that we had our financial experts ready to give you advice on this important matter. Anyway, thank you for your trillions of taxpayers money, it was a great help and we still have our profits intact in these lovely offshore tax havens.
“ I would also like to give praise to one of the world’s communist governments. It has opened up its country to our investments, it is making money, and we are making money. There are no strikes, no trade unions, there is no democracy, and no freedom in this country, but that is the price that must be paid if we are to have free market communism. Of course this communist country did put on the Games for it’s people and the world participated in this orgy of excess in an un-free country. But hey, sports are the thing to keep the masses happy, the mad Nero of ancient Rome knew this, and I always say we can learn from history. Though these days we don’t feed Christians to the lions. [much laughter ensues] We feed them to Human Rights Commissars instead. But, I am digressing again, still, it is good to give the people some enjoyment, and of course we make big profits playing our Games, and the taxpaying people will pay for any losses.
“ I would also like to recognize an elder statesman amongst us today. Mr. K has been adviser to governments and saw the possibilities of operating in a communist country many years ago. He led the way one might say and now we are all ensconced there making big dollars. But, I digress, he has also been a security strategist and I believe was the instigator of a mass bombing of another communist country a number of years ago. He later received a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts and I am sure the arms dealers amongst us look on him with fondness. He and his associates do business world wide. A great planner and schemer he is always available to sound off on the state of the world. Let’s hear it for our esteemed colleague Mr. K. [All stand and give Mr. K a standing ovation.]
Mr. Power continues:
“On another matter, we drove the price of oil ever upward and we made big dollars. The people complained of course but every now and then they have to be taught a lesson on who is really running the show. They were getting too comfortable so we thought it was time to bring them down to earth, as the saying goes. We have brought the price back down for now while we take a breather and count our excess profits. Meanwhile mass layoffs are occurring everywhere around the world, and the people are subject to and subjects of our planned recession. But hey, Mr. Change has arrived, and who better to bring change than Mr. Change, the latest addition to our ranks. He could not be here today, as he is very busy spreading the word of change. He is very clever with words and makes them sound good. I am sure he will be another worthy ally to our plans.
Finally, before closing my speech there is one more important matter that has to be addressed, it is the world wide internet. The people are using this much too freely, they seem to think that this type of freedom can continue. Many of them are bypassing our own corporate media outlets and the managed news and voicing and publishing their own opinions. This is not good for our society, and I would emphasize the word our. It is we who are the movers and shakers. It is we who control and promote the free markets, therefore our next advice to governments will be to help them control the internet so that our democracy can continue as we know it. Thank you all for coming as we continue our journey in managing the world towards our New World Order.
Stephen J. Gray
May 4, 2009.
The monied and powerful elites who use the world’s tax free havens were all together at their luxury retreat for a meeting. Opening the meeting was the esteemed Mr. Power one of the world’s richest and most powerful. Mr. Power ambled up to the podium and commenced his speech.
“Another year has gone by and we continue to bask in our ever increasing wealth. Governments are receptive to our input in their economies and listen when we speak, and talking about governments, we have a former government leader with us today. Stand up Mr. Tony and let us see you.” Mr. Tony stands up, and smiles and bows to the assembled.
Mr. Power continues, “ Let me just say a few words about Mr. Tony. He took his country to war to preserve our freedoms and some of us made money and continue to make money in the weapons industry. There is no recession in the business of war! But, more on Mr. Tony, his party was called the New Socialist Party; however, we all know labels are for the ordinary people so that they can have somebody to vote for in our managed democracies. Political labels really mean nothing, but, I digress. Mr. Tony is no longer in government, his country is in a shambles after years of his government’s New Socialist policies. Mr.Tony’s useless, oops pardon me, I mean useful work continues. He is now an emissary for peace, has got religion and has become a self imposed expert on theology. He is also on the board of one of our biggest financial institutions. He is now an esteemed person and hopefully one day a Nobel Peace Prize could be in the works. So, lets all give a big hand to Mr. Tony for services rendered.”[ A huge round of applause entails, and Mr. Tony once again bows, waves, and smiles to the assembled.]
Mr. Power continues:
“ I see some leaders of governments amongst our invited guests. Let me just say to them, if you all follow the example of Mr. Tony, there could be a place for you in our inner sanctum. Some of you are doing great work and have used your countries taxpayers monies to bail out some of our operations due to that nasty ‘toxic paper’ oops I mean ’troubled assets’ fiasco. Still, it did help that we had our financial experts ready to give you advice on this important matter. Anyway, thank you for your trillions of taxpayers money, it was a great help and we still have our profits intact in these lovely offshore tax havens.
“ I would also like to give praise to one of the world’s communist governments. It has opened up its country to our investments, it is making money, and we are making money. There are no strikes, no trade unions, there is no democracy, and no freedom in this country, but that is the price that must be paid if we are to have free market communism. Of course this communist country did put on the Games for it’s people and the world participated in this orgy of excess in an un-free country. But hey, sports are the thing to keep the masses happy, the mad Nero of ancient Rome knew this, and I always say we can learn from history. Though these days we don’t feed Christians to the lions. [much laughter ensues] We feed them to Human Rights Commissars instead. But, I am digressing again, still, it is good to give the people some enjoyment, and of course we make big profits playing our Games, and the taxpaying people will pay for any losses.
“ I would also like to recognize an elder statesman amongst us today. Mr. K has been adviser to governments and saw the possibilities of operating in a communist country many years ago. He led the way one might say and now we are all ensconced there making big dollars. But, I digress, he has also been a security strategist and I believe was the instigator of a mass bombing of another communist country a number of years ago. He later received a Nobel Peace Prize for his efforts and I am sure the arms dealers amongst us look on him with fondness. He and his associates do business world wide. A great planner and schemer he is always available to sound off on the state of the world. Let’s hear it for our esteemed colleague Mr. K. [All stand and give Mr. K a standing ovation.]
Mr. Power continues:
“On another matter, we drove the price of oil ever upward and we made big dollars. The people complained of course but every now and then they have to be taught a lesson on who is really running the show. They were getting too comfortable so we thought it was time to bring them down to earth, as the saying goes. We have brought the price back down for now while we take a breather and count our excess profits. Meanwhile mass layoffs are occurring everywhere around the world, and the people are subject to and subjects of our planned recession. But hey, Mr. Change has arrived, and who better to bring change than Mr. Change, the latest addition to our ranks. He could not be here today, as he is very busy spreading the word of change. He is very clever with words and makes them sound good. I am sure he will be another worthy ally to our plans.
Finally, before closing my speech there is one more important matter that has to be addressed, it is the world wide internet. The people are using this much too freely, they seem to think that this type of freedom can continue. Many of them are bypassing our own corporate media outlets and the managed news and voicing and publishing their own opinions. This is not good for our society, and I would emphasize the word our. It is we who are the movers and shakers. It is we who control and promote the free markets, therefore our next advice to governments will be to help them control the internet so that our democracy can continue as we know it. Thank you all for coming as we continue our journey in managing the world towards our New World Order.
Stephen J. Gray
May 4, 2009.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)