The Instigators of Human Rights Commissions (HRCs)?
By Stephen J. Gray
“What a strange place Canada is in 2008,…where fundamentalist Muslims use hate-speech laws drafted by secular Jews,…”
(Ezra Levant, Globe and Mail, January 21, 2008.)
Who were the instigators of HRCs that are the cause of the attacks on freedom of speech and freedom of expression in Canada? According to Ezra Levant who has been dragged before the HRCs it was “illiberal elements.” And he went on to say this: ‘…I blame the Jews. A generation ago, illiberal elements in the "official" Jewish community pressed Canadian governments to introduce laws limiting free speech.’ (Globe and Mail, January 21, 2008.)
Mr Levant went on to say in the Globe and Mail article that the people taking him to the HRCs were, “…using the very precedents set by the Canadian Jewish Congress.”
Which makes one wonder, why would a powerful organization like “the Canadian Jewish Congress” not realize that the very “laws” that they “pressed Canadian governments to introduce” could also be used against Jewish people. After all, what’s sauce for the goose is also sauce for the gander, as the saying goes.
But, not only Jewish people are being dragged before the HRCs. Before they came for the Jews, the HRCs came for Chris Kempling, Scott Brockie, Knights of Columbus, Stephen Boissoin, Bishop Henry and others. Now Catholic Insight magazine, the Christian Heritage Party and MacLean’s magazine are now under the guns of the HRCs. Nobody is safe from these appointed interrogators of totalitarian bent. So what can be done to return freedom of speech and freedom of expression to Canadians?
I believe the HRCs must be abolished. Governments appointed them, therefore, governments can disband them. I would also make the suggestion that perhaps “the Canadian Jewish Congress,” who “pressed Canadian governments to introduce laws limiting free speech” now press Canadian governments to disband the HRCs.
Stephen J. Gray
Feb. 6, 2008.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
Tuesday, March 30, 2010
A former conservative M.P. speaks out on Free Speech
A former conservative M.P. speaks out on Free Speech
By Stephen J. Gray
“…ultimately the judgment of history always sides with free speech, warts and all, with its ability to insult, provoke, challenge and inspire.”[1]
Monte Solberg, former conservative M.P. writing in Toronto Sun, March 29, 2010
Mr. Solberg should tell that to his former boss, Stephen Harper. Mr. Harper’s “conservative” government was an intervenor against free speech.
Consider this: “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).
On freedom of speech, Mr. Solberg, now speaks out. But where was he when he was part of Mr. Harper’s government? Was he one of the muzzled minions? Still, it’s good now that he has left politics that he has the courage to speak out.
Speaking out in the “conservative” government for free speech appears to be subject to some kind of censorship.
A Lifesite news article of February 12, 2008, by John-Henry Westen, had this to say about the Conservative government’s stand on Human Rights Commissions: “Internal Memo Tells Canada’s Conservative MPs to be Noncommittal on Human Rights Commissions: Specifies that Conservative MPs are not to stand up publicly for freedom of speech for Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant.”
The article stated: “An internal memo to Conservative MPs sent last week will be sure to disappoint freedom-loving Canadians. The memo, confirmed by LifeSiteNews.com as legitimate, originated from the office of the Minister of Justice Rob Nicholson. The
‘talking points’ memo directs Conservative MPs to remain noncommittal on support for Liberal MP Keith Martin’s motion M-446, which would put an end to the growing and dangerous abuse of human rights commissions….”(see full article here:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/feb/08021212.html).
Human Rights Commissions are an aberration in a supposedly free and democratic society. It was politicians that brought these unelected, appointed bureaucratic monsters into being. Politicians, if they had the political courage, could disband them. But, political courage is lacking in Canada today. Witness the recent debacle at the University of Ottawa where the Ann Coulter speech had to be cancelled because of anti-free speech mobs. Still, it is not surprising to see this type of jackbooted behaviour--it is happening on university campuses all the time--in Canada. The thugs know the politicians will not defend free speech, and therefore they realize they can invade, attack and impose their brown-shirted tactics at will. After all, if those who are elected to public office will not defend free speech, but instead interfere against it, who will?
Still, kudos to Mr. Solberg for speaking out, maybe other Harper conservatives will now find their voice in defense of free speech.
Stephen J. Gray
March 30,2010.
Endnote:
[1]http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/monte_solberg/2010/03/26/13372646.html
By Stephen J. Gray
“…ultimately the judgment of history always sides with free speech, warts and all, with its ability to insult, provoke, challenge and inspire.”[1]
Monte Solberg, former conservative M.P. writing in Toronto Sun, March 29, 2010
Mr. Solberg should tell that to his former boss, Stephen Harper. Mr. Harper’s “conservative” government was an intervenor against free speech.
Consider this: “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).
On freedom of speech, Mr. Solberg, now speaks out. But where was he when he was part of Mr. Harper’s government? Was he one of the muzzled minions? Still, it’s good now that he has left politics that he has the courage to speak out.
Speaking out in the “conservative” government for free speech appears to be subject to some kind of censorship.
A Lifesite news article of February 12, 2008, by John-Henry Westen, had this to say about the Conservative government’s stand on Human Rights Commissions: “Internal Memo Tells Canada’s Conservative MPs to be Noncommittal on Human Rights Commissions: Specifies that Conservative MPs are not to stand up publicly for freedom of speech for Mark Steyn and Ezra Levant.”
The article stated: “An internal memo to Conservative MPs sent last week will be sure to disappoint freedom-loving Canadians. The memo, confirmed by LifeSiteNews.com as legitimate, originated from the office of the Minister of Justice Rob Nicholson. The
‘talking points’ memo directs Conservative MPs to remain noncommittal on support for Liberal MP Keith Martin’s motion M-446, which would put an end to the growing and dangerous abuse of human rights commissions….”(see full article here:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/feb/08021212.html).
Human Rights Commissions are an aberration in a supposedly free and democratic society. It was politicians that brought these unelected, appointed bureaucratic monsters into being. Politicians, if they had the political courage, could disband them. But, political courage is lacking in Canada today. Witness the recent debacle at the University of Ottawa where the Ann Coulter speech had to be cancelled because of anti-free speech mobs. Still, it is not surprising to see this type of jackbooted behaviour--it is happening on university campuses all the time--in Canada. The thugs know the politicians will not defend free speech, and therefore they realize they can invade, attack and impose their brown-shirted tactics at will. After all, if those who are elected to public office will not defend free speech, but instead interfere against it, who will?
Still, kudos to Mr. Solberg for speaking out, maybe other Harper conservatives will now find their voice in defense of free speech.
Stephen J. Gray
March 30,2010.
Endnote:
[1]http://www.torontosun.com/comment/columnists/monte_solberg/2010/03/26/13372646.html
Saturday, March 27, 2010
The Goebbels Media
I wrote this in 2004, and it is still pertinent today. SJG
The Goebbels Media
By Stephen J. Gray
“The effective propagandist must be a master of the art of speech, of writing, of journalism, of the poster and of the leaflet. He must have the gift to use the major methods of influencing public opinion such as the press, film and radio to serve his ideas and goals, above all in an age of advancing technology.”
Joseph Goebbles
(Source: http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb59.htm)
One could argue that the above quote by Nazi propagandist Josef Goebbels is effectively being used by the media today. Just look at the issue of abortion to see how our present day media has turned truth into lies. A display by students of the University of Alberta showed graphic pictures of babies cut to pieces by abortion. The students also showed pictures of other atrocities to let people see how human life had been devalued throughout history.
An article in the Edmonton Journal of March 19, 2004 headlined, “ Offensive images” stated this about the students display:
“The University of Alberta has every right to tell an anti-abortion group it can't post graphic and disturbing pictures in the campus' central square.”
Can you believe the hypocrisy of these so-called defenders of free speech and free expression. They support censorship by saying “graphic and disturbing pictures” should be suppressed. What is their problem? Do they find the truth “disturbing?” What are they trying to tell us? Those pictures of little dismembered and butchered bodies should be disturbing. Of course, the media has perpetuated and covered up the big lie on the atrocity of abortion for so long, that they now believe and defend their own propaganda. We can see the child in the womb on ultrasound. Ethical doctors perform surgery on the child in the womb to correct any complications; yet, our propaganda merchants will not print the facts that abortion kills a baby, or show pictures of the slaughter. The propaganda article goes on to say:
“The question at issue here is not the morality of abortion, but rather, the right of people in a community not to be bombarded by offensive material…. The fact that the anti-abortion posters distort reality makes them all the more unsuitable.”
Here we have our media propagandists going into journalistic outrage, saying people are being “bombarded by offensive material.” Which raises the question. What could be more offensive than babies being killed and the media suppressing the information? One has to ask these “investigative journalists” and writers of “truth:” Is killing and cutting to pieces or poisoning by a saline solution the innocent child in the womb, not a “heinous” and severe crime? Some babies have been born alive after an abortion, but are left to die. Our searchers for truth in the media keep these facts suppressed. The article also states:
“Not only are the images stomach-churning in their explicitness, their distortion of the truth might well be offensive to some. The likening of abortion to some of history's most heinous events is, at best, an extreme overstatement. At worst, the comparison undermines the severity of those crimes.”
Note the propaganda words, “distortion of the truth.” Showing pictures of actual happenings is “offensive.” The killing of the defenseless child in the womb is offensive and heinous. History will surely ask the question: How could a civilized society commit these abominable acts on their young and call the act “choice?” These word warriors of propaganda journalism will go down in history as being complicit. The “truth” dispensers then go on to state that the students, “…are doing the pictoral (sic) equivalent of standing in the quad with a megaphone, screaming epithets at passersby.” Well, well, well, if that isn’t a statement of media propaganda and a distortion of the evidence. Herr Goebbels himself would surely award them a prize for that piece of imaginative disinformation. When you don’t like the truth tell a big lie and slander the students. The only “screaming” in this whole affair of suppression of free speech and free expression comes from the so-called “free press,” as can be witnessed by the journalistic frenzy they have worked themselves into.
What we are seeing and reading in this country is a deliberate attempt to suppress free speech and free expression. These attacks are aided and abetted by most of the media. There are a few that tell it like it is, but only a few. The rest feed the people propaganda from their portals of publishing. We have heard people say, about the various atrocities that have happened over the years, “Why didn’t people speak out? How could this be allowed to happen?” These young students should be praised for speaking out and for having the courage to do so. The fact that they have been virulently attacked shows their message is hitting home. The child in the womb cries out for justice.
The barbarity and the attempts to hide the killing of the child in the womb could be called a conspiracy. Why else would many so-called investigative journalists ignore the scientific and medical facts of the humanity of the unborn child? Why else would any journalists describe these truthful pictures of the killing of these children as “offensive images?” These kinds of words surely give credence to the belief that propaganda pours forth from The Goebbels Media.
Stephen J. Gray
March 28, 2004.
Some info on the Author: Stephen J. 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.
To see the truth about abortion go to: http://www.abortionNO.org
The Goebbels Media
By Stephen J. Gray
“The effective propagandist must be a master of the art of speech, of writing, of journalism, of the poster and of the leaflet. He must have the gift to use the major methods of influencing public opinion such as the press, film and radio to serve his ideas and goals, above all in an age of advancing technology.”
Joseph Goebbles
(Source: http://www.calvin.edu/academic/cas/gpa/goeb59.htm)
One could argue that the above quote by Nazi propagandist Josef Goebbels is effectively being used by the media today. Just look at the issue of abortion to see how our present day media has turned truth into lies. A display by students of the University of Alberta showed graphic pictures of babies cut to pieces by abortion. The students also showed pictures of other atrocities to let people see how human life had been devalued throughout history.
An article in the Edmonton Journal of March 19, 2004 headlined, “ Offensive images” stated this about the students display:
“The University of Alberta has every right to tell an anti-abortion group it can't post graphic and disturbing pictures in the campus' central square.”
Can you believe the hypocrisy of these so-called defenders of free speech and free expression. They support censorship by saying “graphic and disturbing pictures” should be suppressed. What is their problem? Do they find the truth “disturbing?” What are they trying to tell us? Those pictures of little dismembered and butchered bodies should be disturbing. Of course, the media has perpetuated and covered up the big lie on the atrocity of abortion for so long, that they now believe and defend their own propaganda. We can see the child in the womb on ultrasound. Ethical doctors perform surgery on the child in the womb to correct any complications; yet, our propaganda merchants will not print the facts that abortion kills a baby, or show pictures of the slaughter. The propaganda article goes on to say:
“The question at issue here is not the morality of abortion, but rather, the right of people in a community not to be bombarded by offensive material…. The fact that the anti-abortion posters distort reality makes them all the more unsuitable.”
Here we have our media propagandists going into journalistic outrage, saying people are being “bombarded by offensive material.” Which raises the question. What could be more offensive than babies being killed and the media suppressing the information? One has to ask these “investigative journalists” and writers of “truth:” Is killing and cutting to pieces or poisoning by a saline solution the innocent child in the womb, not a “heinous” and severe crime? Some babies have been born alive after an abortion, but are left to die. Our searchers for truth in the media keep these facts suppressed. The article also states:
“Not only are the images stomach-churning in their explicitness, their distortion of the truth might well be offensive to some. The likening of abortion to some of history's most heinous events is, at best, an extreme overstatement. At worst, the comparison undermines the severity of those crimes.”
Note the propaganda words, “distortion of the truth.” Showing pictures of actual happenings is “offensive.” The killing of the defenseless child in the womb is offensive and heinous. History will surely ask the question: How could a civilized society commit these abominable acts on their young and call the act “choice?” These word warriors of propaganda journalism will go down in history as being complicit. The “truth” dispensers then go on to state that the students, “…are doing the pictoral (sic) equivalent of standing in the quad with a megaphone, screaming epithets at passersby.” Well, well, well, if that isn’t a statement of media propaganda and a distortion of the evidence. Herr Goebbels himself would surely award them a prize for that piece of imaginative disinformation. When you don’t like the truth tell a big lie and slander the students. The only “screaming” in this whole affair of suppression of free speech and free expression comes from the so-called “free press,” as can be witnessed by the journalistic frenzy they have worked themselves into.
What we are seeing and reading in this country is a deliberate attempt to suppress free speech and free expression. These attacks are aided and abetted by most of the media. There are a few that tell it like it is, but only a few. The rest feed the people propaganda from their portals of publishing. We have heard people say, about the various atrocities that have happened over the years, “Why didn’t people speak out? How could this be allowed to happen?” These young students should be praised for speaking out and for having the courage to do so. The fact that they have been virulently attacked shows their message is hitting home. The child in the womb cries out for justice.
The barbarity and the attempts to hide the killing of the child in the womb could be called a conspiracy. Why else would many so-called investigative journalists ignore the scientific and medical facts of the humanity of the unborn child? Why else would any journalists describe these truthful pictures of the killing of these children as “offensive images?” These kinds of words surely give credence to the belief that propaganda pours forth from The Goebbels Media.
Stephen J. Gray
March 28, 2004.
Some info on the Author: Stephen J. 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.
To see the truth about abortion go to: http://www.abortionNO.org
Friday, March 26, 2010
The Return of the Alien (Part 2)
More from the Alien, written some time ago. SJG.
The Return of the Alien (Part 2)
By Stephen J. Gray
I am beginning to feel quite at home on planet earth. We were wrong to think that “little green men” and women only existed in our outer space community. They are here on earth. Every day another politician or one of the “eminently knowledgeable persons” on earth proclaim that they are totally “green men and women.” The word green is everywhere and on everybody’s tongue.
Usually people here say to you “have a nice day.” But, the other day I encountered a person who said to me, “have a nice green day.” To which I replied: “You are Dr. Suzuki, I presume?” “No,” he replied. “But, he is my green idol. I am a singer.” To which I replied, “You must be that chap who sings that lovely song: The green, green grass of home. “No.” he said. “But, I like grass.” Then he strode away laughing at some kind of joke only he knew about.
I thought to myself, what is the joke and why is he laughing? I am not aware that humans like grass. Then it dawned upon me, I had met a green dope smoker, a marijuana man, who was on his daily high and a user of this green plant.
Meanwhile, all across this “green” and beautiful land, the green politicians are distributing millions of “green dollars” to “save” mother earth. These millions come from the people’s tax monies. It appears there is plenty of money for “going green” but not very much money for the healthcare of people. People are treated as cows to be milked, except when the politicians are in an election campaign. Then they bribe the people with their own money in the hope of getting elected. Then once elected they milk the people again, and most of their political promises turn out to be lies. Still, it is a “good” system and the people get used, and used to it. This is known as political subjugation or being beaten after the ballot.
Some of the people accept their servitude with servile sincerity, and some even praise these political “green men and women” who lord it over them. These people could be called green masochists or grateful greenies. These grateful greenies do not mind being taxed to the max and the green politicians are so happy that they have these green “useful idiots” amongst the population.
In other news, the population in another country called the Unnatural Kingdom (UK) have been told by their political “leaders” that they will be paying a “green miles” tax if they travel by air. This could be known as the “airing of the green.” Though I hear some in the Unnatural Kingdom (UK) are calling it: “More political pollution from political asses.”
Anyway, these political green asses are in control and their emissions are choking the people. The people are being greened into submission by these little political “green men.”
In fact, one green politician in the Unnatural Kingdom (UK) has called for a green “new world order” to “address climate change.” Though some people are saying the only change needed is to get rid of nutty politicians. And another green political leader in the Unnatural Kingdom (UK) was reported to have “compared the fight against climate change to the battle against fascism.”
Meanwhile, in other Unnatural Kingdom (UK) news it is reported that: “Four-year-olds will get gay fairytales at school” and another U.K news report states that, Unnatural Kingdom “…scientists will be allowed to create part-human, part-animal embryos for research…”
This Unnatural Kingdom (UK) is really going to the dogs or should that be man-dogs now that they are about to “create part-human, part-animal” life.
Life here on earth is getting loonier and loonier, madness has become a virtue and sanity a vice. I am inclined to think there must be a green virus here eating the brain cells of the so-called rulers. This concludes my second report. Till next time I am your faithful alien servant.
A.N. Alien.
Stephen J. Gray
March 14, 2007.
The Return of the Alien (Part 2)
By Stephen J. Gray
I am beginning to feel quite at home on planet earth. We were wrong to think that “little green men” and women only existed in our outer space community. They are here on earth. Every day another politician or one of the “eminently knowledgeable persons” on earth proclaim that they are totally “green men and women.” The word green is everywhere and on everybody’s tongue.
Usually people here say to you “have a nice day.” But, the other day I encountered a person who said to me, “have a nice green day.” To which I replied: “You are Dr. Suzuki, I presume?” “No,” he replied. “But, he is my green idol. I am a singer.” To which I replied, “You must be that chap who sings that lovely song: The green, green grass of home. “No.” he said. “But, I like grass.” Then he strode away laughing at some kind of joke only he knew about.
I thought to myself, what is the joke and why is he laughing? I am not aware that humans like grass. Then it dawned upon me, I had met a green dope smoker, a marijuana man, who was on his daily high and a user of this green plant.
Meanwhile, all across this “green” and beautiful land, the green politicians are distributing millions of “green dollars” to “save” mother earth. These millions come from the people’s tax monies. It appears there is plenty of money for “going green” but not very much money for the healthcare of people. People are treated as cows to be milked, except when the politicians are in an election campaign. Then they bribe the people with their own money in the hope of getting elected. Then once elected they milk the people again, and most of their political promises turn out to be lies. Still, it is a “good” system and the people get used, and used to it. This is known as political subjugation or being beaten after the ballot.
Some of the people accept their servitude with servile sincerity, and some even praise these political “green men and women” who lord it over them. These people could be called green masochists or grateful greenies. These grateful greenies do not mind being taxed to the max and the green politicians are so happy that they have these green “useful idiots” amongst the population.
In other news, the population in another country called the Unnatural Kingdom (UK) have been told by their political “leaders” that they will be paying a “green miles” tax if they travel by air. This could be known as the “airing of the green.” Though I hear some in the Unnatural Kingdom (UK) are calling it: “More political pollution from political asses.”
Anyway, these political green asses are in control and their emissions are choking the people. The people are being greened into submission by these little political “green men.”
In fact, one green politician in the Unnatural Kingdom (UK) has called for a green “new world order” to “address climate change.” Though some people are saying the only change needed is to get rid of nutty politicians. And another green political leader in the Unnatural Kingdom (UK) was reported to have “compared the fight against climate change to the battle against fascism.”
Meanwhile, in other Unnatural Kingdom (UK) news it is reported that: “Four-year-olds will get gay fairytales at school” and another U.K news report states that, Unnatural Kingdom “…scientists will be allowed to create part-human, part-animal embryos for research…”
This Unnatural Kingdom (UK) is really going to the dogs or should that be man-dogs now that they are about to “create part-human, part-animal” life.
Life here on earth is getting loonier and loonier, madness has become a virtue and sanity a vice. I am inclined to think there must be a green virus here eating the brain cells of the so-called rulers. This concludes my second report. Till next time I am your faithful alien servant.
A.N. Alien.
Stephen J. Gray
March 14, 2007.
Wednesday, March 24, 2010
The Return of the Alien (Part 1)
I wrote this a few years ago. SJG
The Return of the Alien (Part 1)
By Stephen J. Gray
It has been three years since I filed a report on the state of the earth. Therefore, my government in outer space has asked me to return to earth, and update them on some of the latest happenings. After much research by me, here is my report to the outer space community.
The people of the earth are still immersed in wars against each other. The victims of these wars are men, women and children. It is the children who suffer the most in all this warfare and killing. The killing is not only done in wars. The people of the earth are not averse to killing their young while these innocents are still in their mothers wombs. They call this atrocity, abortion or “choice.” Millions of innocents in their mothers wombs are killed yearly under the banner of “choice.”
The consequences of killing millions by “choice,” over many years, has resulted in a shortage of workers, which is now showing up in their economic systems. Though, nobody amongst the elites here on earth will admit that this is the cause. Instead they call this lack of workers the results of “low fertility.” I find this corruption of words quite common here. Nothing means what it is supposed to mean anymore. They camouflage the language to impose unnatural agendas.
For instance, the last time I was here in this place, they were discussing and promoting an issue called “same-sex marriage.” This has now come to fruition. This parody was imposed by three judges, who used to be lawyers. These lawyers who become judges are the real rulers in this country. The politicians did make a law on this after the judges made their decision. They call this rule by appointed lawyers oops I mean judges, the “benefit” of living in a “democracy.”
“Democracy” is enacted in this country every few years. The people are allowed to vote in an election. During this election campaign the politicians of all political stripes promise the people all kinds of good things from the peoples own money, if only they will vote for them. Once elected to office, they punish the people for voting for them, and tax them into submission. As I noted earlier, they call this “democracy.”
This “democracy” in this country is ruled by a document called “the Charter.” The people did not get to vote on whether they wanted this “charter.” It was imposed upon them by the political elites of the day. Yet, very few people here ask the question: “How can this document be legitimate when the people were not allowed to vote individually on its acceptance?” Still, as I noted earlier, they call this “democracy.”
In this “democracy,” drugs are supposed to be illegal. Yet, they give out “free needles” (paid for by taxpayers) to those who want to shoot up dope. The dopes in power even allow, what they call, “safe injection sites,” (paid for by taxpayers) where some of the addicts go to inject this illegal dope into their bodies. One would think a better and more healthy way to help, and clean up these people, would be to take them off the streets and put them into forcible treatment.( They do that with those who have TB). But, that would be against their “human rights.”
“Human rights” are big in this country (except for the children in their mothers wombs, they have none) and a whole bureaucracy revolves around “rights.” They have tribunals called "Human Rights Commissions" and anybody who feels discriminated against lodges a complaint with them. Rights have become an industry for the politically correct. If you are not politically correct you can be in trouble. So people must watch their language.
The language here has certain code words. For example when you don’t like something, or if somebody is critical of you, it is good advice to call or accuse that person of being a scab, racist, homophobic, mean spirited, intolerant, bigoted, sexist and hateful. Or accuse them of lookism, ageism or any other "ism" you can think of. There are many more similar words, but these are the key words used to smear people and ensure that your rights are protected even if you are wrong. People run for cover when these words are used against them.
Anyhow, I must close for the moment. I am living quite close to the office of the Human Rights Police (HRP) and they could be watching me. My next report will be issued when I feel more secure. I have so much information on the happenings in this place that it will take some time to document it all. In the meantime, I have applied for welfare under my phony social insurance number and hope to collect my due at the end of the month. Till next time, I am your faithful alien servant.
A.N. Alien.
Stephen J. Gray
March 3, 2007.
The Return of the Alien (Part 1)
By Stephen J. Gray
It has been three years since I filed a report on the state of the earth. Therefore, my government in outer space has asked me to return to earth, and update them on some of the latest happenings. After much research by me, here is my report to the outer space community.
The people of the earth are still immersed in wars against each other. The victims of these wars are men, women and children. It is the children who suffer the most in all this warfare and killing. The killing is not only done in wars. The people of the earth are not averse to killing their young while these innocents are still in their mothers wombs. They call this atrocity, abortion or “choice.” Millions of innocents in their mothers wombs are killed yearly under the banner of “choice.”
The consequences of killing millions by “choice,” over many years, has resulted in a shortage of workers, which is now showing up in their economic systems. Though, nobody amongst the elites here on earth will admit that this is the cause. Instead they call this lack of workers the results of “low fertility.” I find this corruption of words quite common here. Nothing means what it is supposed to mean anymore. They camouflage the language to impose unnatural agendas.
For instance, the last time I was here in this place, they were discussing and promoting an issue called “same-sex marriage.” This has now come to fruition. This parody was imposed by three judges, who used to be lawyers. These lawyers who become judges are the real rulers in this country. The politicians did make a law on this after the judges made their decision. They call this rule by appointed lawyers oops I mean judges, the “benefit” of living in a “democracy.”
“Democracy” is enacted in this country every few years. The people are allowed to vote in an election. During this election campaign the politicians of all political stripes promise the people all kinds of good things from the peoples own money, if only they will vote for them. Once elected to office, they punish the people for voting for them, and tax them into submission. As I noted earlier, they call this “democracy.”
This “democracy” in this country is ruled by a document called “the Charter.” The people did not get to vote on whether they wanted this “charter.” It was imposed upon them by the political elites of the day. Yet, very few people here ask the question: “How can this document be legitimate when the people were not allowed to vote individually on its acceptance?” Still, as I noted earlier, they call this “democracy.”
In this “democracy,” drugs are supposed to be illegal. Yet, they give out “free needles” (paid for by taxpayers) to those who want to shoot up dope. The dopes in power even allow, what they call, “safe injection sites,” (paid for by taxpayers) where some of the addicts go to inject this illegal dope into their bodies. One would think a better and more healthy way to help, and clean up these people, would be to take them off the streets and put them into forcible treatment.( They do that with those who have TB). But, that would be against their “human rights.”
“Human rights” are big in this country (except for the children in their mothers wombs, they have none) and a whole bureaucracy revolves around “rights.” They have tribunals called "Human Rights Commissions" and anybody who feels discriminated against lodges a complaint with them. Rights have become an industry for the politically correct. If you are not politically correct you can be in trouble. So people must watch their language.
The language here has certain code words. For example when you don’t like something, or if somebody is critical of you, it is good advice to call or accuse that person of being a scab, racist, homophobic, mean spirited, intolerant, bigoted, sexist and hateful. Or accuse them of lookism, ageism or any other "ism" you can think of. There are many more similar words, but these are the key words used to smear people and ensure that your rights are protected even if you are wrong. People run for cover when these words are used against them.
Anyhow, I must close for the moment. I am living quite close to the office of the Human Rights Police (HRP) and they could be watching me. My next report will be issued when I feel more secure. I have so much information on the happenings in this place that it will take some time to document it all. In the meantime, I have applied for welfare under my phony social insurance number and hope to collect my due at the end of the month. Till next time, I am your faithful alien servant.
A.N. Alien.
Stephen J. Gray
March 3, 2007.
Monday, March 22, 2010
Trade unions “played a critical role” in “same-sex marriage law”
Another reminder about trade unions. I wrote this a number of years ago. SJG.
Trade unions “played a critical role” in “same-sex marriage law”
By Stephen J. Gray
“With the passage of the federal equal marriage legislation, Canada has taken an important step forward.
The labour movement - from local activists to national leadership - stood united with the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender community and played a critical role in persuading the Canadian government to pass the same-sex marriage law….
The Canadian Labour Congress was a founding member of the broad-based coalition, Canadians for Equal Marriage which led this struggle.”
http://www.canadianlabour.ca/index.php/pride_sol/Its_Time_to_Celebrat
The Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) has been funding and supporting a myriad of special interest groups for years. It is no surprise to me that they were a ‘founding member’ of the coalition “Canadians for Equal Marriage.” Ken Georgetti of the CLC, when he was president of the B.C. Federation of Labour (BCFL), sent out a letter soliciting funds for abortion clinics. Now that he has graduated to the CLC he is still writing letters, only this time it is in support of “same - sex marriage.” He wrote the prime minister in a letter headlined on CLC website, “CLC Supports Same-sex Marriage” and said this:
“Dear Prime Minister:
I want to express my personal support as well as that of the Canadian Labour Congress for your strong stand in support of the extension of human rights to the area of marriage.”
http://www.canadianlabour.ca/index.php/pride_sol/CLC_Supports_Samesex
The Canadian Labour Congress is the head office of the trade union movement in Canada. It states on its website that: “The Canadian Labour Congress is the largest democratic and popular organization in Canada with over three million members. The Canadian Labour Congress brings together Canada's national and international unions, the provincial and territorial federations of labour and 137 district labour councils.”
The CLC is financed from affiliation fees paid from the compulsory union dues of compulsory union members. To my knowledge neither the CLC nor any other trade union in Canada has ever polled or asked its members individually if they supported so called “same-sex marriage.” This aberration has been pushed by the union bosses and a few activists within the trade union movement. Trade union time and money has been spent promoting and supporting this claptrap.
Another union boss with a politically correct agenda is Buzz Hargrove who wrote the prime minister and stated:
“Dear Prime Minister: Clearly the debate around same-sex marriage is heating up. I am writing once again to offer the support of our union, the Canadian Auto Workers, and to encourage you to hold strong on protection of minority rights through the Charter and press forward with same-sex marriage legislation….”
http://www.caw.ca/whatwedo/pride/letters/martin_jan05.asp
And still another union boss inserted himself into the “same-sex marriage” issue. James Clancy, president of the National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) wrote the prime minister and sent a copy of it to Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere (EGALE), among others. Mr. Clancy wrote this to the prime minister:
“Dear Prime Minister,
On behalf of the National Union of Public and General Employees, I am writing to extend our support to your efforts to introduce legislation that would achieve equal marriage rights for same sex couples in Canada….Unfortunately, as we both know, a small but highly vocal opposition is becoming increasingly organized and active on this issue….In conclusion, I am urging you and your government to quickly bring in legislation to ensure equal marriage rights for same sex couples. ”
http://www.nupge.ca/news_2005/n01fe05a.htm
Not to be outdone on this letter writing campaign was Ken Neumann, National Director of the United Steelworkers of America in Canada. Who had this to say on behalf of his compulsory members:
“Dear Prime Minister Martin and Minister Cotler:
As the National Director of the United Steelworkers of America in Canada, I am writing on behalf of our 255,000 members in support of your government's proposed legislation to extend the right of civil marriage to lesbian and gay couples across Canada….In closing, the Steelworkers calls upon your government to take immediate and decisive action to ensure passage of the proposed equal marriage legislation,…”
http://www.uswa.ca/program/content/1923.php?lan=en&
Another letter writer on the subject of “same-sex marriage” was the president of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW), Deborah Bourque. She wrote the following words to opposition leader Stephen Harper:
“Mr. Harper: … The Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) supports the position Prime Minister Paul Martin has taken on same-sex marriage. …Just because marriage has traditionally been a “privilege” only heterosexual couples have been able to access does not mean that the human rights violation should continue.”
http://www.cupw.ca/pages/document_eng.php?Doc_ID=781
And the two big brothers at the headquarters of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) had this to say on pressuring the “federal government” on same sex marriage in this letter to members:
“Dear Sisters and Brothers,…We and our community coalitions can rejoice now that same-sex couples in British Columbia, Ontario, and Québec can legally marry. In the meantime, we continue to pressure the federal government to do the right thing and legalize same-sex marriage so that lesbian and gay couples can marry, no matter where they live in Canada.”
In solidarity,
PAUL MOIST CLAUDE GÉNÉREUX
National President National Secretary-Treasurer
http://www.cupe.ca/www/EqualityPride/9944
The Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) had this to say on same-sex marriage and its support for “ Canadians for Equal Marriage.”
“The Public Service Alliance of Canada continues to strongly support the extension of access to marriage to same-sex couples. …The PSAC also provides office space and other support to the Canadians for Equal Marriage coalition in Ottawa.”
http://www.psac-afpc.org/what/humanrights/Pride/pride_statement_2005-e.shtml
One could go on and on showing examples of these union bosses claiming to speak for ALL their compulsory members on this invention of words called “same-sex marriage.” The use of union members time and money across Canada on this issue is an affront to democracy itself. Union members in Canada are mature enough to make decisions on this matter individually. They do not need or want union bosses making these political, social and moral decisions for them. If any other organizations in Canada were doing what trade union bosses are doing on behalf of their compulsory members all hell would break loose and charges would be laid. But this is the state Canada is in today where a Labour politburo gets away with the big lie of saying ALL its members support this invented nonsense called “same-sex marriage.”
Stephen J. Gray
Sept 5, 2005
Some info on the author: Stephen J. 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.
Trade unions “played a critical role” in “same-sex marriage law”
By Stephen J. Gray
“With the passage of the federal equal marriage legislation, Canada has taken an important step forward.
The labour movement - from local activists to national leadership - stood united with the gay, lesbian, bisexual, transgender community and played a critical role in persuading the Canadian government to pass the same-sex marriage law….
The Canadian Labour Congress was a founding member of the broad-based coalition, Canadians for Equal Marriage which led this struggle.”
http://www.canadianlabour.ca/index.php/pride_sol/Its_Time_to_Celebrat
The Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) has been funding and supporting a myriad of special interest groups for years. It is no surprise to me that they were a ‘founding member’ of the coalition “Canadians for Equal Marriage.” Ken Georgetti of the CLC, when he was president of the B.C. Federation of Labour (BCFL), sent out a letter soliciting funds for abortion clinics. Now that he has graduated to the CLC he is still writing letters, only this time it is in support of “same - sex marriage.” He wrote the prime minister in a letter headlined on CLC website, “CLC Supports Same-sex Marriage” and said this:
“Dear Prime Minister:
I want to express my personal support as well as that of the Canadian Labour Congress for your strong stand in support of the extension of human rights to the area of marriage.”
http://www.canadianlabour.ca/index.php/pride_sol/CLC_Supports_Samesex
The Canadian Labour Congress is the head office of the trade union movement in Canada. It states on its website that: “The Canadian Labour Congress is the largest democratic and popular organization in Canada with over three million members. The Canadian Labour Congress brings together Canada's national and international unions, the provincial and territorial federations of labour and 137 district labour councils.”
The CLC is financed from affiliation fees paid from the compulsory union dues of compulsory union members. To my knowledge neither the CLC nor any other trade union in Canada has ever polled or asked its members individually if they supported so called “same-sex marriage.” This aberration has been pushed by the union bosses and a few activists within the trade union movement. Trade union time and money has been spent promoting and supporting this claptrap.
Another union boss with a politically correct agenda is Buzz Hargrove who wrote the prime minister and stated:
“Dear Prime Minister: Clearly the debate around same-sex marriage is heating up. I am writing once again to offer the support of our union, the Canadian Auto Workers, and to encourage you to hold strong on protection of minority rights through the Charter and press forward with same-sex marriage legislation….”
http://www.caw.ca/whatwedo/pride/letters/martin_jan05.asp
And still another union boss inserted himself into the “same-sex marriage” issue. James Clancy, president of the National Union of Public and General Employees (NUPGE) wrote the prime minister and sent a copy of it to Equality for Gays and Lesbians Everywhere (EGALE), among others. Mr. Clancy wrote this to the prime minister:
“Dear Prime Minister,
On behalf of the National Union of Public and General Employees, I am writing to extend our support to your efforts to introduce legislation that would achieve equal marriage rights for same sex couples in Canada….Unfortunately, as we both know, a small but highly vocal opposition is becoming increasingly organized and active on this issue….In conclusion, I am urging you and your government to quickly bring in legislation to ensure equal marriage rights for same sex couples. ”
http://www.nupge.ca/news_2005/n01fe05a.htm
Not to be outdone on this letter writing campaign was Ken Neumann, National Director of the United Steelworkers of America in Canada. Who had this to say on behalf of his compulsory members:
“Dear Prime Minister Martin and Minister Cotler:
As the National Director of the United Steelworkers of America in Canada, I am writing on behalf of our 255,000 members in support of your government's proposed legislation to extend the right of civil marriage to lesbian and gay couples across Canada….In closing, the Steelworkers calls upon your government to take immediate and decisive action to ensure passage of the proposed equal marriage legislation,…”
http://www.uswa.ca/program/content/1923.php?lan=en&
Another letter writer on the subject of “same-sex marriage” was the president of the Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW), Deborah Bourque. She wrote the following words to opposition leader Stephen Harper:
“Mr. Harper: … The Canadian Union of Postal Workers (CUPW) supports the position Prime Minister Paul Martin has taken on same-sex marriage. …Just because marriage has traditionally been a “privilege” only heterosexual couples have been able to access does not mean that the human rights violation should continue.”
http://www.cupw.ca/pages/document_eng.php?Doc_ID=781
And the two big brothers at the headquarters of the Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) had this to say on pressuring the “federal government” on same sex marriage in this letter to members:
“Dear Sisters and Brothers,…We and our community coalitions can rejoice now that same-sex couples in British Columbia, Ontario, and Québec can legally marry. In the meantime, we continue to pressure the federal government to do the right thing and legalize same-sex marriage so that lesbian and gay couples can marry, no matter where they live in Canada.”
In solidarity,
PAUL MOIST CLAUDE GÉNÉREUX
National President National Secretary-Treasurer
http://www.cupe.ca/www/EqualityPride/9944
The Public Service Alliance of Canada (PSAC) had this to say on same-sex marriage and its support for “ Canadians for Equal Marriage.”
“The Public Service Alliance of Canada continues to strongly support the extension of access to marriage to same-sex couples. …The PSAC also provides office space and other support to the Canadians for Equal Marriage coalition in Ottawa.”
http://www.psac-afpc.org/what/humanrights/Pride/pride_statement_2005-e.shtml
One could go on and on showing examples of these union bosses claiming to speak for ALL their compulsory members on this invention of words called “same-sex marriage.” The use of union members time and money across Canada on this issue is an affront to democracy itself. Union members in Canada are mature enough to make decisions on this matter individually. They do not need or want union bosses making these political, social and moral decisions for them. If any other organizations in Canada were doing what trade union bosses are doing on behalf of their compulsory members all hell would break loose and charges would be laid. But this is the state Canada is in today where a Labour politburo gets away with the big lie of saying ALL its members support this invented nonsense called “same-sex marriage.”
Stephen J. Gray
Sept 5, 2005
Some info on the author: Stephen J. 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.
Groups, organizations and causes that have received union time and/or money
I wrote this some time ago, and the misuse of union time and money continues. SJG.
Groups, organizations and causes that have received union time and/or money
Some of them also receive government grants
POLITICAL CAUSES
*Bloc Que'be'cois
*NDP (millions of dollars)
*Federal Liberals (The party that appointed Judge Rand, the architect of compulsory union dues)
*Municipal elections
*Socialist International
*The Nisga'a Treaty
CAUSES & ORGANIZATIONS
*National Action Committee on Status of Women (NAC)
*National Association of Women and the Law (NAWL)
*Women's Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF)
*Vancouver Status of Women (VSW)
*Conventions for Women Only
*Beijing Conference (assisted radical feminists to go)
*Greenpeace
*B.C. Environmental Network (BCEN)
*End The Arms Race (EAR)
*Canadian Peace Alliance (CPA)
*Coalition Opposed to Arms Trade (COAT)
*Canadian Healthcare Coalition
*Ontario Coalition for Social Justice
*Days of Action of Ontario
*Action Canada Network
*Cultural Research
*Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA)
*CHOICES!
*National Anti-Poverty Organization (NAPO)
*Council of Canadians (COC)
*Ecumenical Coalition for Economic Justice (ECEJ)
*End Legislated Poverty (ELP)
*Charlottetown Accord (the "yes" side supported by CLC and B.C. Federation of Labour)
*Peace Caravan
*Coalition of Progressive Electors (COPE)
*Nanaimo Commonwealth Holding Society (NCHS)
*MATCH
*Bolivian Urban Workers' Association
*Cuba Solidarity Committee
MAGAZINES & NEWSPAPERS
*Angles (gay and lesbian newspaper)
*Briarpatch (socialist magazine)
*Canadian Dimension (socialist magazine)
*Canadian Forum (left-wing magazine)
*Herizons (feminist publication)
*Our Schools, Ourselves
*Our Times
*This Magazine
*Dossier (Action Canada Network newsletter)
*Action Now (NAC's newsletter)
*Kinesis (Vancouver Status of Women newspaper)
*Peoples' Voice (communist newspaper)
*Pacific Tribune (communist newspaper, now defunct)
*Pacific Current (socialist magazine funded by union money, now defunct)
*New Directions (now defunct)
*The Democrat (NDP newspaper)
*The Columbia Journal (left-wing newspaper)
ABORTION & HOMOSEXUAL ISSUES
*Abortion clinics
*Everywoman's Abortion Clinic
*Abortionist Morgentaler's defence fund
*B.C. Coalition for Abortion Clinics (BCCAC)
*Ontario Coalition for Abortion Clinics (OCAC)
*B.C. Federation of Labour's Reproductive Choice Fund
*Buses for pro-abortion rally paid for by B.C. Federation of Labour
*The Vriend Case, the Canadian Labour Congress was an intervenor
*Court challenges on behalf of same sex couples
*Gay and lesbian kits
*Pink Triangle Committee
*Gay and lesbian support group
*B.C. Teachers' Federation contributed $40,000 to court case on behalf of gay activists.
NOTE: There are many more groups, coalitions and causes that unions are involved with.
This information was compiled by Stephen J. Gray and published in
his Save the Union Movement Newsletter, February 1999, page 2,
Newsletter #27.
----------
QUOTABLE QUOTE:
"Millions of Dollars Finance Special Interest Groups"
"Unions are unaccountable because they seldom can be unseated and yet they have the power of indirect taxation through union dues which are used to finance elections for those espousing their beliefs."
"Their millions of dollars finance special interest groups whose special interests often have nothing to do with the concerns of rank and file union members."
-Diane Francis, Editor, The Financial Post, May 28, 1992
Groups, organizations and causes that have received union time and/or money
Some of them also receive government grants
POLITICAL CAUSES
*Bloc Que'be'cois
*NDP (millions of dollars)
*Federal Liberals (The party that appointed Judge Rand, the architect of compulsory union dues)
*Municipal elections
*Socialist International
*The Nisga'a Treaty
CAUSES & ORGANIZATIONS
*National Action Committee on Status of Women (NAC)
*National Association of Women and the Law (NAWL)
*Women's Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF)
*Vancouver Status of Women (VSW)
*Conventions for Women Only
*Beijing Conference (assisted radical feminists to go)
*Greenpeace
*B.C. Environmental Network (BCEN)
*End The Arms Race (EAR)
*Canadian Peace Alliance (CPA)
*Coalition Opposed to Arms Trade (COAT)
*Canadian Healthcare Coalition
*Ontario Coalition for Social Justice
*Days of Action of Ontario
*Action Canada Network
*Cultural Research
*Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA)
*CHOICES!
*National Anti-Poverty Organization (NAPO)
*Council of Canadians (COC)
*Ecumenical Coalition for Economic Justice (ECEJ)
*End Legislated Poverty (ELP)
*Charlottetown Accord (the "yes" side supported by CLC and B.C. Federation of Labour)
*Peace Caravan
*Coalition of Progressive Electors (COPE)
*Nanaimo Commonwealth Holding Society (NCHS)
*MATCH
*Bolivian Urban Workers' Association
*Cuba Solidarity Committee
MAGAZINES & NEWSPAPERS
*Angles (gay and lesbian newspaper)
*Briarpatch (socialist magazine)
*Canadian Dimension (socialist magazine)
*Canadian Forum (left-wing magazine)
*Herizons (feminist publication)
*Our Schools, Ourselves
*Our Times
*This Magazine
*Dossier (Action Canada Network newsletter)
*Action Now (NAC's newsletter)
*Kinesis (Vancouver Status of Women newspaper)
*Peoples' Voice (communist newspaper)
*Pacific Tribune (communist newspaper, now defunct)
*Pacific Current (socialist magazine funded by union money, now defunct)
*New Directions (now defunct)
*The Democrat (NDP newspaper)
*The Columbia Journal (left-wing newspaper)
ABORTION & HOMOSEXUAL ISSUES
*Abortion clinics
*Everywoman's Abortion Clinic
*Abortionist Morgentaler's defence fund
*B.C. Coalition for Abortion Clinics (BCCAC)
*Ontario Coalition for Abortion Clinics (OCAC)
*B.C. Federation of Labour's Reproductive Choice Fund
*Buses for pro-abortion rally paid for by B.C. Federation of Labour
*The Vriend Case, the Canadian Labour Congress was an intervenor
*Court challenges on behalf of same sex couples
*Gay and lesbian kits
*Pink Triangle Committee
*Gay and lesbian support group
*B.C. Teachers' Federation contributed $40,000 to court case on behalf of gay activists.
NOTE: There are many more groups, coalitions and causes that unions are involved with.
This information was compiled by Stephen J. Gray and published in
his Save the Union Movement Newsletter, February 1999, page 2,
Newsletter #27.
----------
QUOTABLE QUOTE:
"Millions of Dollars Finance Special Interest Groups"
"Unions are unaccountable because they seldom can be unseated and yet they have the power of indirect taxation through union dues which are used to finance elections for those espousing their beliefs."
"Their millions of dollars finance special interest groups whose special interests often have nothing to do with the concerns of rank and file union members."
-Diane Francis, Editor, The Financial Post, May 28, 1992
Saturday, March 13, 2010
The Trade Unions’ Intrusion into Social, Moral, and Religious Life
Note: The article below was written a number of years ago. SJG.
"We are involved in matters which have to do with the social direction of Canada and not just issues at the bargaining table..." -Larry Brown, Secretary Treasurer of N.U.P.G.E. (National Union of Provincial Government Employees) in "The Dossier" of Action Canada Network, Sept.-Oct., 1991.
As the above quote from a union boss indicates, unions are involved in "the social direction of Canada". But should trade unions be allowed to interfere in the personal, social, moral, political and religious lives of their members, considering membership and union dues are compulsory? Any intelligent person would say no! Any free society should say no. But today in Canada, trade unions are allowed to impose their values (which many people would say are immoral) on their forced membership.
Union Agendas
Unions receive their certification for collective bargaining and this has progressed into collective coercion. Trade unions pay no taxes and have a money machine to pursue and finance agendas that are incompatible with personal freedom and democracy in Canada. Here are some examples of the trade unions’ agendas:
Union Support of Abortion
The B.C. Coalition for Abortion Clinics stated in its brochure that "the B.C. Federation of Labour and the Canadian Labour Congress, along with other labour organizations have long supported women’s right to choice on abortion, free-standing abortion clinics and medicare coverage for abortion."
The BC Federation of Labour (BCFL) is also on record as soliciting funds for abortion clinics. And Ken Georgetti, former President of the BCFL, and now President of the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC), had this to say in a letter to union members on raising funds for an abortion clinic:
"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. . .."
Why are we compelled to pay for this kind of leadership? Is it any wonder union dues keep increasing? The Ontario Coalition for Abortion Clinics (OCAC) has also infiltrated the labour movement; it is stated in the book Social Movements, Social Change, The Politics and Practice of Organizing (funded by our tax dollars) that "at various labour conventions in 1982 and 1983, OCAC activists were involved in garnering support for choice." The book also states that "many unions have contributed financial and material support to OCAC."
The Ontario Federation of Labour has donated money to Canada’s foremost abortionist. In fact, it is stated in the book The Charter of Rights and the Legalization of Politics in Canada by Michael Mandel, page 301, that "...the Ontario Federation of Labour has donated thousands of dollars to the Morgentaler defence. . ."
Might union members ask the question: What does abortion have to do with collective bargaining? And why are unions allowed to get away with this misuse of the memberships’ time and money?
Support of Homosexuality
"Healthcare" unions are some of the biggest supporters of the "gay rights" lifestyle. For example, the Hospital Employees Union (HEU) has already been to court on behalf of "same sex spouses" and Angles (July, 1991), Vancouver’s gay and lesbian newspaper, said this court case received "financial and moral backing from the Hospital Employees Union (HEU)". The B.C. Nurses Union has set up a "gay and lesbian rights ad hoc committee". And, according to the B.C.N.U. Update, October/November 1996 issue, "the committee made its presence felt in the Gay Pride Parade in Nelson, marching under the B.C.N.U. banner."
The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) launched a court action on behalf of "same sex pensions". An article in CUPE Quarterly (October 1992) stated that "the Canadian Union of Public Employees leads the labour movement in it’s support of lesbian and gay issues". The Vancouver Sun (November 28, 1995) had an article headlined "CUPE Files a Grievance" that said a "journalism teacher" has been suspended and that this teacher "has written that sex between children and adults shouldn’t be illegal". The teacher also works "occasionally as a prostitute". The article goes on to say that "the Canadian Union of Public Employees plans to file a grievance over the suspension."
And the communist newspaper, the "Peoples Voice" (April 1-15, 2001) had this to say in the article "CLC Solidarity and Pride":
"The second ‘Solidarity and Pride’ conference called by the Canadian Labour Congress will be held June 24-27 at the Sheraton Guildford Hotel in Surrey, British Columbia.
"A letter from the CLC points out that since the first such meeting in 1997, ‘there have been many legal victories and gains for lesbian and gay workers at the bargaining table, an increased recognition of our issues in our unions, and ongoing, growing support from union leaders and members at all levels.’"
The Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) was also an intervenor in "The Vriend Case" that went to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Trade Unions and Religion
Parents send their children to independent schools because they want their children taught certain values. A Catholic school in Fort St. John has been closed by the Bishop because the trade union which represents the teachers - the B.C. Government and Service Employees Union (BCGSEU) - had problems with a "Catholicity Clause." The Vancouver Sun (July 1, 1999) said, "Talks stalled over a ‘Catholicity clause’ requiring staff to act according to Catholic teachings both inside and outside the school."
The Globe and Mail (July 13, 1999) said, "the union also wanted an independent adjudicator, not the bishop, to resolve disputes over Catholic lifestyle issues such as divorce, sex outside marriage, and abortion."
The Bishops are the teachers of faith and morals in the Catholic Church. And here we have the union saying "an independent adjudicator" should decide these moral issues. The BCGSEU is affiliated with the B.C. Federation of Labour (BCFL) and the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC); both of these organizations support abortion, homosexuality, radical feminists, etc. It is hypocrisy of the union to suggest an ‘independent adjudicator" when the unions have already taken positions (which contradict those of the Catholic Church) on these moral issues.
Even if a "Catholicity clause" was signed and the union was in the school, some of the Catholic teachers’ union dues would still go to support these controversial issues, through affiliation fees to the BCFL and CLC.
One wonders if there is a union agenda regarding Catholic Schools and others. First you get the union organized in the school. Then the union refuses to sign a "Catholicity clause." The union knows the Bishop will close the school without the clause. Thus, the children will have to go into the public school system, which in turn will need more teachers. This will result in more union dues to help finance all the politically correct causes of the unions.
BCTV News (July 28, 1999) reported a dispute between the BCGSEU and the Salvation Army. The Salvation Army wants its employees to demonstrate a "Christian Lifestyle," which the union objects to. This news report went on to say that the Salvation Army might close down this operation rather than give in to the union. A union official was quoted in the National Post (July 29, 1999) as saying, "This attitude [of the Salvation Army] is not only outrageous, it’s unconscionable." The question must be asked: Why should a Catholic school, the Salvation Army, or any other institution have to agree to a trade union’s version of morality?"
The slogan of abortion supporters is "freedom of choice", yet union members in this country have no "freedom of choice"; they are compelled into supporting abortion and homosexuality and a myriad of fringe groups. Democracy is a dirty word in the union movement and freedom is a farce. Big Brother and Big Sister in the Labour Movement dictate to union members, and compulsion is their instrument of power. If you don’t pay union dues you do not work.
Union members’ social, moral, and religious life has become the domain of union bosses and their supporters. Unions many years ago were oppressed and many people suffered and died to get decent wages and working conditions. But now the wheel has turned full circle and the oppressed have become the oppressors.
Pope John Paul II in his Encyclical Letter "On Human Work" had this to say about unions:
"However, the role of unions is not to ‘play politics’ in the sense that the expression is commonly understood today. Unions do not have the character of political parties struggling for power; they should not be subjected to the decision of political parties or have too close links with them. In fact, in such a situation they easily lose contact with their specific role, which is to secure the just rights of workers within the framework of the common good of the whole of society; instead they become an instrument used for other purposes."
Stephen J. Gray
"We are involved in matters which have to do with the social direction of Canada and not just issues at the bargaining table..." -Larry Brown, Secretary Treasurer of N.U.P.G.E. (National Union of Provincial Government Employees) in "The Dossier" of Action Canada Network, Sept.-Oct., 1991.
As the above quote from a union boss indicates, unions are involved in "the social direction of Canada". But should trade unions be allowed to interfere in the personal, social, moral, political and religious lives of their members, considering membership and union dues are compulsory? Any intelligent person would say no! Any free society should say no. But today in Canada, trade unions are allowed to impose their values (which many people would say are immoral) on their forced membership.
Union Agendas
Unions receive their certification for collective bargaining and this has progressed into collective coercion. Trade unions pay no taxes and have a money machine to pursue and finance agendas that are incompatible with personal freedom and democracy in Canada. Here are some examples of the trade unions’ agendas:
Union Support of Abortion
The B.C. Coalition for Abortion Clinics stated in its brochure that "the B.C. Federation of Labour and the Canadian Labour Congress, along with other labour organizations have long supported women’s right to choice on abortion, free-standing abortion clinics and medicare coverage for abortion."
The BC Federation of Labour (BCFL) is also on record as soliciting funds for abortion clinics. And Ken Georgetti, former President of the BCFL, and now President of the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC), had this to say in a letter to union members on raising funds for an abortion clinic:
"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. . .."
Why are we compelled to pay for this kind of leadership? Is it any wonder union dues keep increasing? The Ontario Coalition for Abortion Clinics (OCAC) has also infiltrated the labour movement; it is stated in the book Social Movements, Social Change, The Politics and Practice of Organizing (funded by our tax dollars) that "at various labour conventions in 1982 and 1983, OCAC activists were involved in garnering support for choice." The book also states that "many unions have contributed financial and material support to OCAC."
The Ontario Federation of Labour has donated money to Canada’s foremost abortionist. In fact, it is stated in the book The Charter of Rights and the Legalization of Politics in Canada by Michael Mandel, page 301, that "...the Ontario Federation of Labour has donated thousands of dollars to the Morgentaler defence. . ."
Might union members ask the question: What does abortion have to do with collective bargaining? And why are unions allowed to get away with this misuse of the memberships’ time and money?
Support of Homosexuality
"Healthcare" unions are some of the biggest supporters of the "gay rights" lifestyle. For example, the Hospital Employees Union (HEU) has already been to court on behalf of "same sex spouses" and Angles (July, 1991), Vancouver’s gay and lesbian newspaper, said this court case received "financial and moral backing from the Hospital Employees Union (HEU)". The B.C. Nurses Union has set up a "gay and lesbian rights ad hoc committee". And, according to the B.C.N.U. Update, October/November 1996 issue, "the committee made its presence felt in the Gay Pride Parade in Nelson, marching under the B.C.N.U. banner."
The Canadian Union of Public Employees (CUPE) launched a court action on behalf of "same sex pensions". An article in CUPE Quarterly (October 1992) stated that "the Canadian Union of Public Employees leads the labour movement in it’s support of lesbian and gay issues". The Vancouver Sun (November 28, 1995) had an article headlined "CUPE Files a Grievance" that said a "journalism teacher" has been suspended and that this teacher "has written that sex between children and adults shouldn’t be illegal". The teacher also works "occasionally as a prostitute". The article goes on to say that "the Canadian Union of Public Employees plans to file a grievance over the suspension."
And the communist newspaper, the "Peoples Voice" (April 1-15, 2001) had this to say in the article "CLC Solidarity and Pride":
"The second ‘Solidarity and Pride’ conference called by the Canadian Labour Congress will be held June 24-27 at the Sheraton Guildford Hotel in Surrey, British Columbia.
"A letter from the CLC points out that since the first such meeting in 1997, ‘there have been many legal victories and gains for lesbian and gay workers at the bargaining table, an increased recognition of our issues in our unions, and ongoing, growing support from union leaders and members at all levels.’"
The Canadian Labour Congress (CLC) was also an intervenor in "The Vriend Case" that went to the Supreme Court of Canada.
Trade Unions and Religion
Parents send their children to independent schools because they want their children taught certain values. A Catholic school in Fort St. John has been closed by the Bishop because the trade union which represents the teachers - the B.C. Government and Service Employees Union (BCGSEU) - had problems with a "Catholicity Clause." The Vancouver Sun (July 1, 1999) said, "Talks stalled over a ‘Catholicity clause’ requiring staff to act according to Catholic teachings both inside and outside the school."
The Globe and Mail (July 13, 1999) said, "the union also wanted an independent adjudicator, not the bishop, to resolve disputes over Catholic lifestyle issues such as divorce, sex outside marriage, and abortion."
The Bishops are the teachers of faith and morals in the Catholic Church. And here we have the union saying "an independent adjudicator" should decide these moral issues. The BCGSEU is affiliated with the B.C. Federation of Labour (BCFL) and the Canadian Labour Congress (CLC); both of these organizations support abortion, homosexuality, radical feminists, etc. It is hypocrisy of the union to suggest an ‘independent adjudicator" when the unions have already taken positions (which contradict those of the Catholic Church) on these moral issues.
Even if a "Catholicity clause" was signed and the union was in the school, some of the Catholic teachers’ union dues would still go to support these controversial issues, through affiliation fees to the BCFL and CLC.
One wonders if there is a union agenda regarding Catholic Schools and others. First you get the union organized in the school. Then the union refuses to sign a "Catholicity clause." The union knows the Bishop will close the school without the clause. Thus, the children will have to go into the public school system, which in turn will need more teachers. This will result in more union dues to help finance all the politically correct causes of the unions.
BCTV News (July 28, 1999) reported a dispute between the BCGSEU and the Salvation Army. The Salvation Army wants its employees to demonstrate a "Christian Lifestyle," which the union objects to. This news report went on to say that the Salvation Army might close down this operation rather than give in to the union. A union official was quoted in the National Post (July 29, 1999) as saying, "This attitude [of the Salvation Army] is not only outrageous, it’s unconscionable." The question must be asked: Why should a Catholic school, the Salvation Army, or any other institution have to agree to a trade union’s version of morality?"
The slogan of abortion supporters is "freedom of choice", yet union members in this country have no "freedom of choice"; they are compelled into supporting abortion and homosexuality and a myriad of fringe groups. Democracy is a dirty word in the union movement and freedom is a farce. Big Brother and Big Sister in the Labour Movement dictate to union members, and compulsion is their instrument of power. If you don’t pay union dues you do not work.
Union members’ social, moral, and religious life has become the domain of union bosses and their supporters. Unions many years ago were oppressed and many people suffered and died to get decent wages and working conditions. But now the wheel has turned full circle and the oppressed have become the oppressors.
Pope John Paul II in his Encyclical Letter "On Human Work" had this to say about unions:
"However, the role of unions is not to ‘play politics’ in the sense that the expression is commonly understood today. Unions do not have the character of political parties struggling for power; they should not be subjected to the decision of political parties or have too close links with them. In fact, in such a situation they easily lose contact with their specific role, which is to secure the just rights of workers within the framework of the common good of the whole of society; instead they become an instrument used for other purposes."
Stephen J. Gray
Tuesday, February 16, 2010
How a Newspaper Can Gut a Letter
I sent a letter to the National Post on February 15, 2010. Below is the original letter I wrote and below that is the letter the National Post published.
Letter to Editor
National Post
February 15, 2010
Dear Editor, re: your article headlined, “Smitherman, husband approved for adoption,” National Post, February 15, 2010. I believe this adoption by two men is wrong. A child should have a mother and a father. No matter how those in our politically correct society try to describe this adoption, I believe, it is not normal for the child. As to your description of one man being the “husband” of the other man in this article, one can only say, nobody in possession of their senses would describe any man as the “husband” of another man. Still, I guess I should not be surprised at this perversion of words by the National Post, was it not your “newspaper” that described the pride parade, where men and women have been known to parade naked as a “family friendly” affair?
------------------------------------------------
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=2569049
Not pleased by gay adoption
National Post
Re: Smitherman, Husband Approved For Adoption, Feb. 15.
I believe any adoption by two men is wrong. A child should have a mother and a father. No matter how those in our politically correct society try to describe this adoption, I believe it is not normal for the child.
This article also describes one man as being the "husband" of the other man. I guess I should not be surprised at this perversion of words by the National Post. Did your newspaper not also describe the Gay Pride Parade as a "family-friendly" affair?
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=2569049
Letter to Editor
National Post
February 15, 2010
Dear Editor, re: your article headlined, “Smitherman, husband approved for adoption,” National Post, February 15, 2010. I believe this adoption by two men is wrong. A child should have a mother and a father. No matter how those in our politically correct society try to describe this adoption, I believe, it is not normal for the child. As to your description of one man being the “husband” of the other man in this article, one can only say, nobody in possession of their senses would describe any man as the “husband” of another man. Still, I guess I should not be surprised at this perversion of words by the National Post, was it not your “newspaper” that described the pride parade, where men and women have been known to parade naked as a “family friendly” affair?
------------------------------------------------
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=2569049
Not pleased by gay adoption
National Post
Re: Smitherman, Husband Approved For Adoption, Feb. 15.
I believe any adoption by two men is wrong. A child should have a mother and a father. No matter how those in our politically correct society try to describe this adoption, I believe it is not normal for the child.
This article also describes one man as being the "husband" of the other man. I guess I should not be surprised at this perversion of words by the National Post. Did your newspaper not also describe the Gay Pride Parade as a "family-friendly" affair?
http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=2569049
Friday, February 12, 2010
Abortion: Today’s Plague
Note: I wrote this over 9 years ago. SJG
-------------------------------------------------------
"In the 1300’s, a form of bubonic plague called The Black Death destroyed a fourth of the population of Europe."( The World Book Encyclopedia )
We have our own plague today killings millions of lives worldwide. It is called abortion and it is being spread deliberately throughout the world. This plague could rightly be called today’s “final solution.”
It was the so called "advanced" countries, like the United States and Canada that made abortion "legitimate" in North America. Court decisions like Roe v Wade (1973) in the United States and the Morgentaler decision (1988) in Canada loosed this judicial plague upon the populace. Judges had now given credibility to the crimes of the abortionists. The child in the womb was considered a danger "to security of the person." The law had become a voice for lawbreakers. The plague dog of abortion was legally set loose and the killings began in greater numbers.
There are approximately 46 million abortions annually across the world.
(www.abortionNO.org)
There have been: " Over 40 million abortions in U.S. since 1973" (www.nrlc.org/abortion)
There have been: 1,829,761 abortions in Canada from 1970 to 1995(www.abortionfacts.com)
Since the Morgentaler decision in 1988 the abortion numbers continue to rise. The latest figures for Canada show there are over 100,000 abortions yearly.
An article in the Globe and Mail (Sept. 26) entitled, "Where have all the babies gone," said "Canada’s fertility rate hit a record low in 2000, driven down by the 10th straight annual decline in the number of births." It doesn’t take a mathematical genius to know where all the babies have gone. The article stated there were "327,882" births in the year 2000 and we know there are now over 100,000 abortions a year in Canada.
The problems from abortion are not limited to North America. Europe is also suffering from this plague of killing by choice.
"Today in seventeen European countries, there are more burials than births, more coffins than cradles."
Pat Buchanan in his book, "The Death Of The West" page 9.
Russia has a high incidence of abortion and "two of every three pregnancies in Russia are terminated before birth." (The Death of The West, page 18.)
Great Britain is another country with a declining population: " The English are not having enough children to reproduce themselves."
(syndicated columnist Paul Craig Roberts quoted in The Death Of The West, page19.)
According to legend, animals called Lemmings head to the sea and drown themselves in large numbers. We have become like the Lemmings. Only we head to the abortion chambers. We are committing societal mass murder by killing off our young.
This has resulted in a growing elderly population. Which will inevitably lead to cries for some sort of "solution." Witness the push for euthanasia or the killing of the aged. What started with the slogan "choice" begets another slogan "death with dignity." Holland has already gone down this path of death and many of its old people are killed in hospitals.
We have a scarcity of young people, and the media call this "low fertility. Though if they were being honest they would look at the huge numbers of abortions. The media use the code words "low fertility" to disguise this fact. The "final solution" -- death -- brought about by abortion is allowed very little discussion in our "investigative media," except to promote that banal slogan "freedom of choice" in an attempt to hide the killing.
While killing by abortion always existed, it was, in saner times, considered a horrific act and subject to criminal penalties. People who did them were outcasts. Now we call this act a "choice" even though the child in the womb has no choice and is poisoned by a saline solution or cut to pieces. Sometimes the child survives the abortion but is left to die.
What kind of society puts on a voluntary blindfold and pretends that abortion is anything other than the killing of the child in the mother’s womb? One wonders where are our "human rights" advocates, the justice system and most of our "choice" supporting media?
With today’s technology we can see the child in the womb, and we can operate on him or her, yet the politicians, the judges and the media continue to propagate the big lie of "freedom of choice."
The November 11, 2002, Canadian edition of "Time" magazine had on its front page a picture of the child in the womb. The headline was "Inside The Womb." The article inside tells us: "The List Of Potential Threats To embryonic life is long. It includes not only what the mother eats, drinks or inhales..." The article goes on to say: "But of all the long-term health threats, maternal undernourishment- which stunts growth...may top the list." Ah, the politically correct media are at it again. No mention of abortion as a "threat" and abortion surely "stunts growth;" it should definitely be on the "list."
This societal plague called abortion has not only infected numerous countries but has infected the brain cells of our so called "intellectuals." Why else would the cover up of this abominable crime continue to be sanctioned?
Abortion is big business and a whole industry "lives" off it. Except of course the child in the womb who is slaughtered by it, under the banner of “choice.” The consequences of killing the child in the womb are starting to show up in our society. An aging population, a disrespect for life, talk of human cloning, experimentation on human embryos and euthanasia. We are reaping what we have sown. No one is safe and nothing is sacred. Life is a commodity to be used and abused. The plague is upon us, a societal plague called abortion.
Stephen J. Gray
November 21, 2002.
See the victims slaughtered by abortion at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
-------------------------------------------------------
"In the 1300’s, a form of bubonic plague called The Black Death destroyed a fourth of the population of Europe."( The World Book Encyclopedia )
We have our own plague today killings millions of lives worldwide. It is called abortion and it is being spread deliberately throughout the world. This plague could rightly be called today’s “final solution.”
It was the so called "advanced" countries, like the United States and Canada that made abortion "legitimate" in North America. Court decisions like Roe v Wade (1973) in the United States and the Morgentaler decision (1988) in Canada loosed this judicial plague upon the populace. Judges had now given credibility to the crimes of the abortionists. The child in the womb was considered a danger "to security of the person." The law had become a voice for lawbreakers. The plague dog of abortion was legally set loose and the killings began in greater numbers.
There are approximately 46 million abortions annually across the world.
(www.abortionNO.org)
There have been: " Over 40 million abortions in U.S. since 1973" (www.nrlc.org/abortion)
There have been: 1,829,761 abortions in Canada from 1970 to 1995(www.abortionfacts.com)
Since the Morgentaler decision in 1988 the abortion numbers continue to rise. The latest figures for Canada show there are over 100,000 abortions yearly.
An article in the Globe and Mail (Sept. 26) entitled, "Where have all the babies gone," said "Canada’s fertility rate hit a record low in 2000, driven down by the 10th straight annual decline in the number of births." It doesn’t take a mathematical genius to know where all the babies have gone. The article stated there were "327,882" births in the year 2000 and we know there are now over 100,000 abortions a year in Canada.
The problems from abortion are not limited to North America. Europe is also suffering from this plague of killing by choice.
"Today in seventeen European countries, there are more burials than births, more coffins than cradles."
Pat Buchanan in his book, "The Death Of The West" page 9.
Russia has a high incidence of abortion and "two of every three pregnancies in Russia are terminated before birth." (The Death of The West, page 18.)
Great Britain is another country with a declining population: " The English are not having enough children to reproduce themselves."
(syndicated columnist Paul Craig Roberts quoted in The Death Of The West, page19.)
According to legend, animals called Lemmings head to the sea and drown themselves in large numbers. We have become like the Lemmings. Only we head to the abortion chambers. We are committing societal mass murder by killing off our young.
This has resulted in a growing elderly population. Which will inevitably lead to cries for some sort of "solution." Witness the push for euthanasia or the killing of the aged. What started with the slogan "choice" begets another slogan "death with dignity." Holland has already gone down this path of death and many of its old people are killed in hospitals.
We have a scarcity of young people, and the media call this "low fertility. Though if they were being honest they would look at the huge numbers of abortions. The media use the code words "low fertility" to disguise this fact. The "final solution" -- death -- brought about by abortion is allowed very little discussion in our "investigative media," except to promote that banal slogan "freedom of choice" in an attempt to hide the killing.
While killing by abortion always existed, it was, in saner times, considered a horrific act and subject to criminal penalties. People who did them were outcasts. Now we call this act a "choice" even though the child in the womb has no choice and is poisoned by a saline solution or cut to pieces. Sometimes the child survives the abortion but is left to die.
What kind of society puts on a voluntary blindfold and pretends that abortion is anything other than the killing of the child in the mother’s womb? One wonders where are our "human rights" advocates, the justice system and most of our "choice" supporting media?
With today’s technology we can see the child in the womb, and we can operate on him or her, yet the politicians, the judges and the media continue to propagate the big lie of "freedom of choice."
The November 11, 2002, Canadian edition of "Time" magazine had on its front page a picture of the child in the womb. The headline was "Inside The Womb." The article inside tells us: "The List Of Potential Threats To embryonic life is long. It includes not only what the mother eats, drinks or inhales..." The article goes on to say: "But of all the long-term health threats, maternal undernourishment- which stunts growth...may top the list." Ah, the politically correct media are at it again. No mention of abortion as a "threat" and abortion surely "stunts growth;" it should definitely be on the "list."
This societal plague called abortion has not only infected numerous countries but has infected the brain cells of our so called "intellectuals." Why else would the cover up of this abominable crime continue to be sanctioned?
Abortion is big business and a whole industry "lives" off it. Except of course the child in the womb who is slaughtered by it, under the banner of “choice.” The consequences of killing the child in the womb are starting to show up in our society. An aging population, a disrespect for life, talk of human cloning, experimentation on human embryos and euthanasia. We are reaping what we have sown. No one is safe and nothing is sacred. Life is a commodity to be used and abused. The plague is upon us, a societal plague called abortion.
Stephen J. Gray
November 21, 2002.
See the victims slaughtered by abortion at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Friday, February 5, 2010
Are Some of the Media Hypocrites?
CHBC a TV station in Kelowna, B.C. has refused to show a pro-life ad after originally accepting it. The excuse for their refusal was that the ad was too graphic. CHBC is an affiliate of Global TV which in turn is part of the Canwest Global Communications, which states on its website: “Canwest Global Communications Corp. is Canada's largest media company. In addition to owning the Global Television Network, Canwest is Canada's largest publisher of paid English language daily newspapers…” [1]
Its newspapers includes the National Post.
The National Post of January 15, 2010 had this to say about “graphic images from Haiti.”
“Some readers may be offended by our use on the front page of Friday's print edition a picture showing the body of a victim of the Haitian earthquake, or by another picture inside showing piles of corpses in the streets of Port-au-Prince.
“We recognize that these pictures are disturbing. But we think that they are also a necessary — indeed, a central — part of telling this story completely. (emphasis added ) They communicate in a powerful manner the true horror of what has taken place in that country.” [1]
Yet here in this country, one of their corporate affiliates CHBC refuses to show the horror of a baby’s severed hand by an abortionist. A picture is worth a thousand words, as the saying goes, and let’s people see the atrocities suffered by many victims. Unless of course it is a picture of an aborted baby-- or the hand of an aborted baby that was in the pro-life ad censored by CHBC TV. These TV stations and other media have shown the bloodstained bodies of victims killed in wars and terrorist attacks, but when it comes to the showing of pictures of the innocents slaughtered by abortionists these so-called “searchers for truth” suppress the evidence, and say it is too “graphic.” Why is this, is it because so many of them have been promoting the big lie of, “freedom of choice” for so long, that to show the truth would make a lie of the propaganda parroted on abortion by “investigative journalism?”
Journalism is supposed to be about the search for truth. Instead it is engaged in suppressing the truth about abortion. The refusal of CHBC to show the pro-life ad shows the hypocrisy of most of the big corporate media. Yet some of these media consider themselves the “nations most trusted and well-respected.” Which raises the question, if the CHBC is part of a media conglomerate that claims to be“most trusted and well respected,” why would they suppress an ad that shows the truth about the horror called abortion? Dare we call them hypocrites?
Stephen J. Gray
February 5, 2010.
Note: The Pro-life ad can be seen at: http://www.prolifekelowna.com/
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.canada.com/aboutus/index.html
[2] http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/editors/archive/2010/01/15/381547.aspx
Its newspapers includes the National Post.
The National Post of January 15, 2010 had this to say about “graphic images from Haiti.”
“Some readers may be offended by our use on the front page of Friday's print edition a picture showing the body of a victim of the Haitian earthquake, or by another picture inside showing piles of corpses in the streets of Port-au-Prince.
“We recognize that these pictures are disturbing. But we think that they are also a necessary — indeed, a central — part of telling this story completely. (emphasis added ) They communicate in a powerful manner the true horror of what has taken place in that country.” [1]
Yet here in this country, one of their corporate affiliates CHBC refuses to show the horror of a baby’s severed hand by an abortionist. A picture is worth a thousand words, as the saying goes, and let’s people see the atrocities suffered by many victims. Unless of course it is a picture of an aborted baby-- or the hand of an aborted baby that was in the pro-life ad censored by CHBC TV. These TV stations and other media have shown the bloodstained bodies of victims killed in wars and terrorist attacks, but when it comes to the showing of pictures of the innocents slaughtered by abortionists these so-called “searchers for truth” suppress the evidence, and say it is too “graphic.” Why is this, is it because so many of them have been promoting the big lie of, “freedom of choice” for so long, that to show the truth would make a lie of the propaganda parroted on abortion by “investigative journalism?”
Journalism is supposed to be about the search for truth. Instead it is engaged in suppressing the truth about abortion. The refusal of CHBC to show the pro-life ad shows the hypocrisy of most of the big corporate media. Yet some of these media consider themselves the “nations most trusted and well-respected.” Which raises the question, if the CHBC is part of a media conglomerate that claims to be“most trusted and well respected,” why would they suppress an ad that shows the truth about the horror called abortion? Dare we call them hypocrites?
Stephen J. Gray
February 5, 2010.
Note: The Pro-life ad can be seen at: http://www.prolifekelowna.com/
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.canada.com/aboutus/index.html
[2] http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/editors/archive/2010/01/15/381547.aspx
Wednesday, February 3, 2010
Will You Vote For This Evil Called “Choice?”
[Note: I wrote the article below in 2008, Michael Ignatieff is now the leader of the Liberal Party and here is their position on abortion: “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]
Will You Vote For This Evil Called “Choice?”
Surely, the most evil act in Canada today is the killing of the unborn child under the depraved slogan, “freedom to choose.” These words are a corruption of language.
“Where the speech is corrupted, the mind is also.” -Seneca
We are in the midst of another federal election and we will be hearing numerous speeches from the leaders of the main political parties. All of these leaders are in favor of “freedom of choice,” which is a slogan that has corrupted our language in an attempt to disguise the killing of the innocent child in the womb. This evil act called “choice,” kills off at least 100,000 innocent lives yearly in Canada, and the leaders of the main political parties and many of the politicians are supporters of this bloody butchery. Here are the main political leaders’ words on this issue:
Stephen Harper: “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).
Jack Layton: He 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)
Gilles Duceppe: “Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe has vowed to bring down any Conservative minority government if it attempts to abolish abortion. [He said that] ‘the position of the Bloc is that we cannot ignore the rights of women in order to keep our seats… I will not accept that the Conservatives abolish the right to abortion.’” (CTV News Jun. 13 2004. (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20040613/bloc_abortion_040613?s_name=&no_ads=)
And before you conclude from Duceppe’s comments that the Conservatives will abolish abortion, note this: “Conservative spokesman Yaroslav Baran was quick to point out his party's official position on the issue in the face of accusations of his party having a hidden social agenda.”
“‘It is certainly not our position that the government should legislate against a woman's right to choose, but it's good to see that other parties are agreeing with our position,’ Baran told Canadian Press”
(CTV News Jun. 13 2004. (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20040613/bloc_abortion_040613?s_name=&no_ads=)
Elizabeth May of the Green Party: "What we’re saying as a party, and what I’m saying as an individual leader, is that any civilized society must provide safe legal access to any woman who needs or wants an abortion... I would never change a thing about the current abortion laws; we must have them." June 7, 2007. MacLeans
http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20070607_145215_12204
Stephane Dion: “… I believe in the rights of women to choose…” (National Post, August 22, 2008 http://www.nationalpost.com/related/links/story.html?id=740563)
“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? Well, what the politicians don’t like to do is go into detail about is this. But the reality is, 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. This is the heinous atrocity disguised under the political slogan of a “woman’s right to choose.”
Now these “right to choose” politicians want you to make a political choice to support their party in the federal election. Can any decent, principled, or moral person in good conscience vote for anyone or any party that supports and condones the killing of the unborn child?
Note: to learn more about what these aforementioned politicians speak of when they talk about choice, go to http://www.AbortionNo.org
Stephen J. Gray
September 12, 2008
The Office of Michael Ignatieff, M.P. Leader of the Opposition]
Will You Vote For This Evil Called “Choice?”
Surely, the most evil act in Canada today is the killing of the unborn child under the depraved slogan, “freedom to choose.” These words are a corruption of language.
“Where the speech is corrupted, the mind is also.” -Seneca
We are in the midst of another federal election and we will be hearing numerous speeches from the leaders of the main political parties. All of these leaders are in favor of “freedom of choice,” which is a slogan that has corrupted our language in an attempt to disguise the killing of the innocent child in the womb. This evil act called “choice,” kills off at least 100,000 innocent lives yearly in Canada, and the leaders of the main political parties and many of the politicians are supporters of this bloody butchery. Here are the main political leaders’ words on this issue:
Stephen Harper: “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).
Jack Layton: He 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)
Gilles Duceppe: “Bloc Quebecois leader Gilles Duceppe has vowed to bring down any Conservative minority government if it attempts to abolish abortion. [He said that] ‘the position of the Bloc is that we cannot ignore the rights of women in order to keep our seats… I will not accept that the Conservatives abolish the right to abortion.’” (CTV News Jun. 13 2004. (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20040613/bloc_abortion_040613?s_name=&no_ads=)
And before you conclude from Duceppe’s comments that the Conservatives will abolish abortion, note this: “Conservative spokesman Yaroslav Baran was quick to point out his party's official position on the issue in the face of accusations of his party having a hidden social agenda.”
“‘It is certainly not our position that the government should legislate against a woman's right to choose, but it's good to see that other parties are agreeing with our position,’ Baran told Canadian Press”
(CTV News Jun. 13 2004. (http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20040613/bloc_abortion_040613?s_name=&no_ads=)
Elizabeth May of the Green Party: "What we’re saying as a party, and what I’m saying as an individual leader, is that any civilized society must provide safe legal access to any woman who needs or wants an abortion... I would never change a thing about the current abortion laws; we must have them." June 7, 2007. MacLeans
http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20070607_145215_12204
Stephane Dion: “… I believe in the rights of women to choose…” (National Post, August 22, 2008 http://www.nationalpost.com/related/links/story.html?id=740563)
“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? Well, what the politicians don’t like to do is go into detail about is this. But the reality is, 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. This is the heinous atrocity disguised under the political slogan of a “woman’s right to choose.”
Now these “right to choose” politicians want you to make a political choice to support their party in the federal election. Can any decent, principled, or moral person in good conscience vote for anyone or any party that supports and condones the killing of the unborn child?
Note: to learn more about what these aforementioned politicians speak of when they talk about choice, go to http://www.AbortionNo.org
Stephen J. Gray
September 12, 2008
Saturday, January 16, 2010
A Criminal Makes a Plea from Jail
To whom it may concern in the justice system:
I am presently incarcerated in a maximum security prison. The crime I was imprisoned for was securities fraud. While doing my hard time in jail, I have been reading the financial news and this makes me very unhappy and upset. I now believe I was falsely convicted as today’s justice system appears to me to be more forgiving of marketplace indiscretions.
I have been reading that some respected financial firms were promoting dubious financial securities as a great investment while at the same time selling themselves out of these investments they were promoting. Could this be called “misrepresentation” in legal parlance as “misrepresentation” is the word used to describe securities fraud? I also read that these respected firms sold these questionable securities to pension funds, mutual funds, state governments and everybody and anybody they could suck in. They even charged large fees for moving, pushing and recommending this financial toilet paper. Some of these blue chip firms were even given taxpayers' monies in something called stimulus packages, as some of them claimed they needed this money to continue in business (and that if they did not get it the financial system would fail and everybody would be in the dumpster). This makes me wonder if this was a form of financial blackmail.
Quite frankly, I never thought I would see the day, when what used to be considered outright thieving and fraud would become legitimized. I certainly feel I am missing out in the opportunities now available in the free market system and the access to unlimited supplies of taxpayers’ dollars. I do not believe it is fair that I am presently imprisoned while others like me are running free and some are advising governments how to save the financial system after selling it short.
I feel that I should be out there in the financial world working within the free market system and using my talents to buy and sell and make an honest dollar, and perhaps even help the country get out of recession. I can move securities with the best of them and I believe my expertise is being wasted here in jail. I know how the system works out there and I sincerely believe I can be of help. I believe the country needs me and I would be willing to take only a small fee for helping sell these rotten securities that are still available to whatever suckers I can find. I am sure I would be welcomed back with open arms by my colleagues who have never yet been in jail and who are always looking for new ideas and new ways to profit from these types of products in the financial market.
In closing, I ask that you consider my offer of help and perhaps free me immediately. Times are changing and we must change with the times. What was a crime yesterday does not appear to be a crime today. Hoping you will consider my plea and let me loose once again into the financial system, home once more amongst friends in the financial world and working at what I do best.
Sincerely
Unfairly Convicted Criminal Number 999.
Satire by Stephen J. Gray
January 16, 2010.
I am presently incarcerated in a maximum security prison. The crime I was imprisoned for was securities fraud. While doing my hard time in jail, I have been reading the financial news and this makes me very unhappy and upset. I now believe I was falsely convicted as today’s justice system appears to me to be more forgiving of marketplace indiscretions.
I have been reading that some respected financial firms were promoting dubious financial securities as a great investment while at the same time selling themselves out of these investments they were promoting. Could this be called “misrepresentation” in legal parlance as “misrepresentation” is the word used to describe securities fraud? I also read that these respected firms sold these questionable securities to pension funds, mutual funds, state governments and everybody and anybody they could suck in. They even charged large fees for moving, pushing and recommending this financial toilet paper. Some of these blue chip firms were even given taxpayers' monies in something called stimulus packages, as some of them claimed they needed this money to continue in business (and that if they did not get it the financial system would fail and everybody would be in the dumpster). This makes me wonder if this was a form of financial blackmail.
Quite frankly, I never thought I would see the day, when what used to be considered outright thieving and fraud would become legitimized. I certainly feel I am missing out in the opportunities now available in the free market system and the access to unlimited supplies of taxpayers’ dollars. I do not believe it is fair that I am presently imprisoned while others like me are running free and some are advising governments how to save the financial system after selling it short.
I feel that I should be out there in the financial world working within the free market system and using my talents to buy and sell and make an honest dollar, and perhaps even help the country get out of recession. I can move securities with the best of them and I believe my expertise is being wasted here in jail. I know how the system works out there and I sincerely believe I can be of help. I believe the country needs me and I would be willing to take only a small fee for helping sell these rotten securities that are still available to whatever suckers I can find. I am sure I would be welcomed back with open arms by my colleagues who have never yet been in jail and who are always looking for new ideas and new ways to profit from these types of products in the financial market.
In closing, I ask that you consider my offer of help and perhaps free me immediately. Times are changing and we must change with the times. What was a crime yesterday does not appear to be a crime today. Hoping you will consider my plea and let me loose once again into the financial system, home once more amongst friends in the financial world and working at what I do best.
Sincerely
Unfairly Convicted Criminal Number 999.
Satire by Stephen J. Gray
January 16, 2010.
Monday, January 11, 2010
Fictional Correspondence between a Bailed out Banker and an American Taxpayer
The American Taxpayer: “Dear sir, I would like to apply for a loan of $10,000 from your bank to tide me over. Can you help?”
The Bailed out Banker: “Dear taxpayer, what is your financial situation at this time? Do you have a job? Own a house, or a car, or any other securities?”
The American Taxpayer: “I lost my job when my firm went bankrupt after buying lousy securities from your bank. I lost my house after I lost my job. My house has since been repossessed by your bank. I also lost my car which was also repossessed by your bank. I am now on welfare.”
The Bailed out Banker: “I am very sorry to hear about your misfortune, but, in our business we only lend to good credit risks.”
The American Taxpayer: “Pardon me if I sound upset, but your bank was bailed out by billions of taxpayers dollars, some of them were mine and now you have the cheek to preach to me about ‘good credit risks.’ Do you know the meaning of hypocrisy?”
The Bailed out Banker: “Please do not get sarcastic with me. We are a reputable banking firm, who do not, I repeat, do not, lend money to welfare cases. We believe in free enterprise, getting government out of the marketplace, and honesty in the financial system. I suggest you start looking for a job and repay your welfare money.”
The American Taxpayer: “I have had it with you guys. You are the biggest welfare bums in society today. You were bailed out with taxpayer dollars which in my mind constitutes corporate welfare. You even gave yourselves bonuses courtesy of the taxpayer, after being bailed out. Now you have the gall to tell me to get a job. It is taxpayer money, some of it mine, that is keeping you in a job!”
The Bailed out Banker: “Please do not write me anymore. I am ending this correspondence after this reply to you. This bank did not get a bailout it got a stimulus package to enable it to keep the financial system stable. We will continue to operate on free market principles and let the marketplace decide. There will always be winners and losers in the free market financial system, and I remind you once again, we don’t lend to, or bail out losers.”
Stephen J. Gray
January 11, 2010.
The Bailed out Banker: “Dear taxpayer, what is your financial situation at this time? Do you have a job? Own a house, or a car, or any other securities?”
The American Taxpayer: “I lost my job when my firm went bankrupt after buying lousy securities from your bank. I lost my house after I lost my job. My house has since been repossessed by your bank. I also lost my car which was also repossessed by your bank. I am now on welfare.”
The Bailed out Banker: “I am very sorry to hear about your misfortune, but, in our business we only lend to good credit risks.”
The American Taxpayer: “Pardon me if I sound upset, but your bank was bailed out by billions of taxpayers dollars, some of them were mine and now you have the cheek to preach to me about ‘good credit risks.’ Do you know the meaning of hypocrisy?”
The Bailed out Banker: “Please do not get sarcastic with me. We are a reputable banking firm, who do not, I repeat, do not, lend money to welfare cases. We believe in free enterprise, getting government out of the marketplace, and honesty in the financial system. I suggest you start looking for a job and repay your welfare money.”
The American Taxpayer: “I have had it with you guys. You are the biggest welfare bums in society today. You were bailed out with taxpayer dollars which in my mind constitutes corporate welfare. You even gave yourselves bonuses courtesy of the taxpayer, after being bailed out. Now you have the gall to tell me to get a job. It is taxpayer money, some of it mine, that is keeping you in a job!”
The Bailed out Banker: “Please do not write me anymore. I am ending this correspondence after this reply to you. This bank did not get a bailout it got a stimulus package to enable it to keep the financial system stable. We will continue to operate on free market principles and let the marketplace decide. There will always be winners and losers in the free market financial system, and I remind you once again, we don’t lend to, or bail out losers.”
Stephen J. Gray
January 11, 2010.
Sunday, January 3, 2010
A Financial Tale
Once upon a time in the land of free markets, there was a street called Wall Street. This was the street where all the free marketers came out to play.
Playing, buying and selling in the market were many reputable and respectable financial firms and bankers. A number of these bankers and blue chip firms were engaged in selling debt packaged as assets. They had nice and impressive names for this debt. Structured Investment Vehicles (SIVs), Collaterized Debt Obligations (CDOs), and Asset Backed Commercial Paper (ABCPs).
This debt described as assets was given Triple A ratings by some of the respected rating agencies. These debt ridden assets were sold to other financial institutions, banks, pension funds, mutual funds, state governments and everybody and anybody who was gullible enough to believe these debts were really assets. The financial system pigged out on this useless paper and charged big fees for buying and selling it.
Some big reputable and respected financial firms were advising people to buy this useless paper, while they themselves were selling themselves out of it. Could this be called criminal fraud? Of course not; after all, these were the crème de la crème of Wall St. and Wall St. is the pillar of our free market society. So the people are in good financial hands.
In fact, some of these “clean” financial hands even run a government, so they are in great positions to advise and help with the massive bailouts; pardon me, I mean stimulus packages of taxpayers’ dollars to save the free market system from collapse after the massive fraud—oops, I mean massive mistakes selling useless paper disguised as assets. There were some cynical critics who complained that this was wrong to be bailing out those who had corrupted the financial system. But, this type of criticism was uncalled for. After all, one banker did say that they were doing “God’s work,” and surely there is no higher recommendation than that.
Anyway, we are now told that the financial system has now stabilized. Trillions or billions of taxpayers’ dollars were the antidote needed to save the free market. The bailed out bankers are receiving huge bonuses. The government is being advised and helped by those who corrupted, pardon me, I mean used the financial system to peddle debt. Profits made by some were sent safely offshore to tax-free havens; after all, you don’t expect smart financiers to use their own country’s banks, these are just for the ordinary people who pay the bankers’ bills.
Picking up the bills for all this financial chicanery will be the taxpaying public in the land of the free. After all, the free markets must remain free and the perpetrators of what some are calling financial fraud are still running the system, because where would we be without them?
Stephen J. Gray
January 3, 2010.
Playing, buying and selling in the market were many reputable and respectable financial firms and bankers. A number of these bankers and blue chip firms were engaged in selling debt packaged as assets. They had nice and impressive names for this debt. Structured Investment Vehicles (SIVs), Collaterized Debt Obligations (CDOs), and Asset Backed Commercial Paper (ABCPs).
This debt described as assets was given Triple A ratings by some of the respected rating agencies. These debt ridden assets were sold to other financial institutions, banks, pension funds, mutual funds, state governments and everybody and anybody who was gullible enough to believe these debts were really assets. The financial system pigged out on this useless paper and charged big fees for buying and selling it.
Some big reputable and respected financial firms were advising people to buy this useless paper, while they themselves were selling themselves out of it. Could this be called criminal fraud? Of course not; after all, these were the crème de la crème of Wall St. and Wall St. is the pillar of our free market society. So the people are in good financial hands.
In fact, some of these “clean” financial hands even run a government, so they are in great positions to advise and help with the massive bailouts; pardon me, I mean stimulus packages of taxpayers’ dollars to save the free market system from collapse after the massive fraud—oops, I mean massive mistakes selling useless paper disguised as assets. There were some cynical critics who complained that this was wrong to be bailing out those who had corrupted the financial system. But, this type of criticism was uncalled for. After all, one banker did say that they were doing “God’s work,” and surely there is no higher recommendation than that.
Anyway, we are now told that the financial system has now stabilized. Trillions or billions of taxpayers’ dollars were the antidote needed to save the free market. The bailed out bankers are receiving huge bonuses. The government is being advised and helped by those who corrupted, pardon me, I mean used the financial system to peddle debt. Profits made by some were sent safely offshore to tax-free havens; after all, you don’t expect smart financiers to use their own country’s banks, these are just for the ordinary people who pay the bankers’ bills.
Picking up the bills for all this financial chicanery will be the taxpaying public in the land of the free. After all, the free markets must remain free and the perpetrators of what some are calling financial fraud are still running the system, because where would we be without them?
Stephen J. Gray
January 3, 2010.
Tuesday, December 1, 2009
Conlibs and Libcons
I wrote this in 2007. SJG.
As the latest politician scurries across the floor from the Liberal camp to the Conservative camp one has to wonder: does it make any difference who the people vote for? We have seen politicians voted into office as Liberals then cross the floor to become Conservatives. We have seen other politicians voted into office as Conservatives then slither across the floor to become Liberals. Is politics just becoming a rotten game played by political cheats?
Do the people need a safeguard against these political swindlers, who have betrayed the trust of those who voted for them? After all, these politicians who claimed to be Conservatives then became Liberals, and vice versa, are really political con-men and con-women. So should we call them Conlibs and Libcons? And since the leadership of both the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party both seem to accept this untrustworthy behavior, would it not be better if both of these two parties changed their names?
They could call themselves the Conservative Liberal Party (CONLIB) and the Liberal Conservative Party (LIBCON) that way the people would know that no matter who they voted for they would at least know they were voting for a Conlib or a Libcon at voting time. After all, con-men and con-women (I’m practicing equality here by naming both genders) have no principles. The people are being conned by floor crossers who pretend to be of one political persuasion to get elected, then cross over to another political persuasion where there is more power.
Of course power corrupts as the saying goes. We see that in these power-seeking politicians, who discard any principles they might have had, for power in the ranks of those they once opposed. They commit political adultery and bed down in their new political homes as if they had done nothing wrong. Then they pretend they did it for their constituents or their country. These political carpetbaggers can justify anything. Or as one of them has said lately: “Politics makes strange bedfellows,” and he could have added, “We screw the people who voted for us” and who would argue with that truism?
Truth has become a casualty in politics today. The people are lied to at election time by these floor crossing double-crossers and democracy becomes a prisoner of political mountebanks. Fawning press releases are then issued from the Conlibs or the Libcons praising the “character” and resolve of the double-crossing floor crossers and their abilities to “improve” the political landscape. It’s all so much political dung, issued without shame and a prime reason why the people of the land hold politicians in such low esteem, and do not trust any of them anymore. The truth is, these floor crossers are devoid of political principles and have in fact lied to the people who elected them. That’s why these two main political parties should be renamed CONLIBS and LIBCONS.
Stephen J. Gray
January 7, 2007.
As the latest politician scurries across the floor from the Liberal camp to the Conservative camp one has to wonder: does it make any difference who the people vote for? We have seen politicians voted into office as Liberals then cross the floor to become Conservatives. We have seen other politicians voted into office as Conservatives then slither across the floor to become Liberals. Is politics just becoming a rotten game played by political cheats?
Do the people need a safeguard against these political swindlers, who have betrayed the trust of those who voted for them? After all, these politicians who claimed to be Conservatives then became Liberals, and vice versa, are really political con-men and con-women. So should we call them Conlibs and Libcons? And since the leadership of both the Liberal Party and the Conservative Party both seem to accept this untrustworthy behavior, would it not be better if both of these two parties changed their names?
They could call themselves the Conservative Liberal Party (CONLIB) and the Liberal Conservative Party (LIBCON) that way the people would know that no matter who they voted for they would at least know they were voting for a Conlib or a Libcon at voting time. After all, con-men and con-women (I’m practicing equality here by naming both genders) have no principles. The people are being conned by floor crossers who pretend to be of one political persuasion to get elected, then cross over to another political persuasion where there is more power.
Of course power corrupts as the saying goes. We see that in these power-seeking politicians, who discard any principles they might have had, for power in the ranks of those they once opposed. They commit political adultery and bed down in their new political homes as if they had done nothing wrong. Then they pretend they did it for their constituents or their country. These political carpetbaggers can justify anything. Or as one of them has said lately: “Politics makes strange bedfellows,” and he could have added, “We screw the people who voted for us” and who would argue with that truism?
Truth has become a casualty in politics today. The people are lied to at election time by these floor crossing double-crossers and democracy becomes a prisoner of political mountebanks. Fawning press releases are then issued from the Conlibs or the Libcons praising the “character” and resolve of the double-crossing floor crossers and their abilities to “improve” the political landscape. It’s all so much political dung, issued without shame and a prime reason why the people of the land hold politicians in such low esteem, and do not trust any of them anymore. The truth is, these floor crossers are devoid of political principles and have in fact lied to the people who elected them. That’s why these two main political parties should be renamed CONLIBS and LIBCONS.
Stephen J. Gray
January 7, 2007.
Friday, November 27, 2009
Harper’s “Conservatives”
I wrote this in October 2008. SJG.
“He [Harper] can be slippier [sic.] than a greased pig” (Paul Wells, Maclean’s Magazine, September 17, 2008).
Conservative leadership is the buzz word of the election campaign. And Mr. Harper is being touted as a “leader.” So let us examine what Mr. Harper the leader says and does on a number of issues:
Free Speech: “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.” [1]
Yet, the Harper government intervenes 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).
Bilingualism: “As a religion, bilingualism is the god that failed. It has led to no fairness, produced no unity, and cost Canadian taxpayers untold millions.” (Stephen Harper) [2]
Now Mr. Harper says this: “My friends, for me a prime minister should speak French,” Harper said, calling French “the founding language of this country” (Source: The Gazette, Sept 8, 2008 [3]).
Same-sex marriage: “I don't see reopening this question [of same-sex marriage] in the future.” (Stephen Harper, CTV News Dec. 7, 2006 [4]).
Sexual orientation and its illegitimate offspring “same-sex marriage” were never in the Charter, yet we had the silly spectacle of a supposedly “conservative government introducing a motion on this that they knew would be defeated. A government with principles would have used the not-withstanding clause to return sanity to this country. But unfortunately Mr. Harper is on record as saying, regarding this nonsense called same-sex marriage, “I will never use the notwithstanding clause on that issue” (Lifesite News December 16, 2005, [5]).
The Status of Women: This group achieved increased funding under the Harper Conservatives as witness the following quote from a minister’s speech: “As a demonstration of our firm commitment to the success of Status of Women Canada, Budget 2007 provided $10 million in funding to the Agency, bringing the total budget to $29.9 million, a record for Status of Women [emphasis added] Canada” (Speech for The Honorable Josée Verner, P.C., M.P., Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages, on the occasion of an appearance before the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, House of Commons, Ottawa, February 5, 2008, [6]).
Abortion: “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…” (Stephen Harper, [7]).
And we thought we lived in a democracy? Or is it a hypocrisy?
And talking about hypocrisy, based on the evidence we have seen from Mr. Harper’s government, are they really a conservative government? Or is it back to the days of the Red Tories and the Mulroney government? A former Reform party member and MP had this to say about Mr. Harper: “he will be remembered as an opportunistic, masterful tactician who, in the course of only three years completely purged the Conservative party of its Reform ideals and restored the Mulroney model of government.” (Lee Morrison, former Reform M.P. in the Calgary Herald, September 14, 2008 [8]).
Furthermore, a former Mulroney supporter is now in “charge of various files…” Read this:
“[Senator] Ms. LeBreton is one of the women Mr. Harper put in Cabinet and trusts. She was a staunch Progressive Conservative, most closely tied to Brian Mulroney, and made it into Mr. Harper's inner circle despite her vocal opposition to his vision to unite the right (the former Reformer Party/Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservatives). Mr. Harper appointed her Conservative leader in the Senate and put her in charge of various files,...” (National Post, September 22, 2008).
This makes one wonder, is Ms. LeBreton now in charge of the abortion “file?” Ms. Breton has said this on abortion:
“… there are certain issues, particularly those that concern women and children, and those of particular concern to women, and here I will use the abortion issue as an example, where even if 99.9 per cent of the members of my party were going one way, I would not support any policy that did not give women the right to choose” (http://www.parl.gc.ca/infoparl/english/issue.htm?param=147&art=983).
And on the “right to choose,” Mr .Harper is on the record as saying this: “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, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jun/060627a.html).
Mr. Harper is heading for a majority government. But on moral issues is there really any difference between the “conservatives” and the other parties? Are we now immersed in “throw the dogs a bone politics” where we are being promised all kinds of goodies with our own tax dollars and moral issues are not even discussed? Are we back to what a former Reform M.P. called in his Calgary Herald article, “Liberal, Tory, same old story?” And will social conservative people buy the “story” that we have a “conservative” party to vote for and allow themselves to be fooled a second time by the Harper “conservatives?”
For, as Andrew Coyne wrote in MacLean’s of September 10, 2008,
“…Harper's whole time in office has been spent reassuring the public he has no plans to lead them anywhere, that under a Conservative government nothing much would change — they would govern much like the Liberals,…” [9]
Stephen J. Gray
October 6, 2008.
Endnotes:
[1] B.C. Report, magazine article by Terry O’Neill) http://www.axionet.com/bcreport/web/990111f.html
[2] http://gerrynicholls.blogspot.com/2008/03/bilingualism-harpers-new-god.html
[3] http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=5cc31fca-80a5-448b-ab5b-ffce081a7502
[4] http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061207/samesexmarriage_vote_061207/20061207?hub=TopStories
[5] http://www..lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/dec/05121606.html).
[6] http://www..swc-cfc.gc.ca/newsroom/news2008/0205_e.html
[7] http://www..lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jan/06011707.html
[8] http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story..html?id=55305055-5bff-4b78-8427-7f3c15bcd213
[9] http://www.macleans.ca/canada/national/article.jsp?content=20080910_115261_115261
“He [Harper] can be slippier [sic.] than a greased pig” (Paul Wells, Maclean’s Magazine, September 17, 2008).
Conservative leadership is the buzz word of the election campaign. And Mr. Harper is being touted as a “leader.” So let us examine what Mr. Harper the leader says and does on a number of issues:
Free Speech: “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.” [1]
Yet, the Harper government intervenes 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).
Bilingualism: “As a religion, bilingualism is the god that failed. It has led to no fairness, produced no unity, and cost Canadian taxpayers untold millions.” (Stephen Harper) [2]
Now Mr. Harper says this: “My friends, for me a prime minister should speak French,” Harper said, calling French “the founding language of this country” (Source: The Gazette, Sept 8, 2008 [3]).
Same-sex marriage: “I don't see reopening this question [of same-sex marriage] in the future.” (Stephen Harper, CTV News Dec. 7, 2006 [4]).
Sexual orientation and its illegitimate offspring “same-sex marriage” were never in the Charter, yet we had the silly spectacle of a supposedly “conservative government introducing a motion on this that they knew would be defeated. A government with principles would have used the not-withstanding clause to return sanity to this country. But unfortunately Mr. Harper is on record as saying, regarding this nonsense called same-sex marriage, “I will never use the notwithstanding clause on that issue” (Lifesite News December 16, 2005, [5]).
The Status of Women: This group achieved increased funding under the Harper Conservatives as witness the following quote from a minister’s speech: “As a demonstration of our firm commitment to the success of Status of Women Canada, Budget 2007 provided $10 million in funding to the Agency, bringing the total budget to $29.9 million, a record for Status of Women [emphasis added] Canada” (Speech for The Honorable Josée Verner, P.C., M.P., Minister of Canadian Heritage, Status of Women and Official Languages, on the occasion of an appearance before the Standing Committee on the Status of Women, House of Commons, Ottawa, February 5, 2008, [6]).
Abortion: “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…” (Stephen Harper, [7]).
And we thought we lived in a democracy? Or is it a hypocrisy?
And talking about hypocrisy, based on the evidence we have seen from Mr. Harper’s government, are they really a conservative government? Or is it back to the days of the Red Tories and the Mulroney government? A former Reform party member and MP had this to say about Mr. Harper: “he will be remembered as an opportunistic, masterful tactician who, in the course of only three years completely purged the Conservative party of its Reform ideals and restored the Mulroney model of government.” (Lee Morrison, former Reform M.P. in the Calgary Herald, September 14, 2008 [8]).
Furthermore, a former Mulroney supporter is now in “charge of various files…” Read this:
“[Senator] Ms. LeBreton is one of the women Mr. Harper put in Cabinet and trusts. She was a staunch Progressive Conservative, most closely tied to Brian Mulroney, and made it into Mr. Harper's inner circle despite her vocal opposition to his vision to unite the right (the former Reformer Party/Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservatives). Mr. Harper appointed her Conservative leader in the Senate and put her in charge of various files,...” (National Post, September 22, 2008).
This makes one wonder, is Ms. LeBreton now in charge of the abortion “file?” Ms. Breton has said this on abortion:
“… there are certain issues, particularly those that concern women and children, and those of particular concern to women, and here I will use the abortion issue as an example, where even if 99.9 per cent of the members of my party were going one way, I would not support any policy that did not give women the right to choose” (http://www.parl.gc.ca/infoparl/english/issue.htm?param=147&art=983).
And on the “right to choose,” Mr .Harper is on the record as saying this: “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, http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jun/060627a.html).
Mr. Harper is heading for a majority government. But on moral issues is there really any difference between the “conservatives” and the other parties? Are we now immersed in “throw the dogs a bone politics” where we are being promised all kinds of goodies with our own tax dollars and moral issues are not even discussed? Are we back to what a former Reform M.P. called in his Calgary Herald article, “Liberal, Tory, same old story?” And will social conservative people buy the “story” that we have a “conservative” party to vote for and allow themselves to be fooled a second time by the Harper “conservatives?”
For, as Andrew Coyne wrote in MacLean’s of September 10, 2008,
“…Harper's whole time in office has been spent reassuring the public he has no plans to lead them anywhere, that under a Conservative government nothing much would change — they would govern much like the Liberals,…” [9]
Stephen J. Gray
October 6, 2008.
Endnotes:
[1] B.C. Report, magazine article by Terry O’Neill) http://www.axionet.com/bcreport/web/990111f.html
[2] http://gerrynicholls.blogspot.com/2008/03/bilingualism-harpers-new-god.html
[3] http://www.canada.com/montrealgazette/news/story.html?id=5cc31fca-80a5-448b-ab5b-ffce081a7502
[4] http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20061207/samesexmarriage_vote_061207/20061207?hub=TopStories
[5] http://www..lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/dec/05121606.html).
[6] http://www..swc-cfc.gc.ca/newsroom/news2008/0205_e.html
[7] http://www..lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jan/06011707.html
[8] http://www.canada.com/calgaryherald/news/story..html?id=55305055-5bff-4b78-8427-7f3c15bcd213
[9] http://www.macleans.ca/canada/national/article.jsp?content=20080910_115261_115261
Monday, November 23, 2009
Tax Addicted Politicians
There are dangerous tax addicts ruling our land. The junkies are politicians of all political stripes who are hooked on confiscating money from the people. The people are being burdened by all kinds of taxes, the GST and the PST are some examples, and now the latest one being proposed is the Harmonized Sales Tax (HST).
The Ontario and B.C. Liberal governments intend to impose this new tax on July 1, 2010. This Hammer the Serfs Tax, pardon me, Harmonized Sales Tax will be a tax-grab of massive proportions.
An article by CBC news of October 7, 2009 said this:
“…the fact is the federal government is aiding and abetting the provinces. It plans to pay B.C. and Ontario almost $6 billion to ease the transition to the HST.” [1]
So there you have it, “$6 Billion” of our tax dollars are being handed over to the Liberal governments of Ontario and B.C. by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s “conservative” government to bring in the HST. Could this be called political bribery paid with our own tax dollars?
And Stephen Harper, leader of the “conservative” government, is on record as saying this: “I don’t believe any taxes are good taxes.” [2]
Mr. Harper is not the only politician to say one thing than do another. CanWest News Service, June 4, 2007, had this headline: “No taxes if re-elected McGuinty promises, honest” the article went on to say, “Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty promised Sunday that he won't raise taxes if he is re-elected this fall and insisted he really means it this time.
“The premier, who ran on a no-new-taxes platform in the 2003 election and then introduced one of the largest income tax increases in provincial history, said Ontarians should believe him now ‘because I'm in charge.’” [3]
The Liberal government in Ontario is not the only government to say one thing then do another.
The Liberal Government of B.C., which some people are calling deceitful, are also going to bring in the HST. Yet, they reportedly said this during the election campaign:
“The [B.C.] Liberals provided written statements during the spring campaign to restaurant owners and home builders that they had ‘no plans’ to implement the controversial HST.”
(Journalist, Kent Spencer, in the Province newspaper of July 28, 2009.)
Still, they had an excuse for this change of plans after being elected.
Gordon Campbell’s finance minister said this about the HST: “It was not on our radar before the election…” Isn’t it amazing how this plan to impose the HST just appeared on their “radar” after being elected? A cynic might call this political deceit.
We have reached a stage in this country that no matter who is in power, we cannot trust any of the political class. They are tax addicted, and we are their victims. They are stiffing us every chance they get for more and more taxes. We are being held in political bondage by taxaholics. Sooner rather than later we have to break free. These political parasites are feeding off everything we buy or sell. They have infested the system; therefore, one has to ask: can we afford the money-seizing habits of tax addicted politicians?
Stephen J. Gray
November 23, 2009.
graysinfo@gmail.com http://graysinfo.blogspot.com
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/10/06/f-hst-tax-0106.html
[2] http://blog.canadianbusiness.com/no-taxes-are-good-taxes-harper/
[3] http://www.canada.com/topics/news/politics/story.html?id=fd2c231b-1a71-4a2a-a2e4-94a469be0688&k=45702
The Ontario and B.C. Liberal governments intend to impose this new tax on July 1, 2010. This Hammer the Serfs Tax, pardon me, Harmonized Sales Tax will be a tax-grab of massive proportions.
An article by CBC news of October 7, 2009 said this:
“…the fact is the federal government is aiding and abetting the provinces. It plans to pay B.C. and Ontario almost $6 billion to ease the transition to the HST.” [1]
So there you have it, “$6 Billion” of our tax dollars are being handed over to the Liberal governments of Ontario and B.C. by Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s “conservative” government to bring in the HST. Could this be called political bribery paid with our own tax dollars?
And Stephen Harper, leader of the “conservative” government, is on record as saying this: “I don’t believe any taxes are good taxes.” [2]
Mr. Harper is not the only politician to say one thing than do another. CanWest News Service, June 4, 2007, had this headline: “No taxes if re-elected McGuinty promises, honest” the article went on to say, “Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty promised Sunday that he won't raise taxes if he is re-elected this fall and insisted he really means it this time.
“The premier, who ran on a no-new-taxes platform in the 2003 election and then introduced one of the largest income tax increases in provincial history, said Ontarians should believe him now ‘because I'm in charge.’” [3]
The Liberal government in Ontario is not the only government to say one thing then do another.
The Liberal Government of B.C., which some people are calling deceitful, are also going to bring in the HST. Yet, they reportedly said this during the election campaign:
“The [B.C.] Liberals provided written statements during the spring campaign to restaurant owners and home builders that they had ‘no plans’ to implement the controversial HST.”
(Journalist, Kent Spencer, in the Province newspaper of July 28, 2009.)
Still, they had an excuse for this change of plans after being elected.
Gordon Campbell’s finance minister said this about the HST: “It was not on our radar before the election…” Isn’t it amazing how this plan to impose the HST just appeared on their “radar” after being elected? A cynic might call this political deceit.
We have reached a stage in this country that no matter who is in power, we cannot trust any of the political class. They are tax addicted, and we are their victims. They are stiffing us every chance they get for more and more taxes. We are being held in political bondage by taxaholics. Sooner rather than later we have to break free. These political parasites are feeding off everything we buy or sell. They have infested the system; therefore, one has to ask: can we afford the money-seizing habits of tax addicted politicians?
Stephen J. Gray
November 23, 2009.
graysinfo@gmail.com http://graysinfo.blogspot.com
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2009/10/06/f-hst-tax-0106.html
[2] http://blog.canadianbusiness.com/no-taxes-are-good-taxes-harper/
[3] http://www.canada.com/topics/news/politics/story.html?id=fd2c231b-1a71-4a2a-a2e4-94a469be0688&k=45702
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Too Big to Fail: Too Powerful to go to Jail?
Based on the evidence available regarding the financial mess created by those who were literally selling junk packaged as assets, one has to ask the question: should some jail time be in order? Or are some of those who run the “financial order” too powerful to go to jail? Do they in fact run and control the system? There were those in this system who were giving triple A ratings to this junk. They were also getting paid big fees for giving it an excellent rating. Which begs the question: How could “respected” rating agencies do such a thing? After all, these people are the so-called experts in the ratings field.
Meanwhile out in the muddied financial field, the brilliant financial minds were selling this manure as safe and solid investments. These “investments” were sold to pension funds, mutual funds, numerous investors and anybody and everybody who would buy this financial dung. Some of the dung-sellers were paid millions in bonuses, proving that old saying rings true: “where there is muck, there is money.” Unfortunately, the people getting the muck were those who bought the useless waste from the money changers and the money changers got their money.
Big profits were made by some of these financial sharks who were touting this financial toilet paper as a good investment, and some of them were selling themselves out of this “good investment” and passing it on to others. One wonders, does this constitute a fraud? Or was this an “honest fraud,” whatever that means, in today’s society of mangled language? Still, one banker did say they did “wrong.” He also said they were doing the work of God. Which makes one wonder, how can one do wrong and be doing God’s work?
Meanwhile, the “working” political elites are travelling around the world at taxpayers’ expense, holding talks on fixing the monetary system. The solution is staring them in the face. They could start by jailing these paper-passing fraud artists and try finding out just how much money is stashed away in their offshore banking and tax-free havens and confiscate it all. But, that will not be done; the powerful are too powerful and the politicians are their dumb lackeys who have provided taxpayers' dollars to the exploiters of the system. Bailouts of billions of taxpayer dollars, called stimulus packages, were handed over to these manipulators of money. Now, the taxpayers everywhere will be paying and suffering for years and years while those who benefited from their tax dollars are allowed to walk away free.
These financial con artists are responsible for people losing their jobs, their homes, their savings, their investments and their peace of mind. In my mind, I believe, a fraud of massive proportions has been perpetrated. The fraud artists have been compensated with taxpayers’ dollars and the losers are the decent people everywhere who believed in the honesty of the financial system.
Stephen. J. Gray
November 19, 2009.
Meanwhile out in the muddied financial field, the brilliant financial minds were selling this manure as safe and solid investments. These “investments” were sold to pension funds, mutual funds, numerous investors and anybody and everybody who would buy this financial dung. Some of the dung-sellers were paid millions in bonuses, proving that old saying rings true: “where there is muck, there is money.” Unfortunately, the people getting the muck were those who bought the useless waste from the money changers and the money changers got their money.
Big profits were made by some of these financial sharks who were touting this financial toilet paper as a good investment, and some of them were selling themselves out of this “good investment” and passing it on to others. One wonders, does this constitute a fraud? Or was this an “honest fraud,” whatever that means, in today’s society of mangled language? Still, one banker did say they did “wrong.” He also said they were doing the work of God. Which makes one wonder, how can one do wrong and be doing God’s work?
Meanwhile, the “working” political elites are travelling around the world at taxpayers’ expense, holding talks on fixing the monetary system. The solution is staring them in the face. They could start by jailing these paper-passing fraud artists and try finding out just how much money is stashed away in their offshore banking and tax-free havens and confiscate it all. But, that will not be done; the powerful are too powerful and the politicians are their dumb lackeys who have provided taxpayers' dollars to the exploiters of the system. Bailouts of billions of taxpayer dollars, called stimulus packages, were handed over to these manipulators of money. Now, the taxpayers everywhere will be paying and suffering for years and years while those who benefited from their tax dollars are allowed to walk away free.
These financial con artists are responsible for people losing their jobs, their homes, their savings, their investments and their peace of mind. In my mind, I believe, a fraud of massive proportions has been perpetrated. The fraud artists have been compensated with taxpayers’ dollars and the losers are the decent people everywhere who believed in the honesty of the financial system.
Stephen. J. Gray
November 19, 2009.
Saturday, November 14, 2009
An Open Letter to the “conservative” Party
I recently received a letter from you asking for a donation. Quite frankly, I have to say I thought your letter was an insult to those of us who believe in the sanctity of human life, the traditional family and freedom of speech. This so-called “conservative” government of yours has intervened against free speech and sided with the Canadian Human Rights Commission (CHRC) and other powerful special interests against free speech. (The Lemire Case) Yet, your “leader” before he came to power said this:
“Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society … It is, in fact, totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff” (Stephen Harper)
It would appear, your “leader” says one thing then does another. Dare one, call this hypocrisy?
On another matter the killing of the unborn child by abortion, your leader 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…” (Stephen Harper) [1]
So much for democracy in “conservative” Canada!
Another example of, “conservative values” is this:
Your 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.”
The leader of your government says he believes in “family!” 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, he is on record as saying the following regarding this nonsense called same-sex marriage, “I will never use the notwithstanding clause on that issue” [2] (Lifesite News December 16, 2005.)
It takes courage to stand up and do the right thing, this I believe, is sadly lacking in the “conservative” party and its leadership.
Still, your “leader” is on record as saying this:
“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 )
In closing, I have had enough of politicians who I believe are hypocrites, and are a danger to democracy. Please do NOT send me anymore letters asking for donations. I do not believe there is a “conservative” party in Canada.
Stephen J. Gray
November 14, 2009.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jan/06011707.html
[2] http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/dec/051216.html
“Human rights commissions, as they are evolving, are an attack on our fundamental freedoms and the basic existence of a democratic society … It is, in fact, totalitarianism. I find this is very scary stuff” (Stephen Harper)
It would appear, your “leader” says one thing then does another. Dare one, call this hypocrisy?
On another matter the killing of the unborn child by abortion, your leader 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…” (Stephen Harper) [1]
So much for democracy in “conservative” Canada!
Another example of, “conservative values” is this:
Your 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.”
The leader of your government says he believes in “family!” 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, he is on record as saying the following regarding this nonsense called same-sex marriage, “I will never use the notwithstanding clause on that issue” [2] (Lifesite News December 16, 2005.)
It takes courage to stand up and do the right thing, this I believe, is sadly lacking in the “conservative” party and its leadership.
Still, your “leader” is on record as saying this:
“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 )
In closing, I have had enough of politicians who I believe are hypocrites, and are a danger to democracy. Please do NOT send me anymore letters asking for donations. I do not believe there is a “conservative” party in Canada.
Stephen J. Gray
November 14, 2009.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jan/06011707.html
[2] http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2005/dec/051216.html
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
A Grateful Financier Thanks the Taxpayers
Dear Taxpayers,
As I languish by the pool, martini in hand, in my favorite offshore tax haven, I want to give you the ordinary people, the backbone of society, some recognition. You taxpayers are paying to keep our free market system afloat and the financial industry in business. Your hard earned tax dollars were there for us in the financial system when we needed them most, and for that we are eternally grateful. I know many of you have lost your jobs and your pension funds are in the dumpster. Some of you have lost your homes and are in debt to the banks. Still you soldier on amidst all these negatives. But do not worry, be happy, the day of recovery is coming soon, and once again it will be back to business as usual in the market.
The market as you all know had a bad and troubling experience. We were all selling loads of useless paper throughout the financial system. Some beneficiaries of our selling expertise were; your pension funds, state governments and everybody and anybody we could suck in. We were selling this crap, oops, I mean collaterized debt opportunities like there was no tomorrow. But, unfortunately tomorrow arrived and you the taxpayers are picking up the bill for our free market fraud, pardon me, I mean errors. Mistakes were made and some of us, the greedy ones, were left holding this useless lousy paper that we were selling. Now it is being called “toxic paper,” though some of our marketing experts are calling it “troubled assets,” in the hope that it can be sold at a later date when the market recovers. And make no mistake the market will recover as long as there are politicians out there to bail out, oops, I mean stimulate the system, with your tax dollars.
Dollars are important in the financial system, and your tax dollars have been a boon to us. A press of a button and we can move money offshore to our tax free haven. As I sit here, and write this, I think of all you wonderful people who are giving up so much to keep us in the style we are accustomed. Without your help, we might all be broke, just like some of you. But hey, you came through for us and I am sure you will again, when the time comes, as it will, and the market once again plunges after we take our profits.
Profits are good and a blessing to us all. That old saying: “profit from your mistakes,” comes to mind. A good example is some of the bankers who made “mistakes” selling the “toxic paper,” I mean, “troubled assets,” now they are profiting from the bailouts, pardon me, I mean stimulus packages of your tax dollars. Big bonuses are being handed out by them, courtesy of your tax monies that helped them stay in business. So we are all raising a glass in your honor and toasting our successes.
Success is important to us all, and I include you the taxpayers. Without successful bailouts, I mean stimulus packages of your tax dollars, we moneychangers would be devastated. Now we are all stimulated and watered and fed by your generosity. So thank you for all you have done for us. Keep smiling, keep faith in the market, think positive and know that we financiers depend upon you for our bread and butter. I will close by quoting one of our esteemed banker friends, who said just the other day that: “We are doing God’s work,” though I am sure that some cynical people will say the false God Mammon is more appropriate. Anyway, thank you all for your assistance in keeping the “free market” functioning and I hope to see some of you at my next investment seminar.
Sincerely,
Mr. B.S. Baloney c/o Cayman Islands
Stephen J. Gray
November 11, 2009.
As I languish by the pool, martini in hand, in my favorite offshore tax haven, I want to give you the ordinary people, the backbone of society, some recognition. You taxpayers are paying to keep our free market system afloat and the financial industry in business. Your hard earned tax dollars were there for us in the financial system when we needed them most, and for that we are eternally grateful. I know many of you have lost your jobs and your pension funds are in the dumpster. Some of you have lost your homes and are in debt to the banks. Still you soldier on amidst all these negatives. But do not worry, be happy, the day of recovery is coming soon, and once again it will be back to business as usual in the market.
The market as you all know had a bad and troubling experience. We were all selling loads of useless paper throughout the financial system. Some beneficiaries of our selling expertise were; your pension funds, state governments and everybody and anybody we could suck in. We were selling this crap, oops, I mean collaterized debt opportunities like there was no tomorrow. But, unfortunately tomorrow arrived and you the taxpayers are picking up the bill for our free market fraud, pardon me, I mean errors. Mistakes were made and some of us, the greedy ones, were left holding this useless lousy paper that we were selling. Now it is being called “toxic paper,” though some of our marketing experts are calling it “troubled assets,” in the hope that it can be sold at a later date when the market recovers. And make no mistake the market will recover as long as there are politicians out there to bail out, oops, I mean stimulate the system, with your tax dollars.
Dollars are important in the financial system, and your tax dollars have been a boon to us. A press of a button and we can move money offshore to our tax free haven. As I sit here, and write this, I think of all you wonderful people who are giving up so much to keep us in the style we are accustomed. Without your help, we might all be broke, just like some of you. But hey, you came through for us and I am sure you will again, when the time comes, as it will, and the market once again plunges after we take our profits.
Profits are good and a blessing to us all. That old saying: “profit from your mistakes,” comes to mind. A good example is some of the bankers who made “mistakes” selling the “toxic paper,” I mean, “troubled assets,” now they are profiting from the bailouts, pardon me, I mean stimulus packages of your tax dollars. Big bonuses are being handed out by them, courtesy of your tax monies that helped them stay in business. So we are all raising a glass in your honor and toasting our successes.
Success is important to us all, and I include you the taxpayers. Without successful bailouts, I mean stimulus packages of your tax dollars, we moneychangers would be devastated. Now we are all stimulated and watered and fed by your generosity. So thank you for all you have done for us. Keep smiling, keep faith in the market, think positive and know that we financiers depend upon you for our bread and butter. I will close by quoting one of our esteemed banker friends, who said just the other day that: “We are doing God’s work,” though I am sure that some cynical people will say the false God Mammon is more appropriate. Anyway, thank you all for your assistance in keeping the “free market” functioning and I hope to see some of you at my next investment seminar.
Sincerely,
Mr. B.S. Baloney c/o Cayman Islands
Stephen J. Gray
November 11, 2009.
Sunday, November 8, 2009
The Paper Shufflers
I wrote this over a year ago SJG.
They shuffle their paper around the world
Betting on commodities, “free market” banners unfurled
Speculating on food to make a profit
While the poor go hungry and starve because of it
Boosting the prices in many a nation
This is the game of commodities speculation
Fortunes are made in the wink of an eye
And the price of rice goes sky high
The “free marketers” in food are making a killing
People are dying, while the speculators are living
These financial vultures in their luxury office towers
Are “money managers.” Oh what a shower!
No sweat, no labour: These are societies non-producers
Manipulating currencies and betting on futures
These are the rich and the present day “street people.”
In the French revolution they hanged them from a steeple
But that was in the time of barbarism
Now we call it capitalism
“Let the marketplace decide,” they cry
And if there are losses the taxpayers are standing by
The peoples taxes will bail out any losses
And huge salaries are paid to the financial bosses
These are the new rulers of all they survey
And their motto is: “Make the people pay.”
For financial manipulation is “honest toil?”
And they keep betting up the price of oil
The people will have to learn to survive they say
For this is the paper shufflers day
Stephen J. Gray
June 8, 2008.
They shuffle their paper around the world
Betting on commodities, “free market” banners unfurled
Speculating on food to make a profit
While the poor go hungry and starve because of it
Boosting the prices in many a nation
This is the game of commodities speculation
Fortunes are made in the wink of an eye
And the price of rice goes sky high
The “free marketers” in food are making a killing
People are dying, while the speculators are living
These financial vultures in their luxury office towers
Are “money managers.” Oh what a shower!
No sweat, no labour: These are societies non-producers
Manipulating currencies and betting on futures
These are the rich and the present day “street people.”
In the French revolution they hanged them from a steeple
But that was in the time of barbarism
Now we call it capitalism
“Let the marketplace decide,” they cry
And if there are losses the taxpayers are standing by
The peoples taxes will bail out any losses
And huge salaries are paid to the financial bosses
These are the new rulers of all they survey
And their motto is: “Make the people pay.”
For financial manipulation is “honest toil?”
And they keep betting up the price of oil
The people will have to learn to survive they say
For this is the paper shufflers day
Stephen J. Gray
June 8, 2008.
Thursday, November 5, 2009
The “Good” Corporate Citizens
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)
---------------------------------------
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)
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)