Surely the most important issue in this federal election should be the lawless killing of the child in the womb under the banner of “choice." There is no law on this abominable act of slaughter in Canada and the leaders of all the prominent political parties travelling the country are begging for votes. I believe, all are complicit in this atrocity called abortion. Parliament is the place where laws are made and these leaders and others before them chose to ignore the sanctity of human life and instead parroted the banal slogan called “freedom of choice" to kill. And so the massive killing continues at a rate of over 100,000 innocent lives snuffed out yearly in the country’s abortion chambers. Where are their principles on protecting human life? Where are their morals and where are their concerns for the pregnant woman coerced into an abortion?
Only a short time ago there was a vote in Parliament to protect pregnant women from coerced abortion. The vote was defeated and all four leaders voted against protecting these women. And these are the kind of people who want your vote! Still, one should not be surprised at this kind of behavior; after all, they do have the title “honorable.” Though, I wonder what is honorable about allowing coercion, and what is honorable about supporting killing by choice? Still, our “honorable leaders” like to camouflage their words when talking about this atrocity called abortion. Here are some of their statements:
Stephen Harper:
“This government will not open, will not permit anyone to open the abortion debate” (Stephen Harper, quoted in Lifesite News, Sept. 29, 2008: [1]
The above quote by Mr. Harper makes one wonder, whatever happened to democracy and free expression in Harper’s Canada? One wonders what other issues he “will not permit” to be discussed? And this guy is asking the people to give him a majority government! Here is another quote by him on the infamous “right to choose":
“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” (Stephen Harper quoted, June 27, 2006 LifeSiteNews.) [2]
Michael Ignatieff
“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
Jack Layton:
The leader of the NDP, Jack Layton, supports freedom of choice on abortion and had this to say about Canada’s foremost abortionist: “On behalf of the New Democratic Party of Canada, I salute Dr. Henry Morgentaler as one of the 2008 recipients of the Order of Canada” (July 2, 2008) [3]
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.)
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.) [4]
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 [5]
“A woman’s right to choose” rolling off the tongues of slippery 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 this heinous act.
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 the back of their necks 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 or the coercion of women into killing that child?
Stephen J. Gray
March 29, 2011.
Note: to learn more about what these aforementioned politicians speak of when they parrot the word “choice”, go to www.abortionNo.org and see the slaughtered victims of this unspeakable butchery.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2008/sep/08092912.html
[2] http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2006/jun/060627a.html
[3] http://www.ndp.ca/page/6561
[4] http://www.ctv.ca/servlet/ArticleNews/story/CTVNews/20040613/bloc_abortion_040613?s_name=&no_ads=
[5] http://www.macleans.ca/article.jsp?content=20070607_145215_12204
Tuesday, March 29, 2011
Sunday, March 20, 2011
A Pompous Political Charlatan Speaks to the International Community
We esteemed and honorable ones are gathered here today to take action to preserve freedom and democracy. There is a dangerous dictator loose upon the planet that is attacking his own people with fighter planes, guns, tanks, bombs and tear gas that many of us assembled here today supplied him with. He once was our friend, but now, he is an enemy. We must protect freedom, no matter the cost. (a massive round of applause ensues, and the speaker continues)
I see, by the applause, the arms makers, and the arms sellers and buyers in our midst realizes this defense of freedom and democracy is good for business and the economy. It is also good for any of us running for re-election. There is nothing like a good war to energize the masses. But, I digress. The important thing to remember is that we are all in favor of human rights, and hopefully our values are out there for all to see. There can be no compromise where freedom is concerned, even though some say we are hypocrites who have propped up this and other dictators for years. Still, I am sure, the friendly dictators in our midst will agree, one must talk freedom, even as our hypocrisy nearly chokes us, oops, what am I saying. Anyway you all know what I mean. B.S. baffles brains as the saying goes. In fact, one must believe in freedom, when the people are demanding it. Though, sometimes they have to be suppressed, oops, I mean, even though freedom can be a pest. But hey, who ever said running a democracy was easy. (Another wave of applause erupts amongst the assembled, eminent persons, honorable ones, dictators and despots, sex addicts, liars, B.S merchants etc. that make up the international community. The speaker continues.)
Now, where was I? Oh yes, I was talking about democracy and its importance to society. Importance indeed! That’s why we have unelected Human Rights Commissions. In fact the dictator who used to be our friend, but is now our enemy had a representative, as “chair’ on an international “human rights council.” Still, that was in friendlier days, and you know what happens when friends fall out. We start a war, pardon me, I mean a fight for freedom and democracy with all the weapons at our disposal.
Talking about weapons, this will be an interesting little war. We will be firing our weapons at our old friend and he will be firing back at us with the weapons we supplied him with. Wow, isn’t that something. I wonder if that gives new meaning to the saying “friendly fire.” Oh well, at least we leaders of the international community won’t be in the front line. We will be leading from the safety of the rear as always.
Still, all in all, this latest little war of ours is perhaps a blessing in disguise as the saying goes. It helps our people forget about the world recession and the financial fraud on Wall St and other places. In fact, out of evil we can extract some good. Perhaps we should float the idea of an international freedom tax to save the peoples’ everywhere. I believe this is an idea whose time has come. Who will pay for the tax? The people themselves of course they always pay for our guidance and leadership. (A huge thunder of applause is heard and a standing ovation ensues from the assembled herd of leaders whose main expertise in life is taxing their people.) Now let me say one final thing in closing, we are a community of leaders and if we did not lead who would? The people are incapable of governing themselves therefore we in the international community must do it for them under the banner of a new world order.
Stephen J. Gray
March 20, 2011.
I see, by the applause, the arms makers, and the arms sellers and buyers in our midst realizes this defense of freedom and democracy is good for business and the economy. It is also good for any of us running for re-election. There is nothing like a good war to energize the masses. But, I digress. The important thing to remember is that we are all in favor of human rights, and hopefully our values are out there for all to see. There can be no compromise where freedom is concerned, even though some say we are hypocrites who have propped up this and other dictators for years. Still, I am sure, the friendly dictators in our midst will agree, one must talk freedom, even as our hypocrisy nearly chokes us, oops, what am I saying. Anyway you all know what I mean. B.S. baffles brains as the saying goes. In fact, one must believe in freedom, when the people are demanding it. Though, sometimes they have to be suppressed, oops, I mean, even though freedom can be a pest. But hey, who ever said running a democracy was easy. (Another wave of applause erupts amongst the assembled, eminent persons, honorable ones, dictators and despots, sex addicts, liars, B.S merchants etc. that make up the international community. The speaker continues.)
Now, where was I? Oh yes, I was talking about democracy and its importance to society. Importance indeed! That’s why we have unelected Human Rights Commissions. In fact the dictator who used to be our friend, but is now our enemy had a representative, as “chair’ on an international “human rights council.” Still, that was in friendlier days, and you know what happens when friends fall out. We start a war, pardon me, I mean a fight for freedom and democracy with all the weapons at our disposal.
Talking about weapons, this will be an interesting little war. We will be firing our weapons at our old friend and he will be firing back at us with the weapons we supplied him with. Wow, isn’t that something. I wonder if that gives new meaning to the saying “friendly fire.” Oh well, at least we leaders of the international community won’t be in the front line. We will be leading from the safety of the rear as always.
Still, all in all, this latest little war of ours is perhaps a blessing in disguise as the saying goes. It helps our people forget about the world recession and the financial fraud on Wall St and other places. In fact, out of evil we can extract some good. Perhaps we should float the idea of an international freedom tax to save the peoples’ everywhere. I believe this is an idea whose time has come. Who will pay for the tax? The people themselves of course they always pay for our guidance and leadership. (A huge thunder of applause is heard and a standing ovation ensues from the assembled herd of leaders whose main expertise in life is taxing their people.) Now let me say one final thing in closing, we are a community of leaders and if we did not lead who would? The people are incapable of governing themselves therefore we in the international community must do it for them under the banner of a new world order.
Stephen J. Gray
March 20, 2011.
Saturday, March 12, 2011
Are we seeing political treason?
Treason: “A betrayal of trust or confidence.” [1]
Can the people of any country have confidence in a government that does not obey the will of the people?
Example: The people of Ireland voted No to joining the European Union. This vote was not acceptable to the elites and the people of Ireland were subjected to another vote that culminated in a Yes vote. Therefore, one has to ask: Why was the No vote unacceptable? Were there other forces behind the scenes determined to subvert democracy and did they succeed? And could one call this abrogation of the original No vote, a case of political treason?
Another example: Some countries now in the European Union never asked their citizens whether they wanted to join. In fact “ Bloomberg Business Week” of June 13, 2008, stated: “Ireland is the only country in Europe to hold a referendum on the treaty.” [2]
Here is an excerpt from an article in the Brussels Journal by Paul Belien, headlined:
“Former Soviet Dissident Warns For EU Dictatorship” The man being interviewed is Vladimir Bukozksy….
PB: “But all these countries that joined the European Union did so voluntarily.”
VB: “No, they did not. Look at Denmark which voted against the Maastricht treaty twice. Look at Ireland [which voted against the Nice treaty]. Look at many other countries, they are under enormous pressure. It is almost blackmail. Switzerland was forced to vote five times in a referendum. All five times they have rejected it, but who knows what will happen the sixth time, the seventh time. It is always the same thing. It is a trick for idiots. The people have to vote in referendums until the people vote the way that is wanted….” [3]
Was that what happened to the Irish vote? They had to vote until the elites got the vote “…the way that is wanted.” Now look what has happened to Ireland, its sovereignty has been superseded by the E.U. and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the unelected IMF has imposed austerity measures on the Irish people. They are now prisoners of an E.U. system that they originally rejected.
It is not only the Irish that is being dictated to by the E.U. and the IMF. Greece is also taking austerity orders from the unelected IMF and other countries are submitting their “economic plans” to the IMF. See info below.
“In recent months, G20 countries have submitted their economic plans to the IMF - which would then assess what the net impact would be on the global economy.” [4]
.
Well excuse me, but who elected the IMF? And when did supposed parliamentary democracies decide to hand over their “economic plans” to an unelected cabal of bankers? And what is the point in having elections in so-called “democracies,” if politicians and political leaders of various countries are subservient to the unelected moneychangers on financial matters. Is some form of “global governance” in the works?
“The Group of Twenty ("G-20") nations, the new Financial Stability Board ("FSB"), and the International Monetary Fund ("IMF") are progressing on two fronts: the monitoring and revision of national and regional economic plans to facilitate global economic governance…” [5]
So there you have it “global governance” is being facilitated. The politicians and the political leaders of various governments appear to be handing over their national sovereignty to unelected bureaucrats and bankers. Therefore, I ask the question: Are we seeing political treason?
Stephen J. Gray
March 12, 2011.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.thefreedictionary.com/treason
[2] http://www.businessweek.com/blogs/europeinsight/archives/2008/06/irish_vote_no_to_lisbon_treaty.html
[3] http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865
[4] http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/stephanieflanders/2010/06/imf_says_g20_could_do_better.html
[5] http://www.globalgovernancewatch.org/spotlight_on_sovereignty/g20-and-imf-officials-institutionalize-economic-global-governance
Can the people of any country have confidence in a government that does not obey the will of the people?
Example: The people of Ireland voted No to joining the European Union. This vote was not acceptable to the elites and the people of Ireland were subjected to another vote that culminated in a Yes vote. Therefore, one has to ask: Why was the No vote unacceptable? Were there other forces behind the scenes determined to subvert democracy and did they succeed? And could one call this abrogation of the original No vote, a case of political treason?
Another example: Some countries now in the European Union never asked their citizens whether they wanted to join. In fact “ Bloomberg Business Week” of June 13, 2008, stated: “Ireland is the only country in Europe to hold a referendum on the treaty.” [2]
Here is an excerpt from an article in the Brussels Journal by Paul Belien, headlined:
“Former Soviet Dissident Warns For EU Dictatorship” The man being interviewed is Vladimir Bukozksy….
PB: “But all these countries that joined the European Union did so voluntarily.”
VB: “No, they did not. Look at Denmark which voted against the Maastricht treaty twice. Look at Ireland [which voted against the Nice treaty]. Look at many other countries, they are under enormous pressure. It is almost blackmail. Switzerland was forced to vote five times in a referendum. All five times they have rejected it, but who knows what will happen the sixth time, the seventh time. It is always the same thing. It is a trick for idiots. The people have to vote in referendums until the people vote the way that is wanted….” [3]
Was that what happened to the Irish vote? They had to vote until the elites got the vote “…the way that is wanted.” Now look what has happened to Ireland, its sovereignty has been superseded by the E.U. and the International Monetary Fund (IMF), and the unelected IMF has imposed austerity measures on the Irish people. They are now prisoners of an E.U. system that they originally rejected.
It is not only the Irish that is being dictated to by the E.U. and the IMF. Greece is also taking austerity orders from the unelected IMF and other countries are submitting their “economic plans” to the IMF. See info below.
“In recent months, G20 countries have submitted their economic plans to the IMF - which would then assess what the net impact would be on the global economy.” [4]
.
Well excuse me, but who elected the IMF? And when did supposed parliamentary democracies decide to hand over their “economic plans” to an unelected cabal of bankers? And what is the point in having elections in so-called “democracies,” if politicians and political leaders of various countries are subservient to the unelected moneychangers on financial matters. Is some form of “global governance” in the works?
“The Group of Twenty ("G-20") nations, the new Financial Stability Board ("FSB"), and the International Monetary Fund ("IMF") are progressing on two fronts: the monitoring and revision of national and regional economic plans to facilitate global economic governance…” [5]
So there you have it “global governance” is being facilitated. The politicians and the political leaders of various governments appear to be handing over their national sovereignty to unelected bureaucrats and bankers. Therefore, I ask the question: Are we seeing political treason?
Stephen J. Gray
March 12, 2011.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.thefreedictionary.com/treason
[2] http://www.businessweek.com/blogs/europeinsight/archives/2008/06/irish_vote_no_to_lisbon_treaty.html
[3] http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865
[4] http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/stephanieflanders/2010/06/imf_says_g20_could_do_better.html
[5] http://www.globalgovernancewatch.org/spotlight_on_sovereignty/g20-and-imf-officials-institutionalize-economic-global-governance
Wednesday, March 2, 2011
The Political Hypocrites Who Sell Arms to Dictators
Anybody who has been following the unrest in countries in the Middle East must be getting a lesson in hypocrisy. Nightly we have seen politicians and political leaders from various countries bemoaning the fact that people in Libya are being fired upon and killed by Gaddafi’s military thugs. Yet, Gaddafi and his thugs have received weapons supplied from various countries in the so-called “international community.”
The Daily Telegraph U.K. of February 22, 2011 said this: “The shameless courting of the Libyan dictator by Tony Blair and key Labour ministers, despite his track record in financing terrorism, has come back to haunt the party.…” The article went on to state: “The Daily Telegraph revealed in September, 2009, that the SAS had spent six months training Libyan special forces.” [1]
Therefore, when one sees these huffing and puffing politicians talking about “human rights” and “crimes against humanity” one is inclined to think it is a wonder that they do not choke on their own hypocrisy. In fact, you can see these “political leaders” at G8 and G20 meetings shaking hands with dictators and despots and getting their pictures taken, all lined up together, in buddy, buddy mode. Cynical people might call the lineup a political “ rogues’ gallery” of the world!
Now the peoples’ of the world are being told by some of these political hypocrites that they care about “human rights” and “democracy and peace” after they have sold guns, tanks, bombs, aircraft, and tear gas etc. to their dictator friends who they now claim are persons non grata. The Independent, U.K. of February 19, 2011, said this: “How Britain taught Arab police forces all they know...Britain has authorised the export of tear gas, crowd-control ammunition, small-arms ammunition and door-breaching projectile launchers....” [2]
The Daily Mail, U.K. of February 22, 2011, reported this: “It is not wrong to sell arms, says David Cameron as he defends sale of weapons to Middle East…British-made equipment had been used by the Gaddafi regime to suppress unrest in Libya.” [3]
What a bunch of mealy mouthed hypocrites many of these politicians and political “leaders” are! A number of politicians of all political stripes and parties have groveled to this dictator Gaddafi. The National Post of February 22, 2011, in an article by John Ivison headlined, “Embracing Gaddafi was Canada’s shame” stated:
“The Liberal government knew Gaddafi was unhinged when it started playing footsy with him. In 1999, economic sanctions were lifted after Libya made two suspects of the Lockerbie bombing available for trial and agreed to pay compensation to the victims’ families. By 2004, prime minister Paul Martin was in Libya breaking bread with the old pariah in his tent in the desert, while two camels mated noisily outside....” [4]
Now the political mates of numerous dictators are now washing their hands like political Pontius Pilates and telling all and sundry that they no longer support these bloodthirsty regimes. No wonder decent people everywhere have to laugh when they see these political hypocrites mouthing platitudes about “human rights” and “human dignity.” To which one can only say, “ugh!”
Stephen J. Gray
March 2, 2011.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8341483/How-Britain-danced-to-Gaddafis-tune.html
[2] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/how-britain-taught-arab-police-forces-all-they-know-2219270.html
[3] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1359712/David-Cameron-Its-wrong-sell-arms-Middle-East.html
[4] http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/02/22/john-ivison-embracing-gaddafi-was-canadas-shame/
The Daily Telegraph U.K. of February 22, 2011 said this: “The shameless courting of the Libyan dictator by Tony Blair and key Labour ministers, despite his track record in financing terrorism, has come back to haunt the party.…” The article went on to state: “The Daily Telegraph revealed in September, 2009, that the SAS had spent six months training Libyan special forces.” [1]
Therefore, when one sees these huffing and puffing politicians talking about “human rights” and “crimes against humanity” one is inclined to think it is a wonder that they do not choke on their own hypocrisy. In fact, you can see these “political leaders” at G8 and G20 meetings shaking hands with dictators and despots and getting their pictures taken, all lined up together, in buddy, buddy mode. Cynical people might call the lineup a political “ rogues’ gallery” of the world!
Now the peoples’ of the world are being told by some of these political hypocrites that they care about “human rights” and “democracy and peace” after they have sold guns, tanks, bombs, aircraft, and tear gas etc. to their dictator friends who they now claim are persons non grata. The Independent, U.K. of February 19, 2011, said this: “How Britain taught Arab police forces all they know...Britain has authorised the export of tear gas, crowd-control ammunition, small-arms ammunition and door-breaching projectile launchers....” [2]
The Daily Mail, U.K. of February 22, 2011, reported this: “It is not wrong to sell arms, says David Cameron as he defends sale of weapons to Middle East…British-made equipment had been used by the Gaddafi regime to suppress unrest in Libya.” [3]
What a bunch of mealy mouthed hypocrites many of these politicians and political “leaders” are! A number of politicians of all political stripes and parties have groveled to this dictator Gaddafi. The National Post of February 22, 2011, in an article by John Ivison headlined, “Embracing Gaddafi was Canada’s shame” stated:
“The Liberal government knew Gaddafi was unhinged when it started playing footsy with him. In 1999, economic sanctions were lifted after Libya made two suspects of the Lockerbie bombing available for trial and agreed to pay compensation to the victims’ families. By 2004, prime minister Paul Martin was in Libya breaking bread with the old pariah in his tent in the desert, while two camels mated noisily outside....” [4]
Now the political mates of numerous dictators are now washing their hands like political Pontius Pilates and telling all and sundry that they no longer support these bloodthirsty regimes. No wonder decent people everywhere have to laugh when they see these political hypocrites mouthing platitudes about “human rights” and “human dignity.” To which one can only say, “ugh!”
Stephen J. Gray
March 2, 2011.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/africaandindianocean/libya/8341483/How-Britain-danced-to-Gaddafis-tune.html
[2] http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/politics/how-britain-taught-arab-police-forces-all-they-know-2219270.html
[3] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1359712/David-Cameron-Its-wrong-sell-arms-Middle-East.html
[4] http://fullcomment.nationalpost.com/2011/02/22/john-ivison-embracing-gaddafi-was-canadas-shame/
Monday, February 7, 2011
Has society gone to the dogs?
Has society gone to the dogs?
Recently there was saturation coverage of the story about the sled dogs killed at Whistler, B.C. The killing of these dogs caused public and media outrage (as it should) and TV coverage and newspaper reporting went on for several days and still does. Global TV News B.C. had a story Feb. 5, 2011, of an organized protest rally against the dog killing. The word “horrific” was used in this report and one person was quoted as saying he was so upset he could not go to work for a few days. CTV news of Feb. 5, 2011 had this headline: “'Funeral procession' held for dead sled dogs.”
The dog story had even flashed around the world it was so doggone awful. What was the world coming to? But hey, this dog story had legs, and everybody was barking in sympathy at this atrocity to animals.
The Toronto Star of Feb. 1, 2011, had this headline: “100 sled dogs killed in B.C. ‘massacre.’”
CTV News of Jan. 31, 2011, had the headline, “100 healthy sled dogs slaughtered in Whistler, B.C.”
These dogs are described as being killed in a ‘massacre,' and of being ‘slaughtered’ and who would argue with that? The whole scene of killing helpless animals is very sad and troubling.
Meanwhile a few miles away in the city of Vancouver, helpless innocent humans are butchered in the local abortion chambers but there are no ‘slaughtered’ headlines for them. No media outrage, no funeral processions, no saturation coverage of the ‘massacre’ of these innocents, no charges laid, and the killings hid from public view. The scene of slaughter is protected by a “bubble zone” so that the work of butchering the innocents can go on without protest. Which begs the question: Does the killing of dogs take on more importance than the killing of tiny humans? Is it okay to have “freedom of choice” to slaughter the innocents in their mothers’ wombs, but not to have “freedom of choice” to kill unwanted dogs? Do the media care more about dogs than about butchered humans? Has the media lost its credibility when it goes into a frenzy over canine carnage but remains mostly silent on the human horror killings in the abortion chambers of the country? Is that not a doggone scandal?
But hey, how can these murderous attacks on human life be a scandal when the country's foremost abortionist receives the highest honor in the country for his “work.” The message in this country seems to be that if you kill dogs and you are reviled, but if you kill humans and you are rewarded! Have we lost our senses? Or has commonsense become so corrupted that we are literally and morally going to the dogs?
Stephen J. Gray
Note: See the horrific slaughter of helpless humans at:
http://www.unmaskingchoice.ca
Recently there was saturation coverage of the story about the sled dogs killed at Whistler, B.C. The killing of these dogs caused public and media outrage (as it should) and TV coverage and newspaper reporting went on for several days and still does. Global TV News B.C. had a story Feb. 5, 2011, of an organized protest rally against the dog killing. The word “horrific” was used in this report and one person was quoted as saying he was so upset he could not go to work for a few days. CTV news of Feb. 5, 2011 had this headline: “'Funeral procession' held for dead sled dogs.”
The dog story had even flashed around the world it was so doggone awful. What was the world coming to? But hey, this dog story had legs, and everybody was barking in sympathy at this atrocity to animals.
The Toronto Star of Feb. 1, 2011, had this headline: “100 sled dogs killed in B.C. ‘massacre.’”
CTV News of Jan. 31, 2011, had the headline, “100 healthy sled dogs slaughtered in Whistler, B.C.”
These dogs are described as being killed in a ‘massacre,' and of being ‘slaughtered’ and who would argue with that? The whole scene of killing helpless animals is very sad and troubling.
Meanwhile a few miles away in the city of Vancouver, helpless innocent humans are butchered in the local abortion chambers but there are no ‘slaughtered’ headlines for them. No media outrage, no funeral processions, no saturation coverage of the ‘massacre’ of these innocents, no charges laid, and the killings hid from public view. The scene of slaughter is protected by a “bubble zone” so that the work of butchering the innocents can go on without protest. Which begs the question: Does the killing of dogs take on more importance than the killing of tiny humans? Is it okay to have “freedom of choice” to slaughter the innocents in their mothers’ wombs, but not to have “freedom of choice” to kill unwanted dogs? Do the media care more about dogs than about butchered humans? Has the media lost its credibility when it goes into a frenzy over canine carnage but remains mostly silent on the human horror killings in the abortion chambers of the country? Is that not a doggone scandal?
But hey, how can these murderous attacks on human life be a scandal when the country's foremost abortionist receives the highest honor in the country for his “work.” The message in this country seems to be that if you kill dogs and you are reviled, but if you kill humans and you are rewarded! Have we lost our senses? Or has commonsense become so corrupted that we are literally and morally going to the dogs?
Stephen J. Gray
Note: See the horrific slaughter of helpless humans at:
http://www.unmaskingchoice.ca
Friday, January 28, 2011
The Real “State of the Union?”
None of the big boys in the financial industry have gone to jail despite numerous articles saying fraud was committed.[1] If one googles financial fraud on Wall St. there is “About 10,200,000 results” One has to ask, does crime pay?
There are over 40 million Americans on food stamps and a major bank that was bailed out by taxpayers reportedly makes money off the food stamps issue.[2]
Millions of Americans are unemployed and one report said there are, “no jobs for more than 75% of unemployed Americans.”[3]
Many of their jobs were sent overseas to China [4]
China’s dictator got a huge welcome from president Obama, but hey I guess this is called “change to believe in.” The United States owes a trillion or more dollars to China so when the “landlord” visits the welcome mat goes out!
Meanwhile a huge number of the American people have lost their homes. Some homes have been repossessed by bankers who were bailed out by American taxpayers’ dollars. A headline in the Washington Post said this: “U.S. homes repossessed by banks set to hit record 1 million this year.” [5] The bankers are now having a great time after being “stimulated’ by taxpayers dollars and the ordinary American is wondering why they cannot get bailed out, or stimulated, especially when it is their tax dollars that re-financed the bankers! Still, who said the system was fair or even honest?
But hey, the good old U.S.A. had an anniversary to celebrate recently: “Roe v Wade.” It was reported that over 50 million abortions have been committed in the country since this decision was handed down. One might say that this killing of the innocents by abortionists could be called the “slaughter of the union.” Still, President Obama has reportedly said abortion is a “right.” In today’s mangled language killing the innocents is called a “right.” Is that sick or what?
Meanwhile a huge “march-for-life” was ignored by most of the mainstream media. [6] Which is not surprising, since most of the media are pro-abortion and support the sick slogan, “freedom of choice” to kill the child in the womb. But not only is there a war on the child in the womb. The war in Iraq is costing human lives, human suffering and huge amounts of money considering we now know that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) a headline in the Washington Post said: “The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond” [7] One wonders who profits from the war? Certainly, not the soldiers or those who are disfigured or maimed. It would be interesting to see the names of the corporations and businesses that made money and are still making money but never wear combat gear themselves, and who have a vested interest in war.
We are seeing the results of financial war. People have lost their jobs, their homes and no financial criminals in jail. The other war in Iraq was started on the premise of WMDs this has since been proven false.[8] The only winners being the profiteers in bloodshed and mayhem, and the politicians who never wear combat gear but lead with their mouths. And if some politicians now say they are bringing “democracy” to Iraq, one has to ask the question: why don’t they bring democracy to China? After all it is a dictatorship.
Therefore, in closing, one has to ask: What is the real state of the union?
Stephen J. Gray
January 28, 2011
References:
[1] http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Robert-Reich-s-Blog/2010/0401/Fraud-on-Wall-Street-Where-has-SEC-been
[2] http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/the-more-americans-that-go-on-food-stamps-the-more-money-jp-morgan-makes
[3] http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/7857961-no-jobs-for-more-than-75-of-unemployed-americans
[4] http://www.gastongazette.com/articles/china-49830-american-jobs.html
[5] http://voices.washingtonpost.com/political-economy/2010/07/us_homes_repossessed_by_banks.html
[6] http://www.lifenews.com/2011/01/26/abc-cbs-nbc-new-york-times-all-ignore-march-for-life
[7] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/03/AR2010090302200.html
[8] http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/11/26/weapons-of-mass-deception-115875-21850852/
There are over 40 million Americans on food stamps and a major bank that was bailed out by taxpayers reportedly makes money off the food stamps issue.[2]
Millions of Americans are unemployed and one report said there are, “no jobs for more than 75% of unemployed Americans.”[3]
Many of their jobs were sent overseas to China [4]
China’s dictator got a huge welcome from president Obama, but hey I guess this is called “change to believe in.” The United States owes a trillion or more dollars to China so when the “landlord” visits the welcome mat goes out!
Meanwhile a huge number of the American people have lost their homes. Some homes have been repossessed by bankers who were bailed out by American taxpayers’ dollars. A headline in the Washington Post said this: “U.S. homes repossessed by banks set to hit record 1 million this year.” [5] The bankers are now having a great time after being “stimulated’ by taxpayers dollars and the ordinary American is wondering why they cannot get bailed out, or stimulated, especially when it is their tax dollars that re-financed the bankers! Still, who said the system was fair or even honest?
But hey, the good old U.S.A. had an anniversary to celebrate recently: “Roe v Wade.” It was reported that over 50 million abortions have been committed in the country since this decision was handed down. One might say that this killing of the innocents by abortionists could be called the “slaughter of the union.” Still, President Obama has reportedly said abortion is a “right.” In today’s mangled language killing the innocents is called a “right.” Is that sick or what?
Meanwhile a huge “march-for-life” was ignored by most of the mainstream media. [6] Which is not surprising, since most of the media are pro-abortion and support the sick slogan, “freedom of choice” to kill the child in the womb. But not only is there a war on the child in the womb. The war in Iraq is costing human lives, human suffering and huge amounts of money considering we now know that there were no Weapons of Mass Destruction (WMD) a headline in the Washington Post said: “The true cost of the Iraq war: $3 trillion and beyond” [7] One wonders who profits from the war? Certainly, not the soldiers or those who are disfigured or maimed. It would be interesting to see the names of the corporations and businesses that made money and are still making money but never wear combat gear themselves, and who have a vested interest in war.
We are seeing the results of financial war. People have lost their jobs, their homes and no financial criminals in jail. The other war in Iraq was started on the premise of WMDs this has since been proven false.[8] The only winners being the profiteers in bloodshed and mayhem, and the politicians who never wear combat gear but lead with their mouths. And if some politicians now say they are bringing “democracy” to Iraq, one has to ask the question: why don’t they bring democracy to China? After all it is a dictatorship.
Therefore, in closing, one has to ask: What is the real state of the union?
Stephen J. Gray
January 28, 2011
References:
[1] http://www.csmonitor.com/Business/Robert-Reich-s-Blog/2010/0401/Fraud-on-Wall-Street-Where-has-SEC-been
[2] http://theeconomiccollapseblog.com/archives/the-more-americans-that-go-on-food-stamps-the-more-money-jp-morgan-makes
[3] http://www.allvoices.com/contributed-news/7857961-no-jobs-for-more-than-75-of-unemployed-americans
[4] http://www.gastongazette.com/articles/china-49830-american-jobs.html
[5] http://voices.washingtonpost.com/political-economy/2010/07/us_homes_repossessed_by_banks.html
[6] http://www.lifenews.com/2011/01/26/abc-cbs-nbc-new-york-times-all-ignore-march-for-life
[7] http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/09/03/AR2010090302200.html
[8] http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2009/11/26/weapons-of-mass-deception-115875-21850852/
Sunday, January 23, 2011
The Enormity of Evil
“He who does not punish evil commands it to be done.”
Leonardo da Vinci
Surely the greatest unpunished evil in our world today is the murderous slaughter of the innocents under the banner of abortion. This evil atrocity is disguised and camouflaged by using nice-sounding words like “freedom of choice,” or “medical terminations,” or “medical procedures.” Pregnancy is not a disease, but in today’s society it is treated as such by abortionists who have been known to describe the unborn child as a “parasite.”
The language is perverted, as is the law, to disguise the horrendous truth that innocent human lives are butchered by this abominable act. When asked about this depraved act called abortion many politicians and political leaders will trumpet the banal slogan, “I am in favor of a woman’s right to choose.” The choice is never described in detail by politicians or many media, nor is it mentioned that “choice” regarding abortion means killing the child in the womb if she/he is unwanted. Is there anything more evil than having one’s flesh and blood suctioned out, cut to pieces or decapitated in an abortion chamber by an assassin masquerading as a “doctor"?
One of these “doctor’s” was mentioned in the U.K Daily Mail of January 20, 2011. The headline of the article was: “Doctor accused of killing seven babies with scissors after they were born alive in 'House of Horrors' abortion clinic” The article went on to state the following:
“…Prosecutors claim the babies were murdered after they were born alive in illegal botched late-term abortions during the sixth, seventh or eighth months of pregnancy….
“Authorities suspect the physician may have killed hundreds of babies during the course of his 30-year practice. He made $1.8million in one year alone performing the procedures.” [1]
Notice how the paid killing is described as “procedures.”
And the U.K Daily Mail of January 7, 2011, had an article that said this: “A married couple who aborted twin boys the wife was expecting after IVF treatment have gone to court to choose the sex of their next child – because they want a girl.” [2]
This is where this enormous evil called “choice” on abortion has taken us. Human life is treated like disposable garbage if it is unwanted.
Here is another example of our sick depraved and evil world. A woman describes forced abortions in this excerpt.
“Testimony of Wujian”
“Wujian (not her real name) is a victim of forced abortion under China's One Child Policy. She testified before the United States Congressional Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission on November 10, 2009….”
“About one hour later, the van stopped in the hospital. As soon as I was drug out of the van, I saw hundred of pregnant Moms there – all of them, just like pigs in the slaughterhouse. Immediately I was drug into a special room, and without any preliminary medical examination, one nurse did Oxytocin injection intravenously. Then I was put into a room with several other Moms.
“The room was full of Moms who had just gone through a forced abortion. Some Moms were crying, some Moms were mourning, some Moms were screaming, and one Mom was rolling on the floor with unbearable pain. ...
“The one-child policy and forced abortion policy have killed millions of innocent lives in China. How could this inhuman crime be stopped? When could this inhuman crime be stopped? ...” [3]
“Hell is empty and all the devils are here.”
William Shakespeare
Who could argue with Shakespeare’s statement based on the evidence above? The world is awash in the blood of the helpless innocents and “leaders” almost everywhere condone and support these heinous crimes against humanity, as do those who parrot the devilish slogan, “we believe in freedom of choice.” One wonders what kinds of thinking goes on in their minds when they speak those perverted words. Perhaps it is best summed up in the quote below.
“Where the speech is corrupted, the mind is also.” –Seneca
And so we have a society today that condones and approves of this enormous evil.
Note: See the slaughtered victims of this evil called “choice” at:
www.unmaskingchoice.ca
Stephen J. Gray
January 23, 2011.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1348632/Philadelphia-abortion-doctor-Dr-Kermit-Gosnell-facing-counts-murder.html#ixzz1BaueOVbS
[2] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345057/Couple-sons-abort-twin-boys-IVF--try-baby-girl-daughter-died.html
[3] http://www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/index.php?nav=wujian
Leonardo da Vinci
Surely the greatest unpunished evil in our world today is the murderous slaughter of the innocents under the banner of abortion. This evil atrocity is disguised and camouflaged by using nice-sounding words like “freedom of choice,” or “medical terminations,” or “medical procedures.” Pregnancy is not a disease, but in today’s society it is treated as such by abortionists who have been known to describe the unborn child as a “parasite.”
The language is perverted, as is the law, to disguise the horrendous truth that innocent human lives are butchered by this abominable act. When asked about this depraved act called abortion many politicians and political leaders will trumpet the banal slogan, “I am in favor of a woman’s right to choose.” The choice is never described in detail by politicians or many media, nor is it mentioned that “choice” regarding abortion means killing the child in the womb if she/he is unwanted. Is there anything more evil than having one’s flesh and blood suctioned out, cut to pieces or decapitated in an abortion chamber by an assassin masquerading as a “doctor"?
One of these “doctor’s” was mentioned in the U.K Daily Mail of January 20, 2011. The headline of the article was: “Doctor accused of killing seven babies with scissors after they were born alive in 'House of Horrors' abortion clinic” The article went on to state the following:
“…Prosecutors claim the babies were murdered after they were born alive in illegal botched late-term abortions during the sixth, seventh or eighth months of pregnancy….
“Authorities suspect the physician may have killed hundreds of babies during the course of his 30-year practice. He made $1.8million in one year alone performing the procedures.” [1]
Notice how the paid killing is described as “procedures.”
And the U.K Daily Mail of January 7, 2011, had an article that said this: “A married couple who aborted twin boys the wife was expecting after IVF treatment have gone to court to choose the sex of their next child – because they want a girl.” [2]
This is where this enormous evil called “choice” on abortion has taken us. Human life is treated like disposable garbage if it is unwanted.
Here is another example of our sick depraved and evil world. A woman describes forced abortions in this excerpt.
“Testimony of Wujian”
“Wujian (not her real name) is a victim of forced abortion under China's One Child Policy. She testified before the United States Congressional Tom Lantos Human Rights Commission on November 10, 2009….”
“About one hour later, the van stopped in the hospital. As soon as I was drug out of the van, I saw hundred of pregnant Moms there – all of them, just like pigs in the slaughterhouse. Immediately I was drug into a special room, and without any preliminary medical examination, one nurse did Oxytocin injection intravenously. Then I was put into a room with several other Moms.
“The room was full of Moms who had just gone through a forced abortion. Some Moms were crying, some Moms were mourning, some Moms were screaming, and one Mom was rolling on the floor with unbearable pain. ...
“The one-child policy and forced abortion policy have killed millions of innocent lives in China. How could this inhuman crime be stopped? When could this inhuman crime be stopped? ...” [3]
“Hell is empty and all the devils are here.”
William Shakespeare
Who could argue with Shakespeare’s statement based on the evidence above? The world is awash in the blood of the helpless innocents and “leaders” almost everywhere condone and support these heinous crimes against humanity, as do those who parrot the devilish slogan, “we believe in freedom of choice.” One wonders what kinds of thinking goes on in their minds when they speak those perverted words. Perhaps it is best summed up in the quote below.
“Where the speech is corrupted, the mind is also.” –Seneca
And so we have a society today that condones and approves of this enormous evil.
Note: See the slaughtered victims of this evil called “choice” at:
www.unmaskingchoice.ca
Stephen J. Gray
January 23, 2011.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1348632/Philadelphia-abortion-doctor-Dr-Kermit-Gosnell-facing-counts-murder.html#ixzz1BaueOVbS
[2] http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-1345057/Couple-sons-abort-twin-boys-IVF--try-baby-girl-daughter-died.html
[3] http://www.womensrightswithoutfrontiers.org/index.php?nav=wujian
Monday, December 20, 2010
A Bankster Gives Thanks: A Satire
This being the season of goodwill towards men and women it is appropriate that we banksters give thanks. Therefore,
I give thanks that we are still free after ripping off the financial system.
I give thanks for governments who bailed us out.
I give thanks for the taxpayers everywhere who will pay for our bailouts.
I give thanks for offshore tax havens where we can keep our ill-gotten gains in safety.
I give thanks that we are still in positions of power to advise governments on monetary policy.
I give thanks for the greatest country in the world and to a justice system that has failed to convict us for fraud.
I give thanks that over 40 million taxpayers who helped bail us out are able to get food stamps in the greatest country in the world.
I give thanks that countries which were “living beyond their means” are now practicing austerity.
.
I give thanks that some “investors” and “bond holders” are being bailed out with tax-payers’ dollars.
I give thanks that our useless “toxic assets” have been dumped on the taxpayers.
I give thanks for the “free enterprise” system.
I give thanks that the peoples of various countries are accepting austerity and loss of sovereignty.
I give thanks that it is so easy to herd the masses into acceptance of control by us monied, unelected international banksters.
I give thanks for those who believe “We are doing God’s work.”
I give thanks for politicians of all political stripes who do what we tell them.
I give thanks for those who say, “there is no free lunch” (except for us of course).
I give thanks for those banksters who say, “Let the marketplace decide,” but when the market goes bust they accept taxpayer bailouts.
And finally, I give thanks for all the think tanks, economists, experts and propaganda merchants who continue to propagate in our favor by calling the greatest robbery in the history of the free world a “recession.” Their supportive peddling of propaganda helps keep the masses in submission. Still, enough of the negativity, good things are always happening for us banksters, so Ho, Ho, Ho and a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all in our grasping, controlling, manipulative hands.
Stephen J. Gray
December 20, 2010
I give thanks that we are still free after ripping off the financial system.
I give thanks for governments who bailed us out.
I give thanks for the taxpayers everywhere who will pay for our bailouts.
I give thanks for offshore tax havens where we can keep our ill-gotten gains in safety.
I give thanks that we are still in positions of power to advise governments on monetary policy.
I give thanks for the greatest country in the world and to a justice system that has failed to convict us for fraud.
I give thanks that over 40 million taxpayers who helped bail us out are able to get food stamps in the greatest country in the world.
I give thanks that countries which were “living beyond their means” are now practicing austerity.
.
I give thanks that some “investors” and “bond holders” are being bailed out with tax-payers’ dollars.
I give thanks that our useless “toxic assets” have been dumped on the taxpayers.
I give thanks for the “free enterprise” system.
I give thanks that the peoples of various countries are accepting austerity and loss of sovereignty.
I give thanks that it is so easy to herd the masses into acceptance of control by us monied, unelected international banksters.
I give thanks for those who believe “We are doing God’s work.”
I give thanks for politicians of all political stripes who do what we tell them.
I give thanks for those who say, “there is no free lunch” (except for us of course).
I give thanks for those banksters who say, “Let the marketplace decide,” but when the market goes bust they accept taxpayer bailouts.
And finally, I give thanks for all the think tanks, economists, experts and propaganda merchants who continue to propagate in our favor by calling the greatest robbery in the history of the free world a “recession.” Their supportive peddling of propaganda helps keep the masses in submission. Still, enough of the negativity, good things are always happening for us banksters, so Ho, Ho, Ho and a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year to all in our grasping, controlling, manipulative hands.
Stephen J. Gray
December 20, 2010
Sunday, November 28, 2010
Hypocrisy and Discrimination at Carleton University
“Tolerance and respect are based on knowledge. Fear and distrust stem from ignorance.”
Roseann O’Reilly Runte president of Carleton University [1]
The words above from the president of Carleton University are surely very nice. But the arrest of pro-life Carleton Students at the behest of the university for daring to exercise their right to free speech and free expression surely makes a mockery of the words “tolerance” and “respect.” I believe the words hypocrisy and discrimination are more apt and should apply to what has happened at Carleton University.
The university had these young pro-life students arrested for daring to show pictures of the slaughter of babies by abortion. The video of this arrest can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeJkBQn1-r8
One can only wonder, what is happening in Canada and on a university campus when peaceful, law-abiding students are arrested for having the courage to show the truth about the heinous (legally acceptable) depravity that kills the child in the womb? The perpetrators and supporters of this atrocity, though, like to call the act "choice." Consider the quote below by a representative of the Carleton University Student Association (CUSA):
“CUSA is a pro-choice organization,” said Sam Heaton, CUSA vice-president (student services) in an interview Oct. 18. “We do not fund through our clubs any pro-life or anti-choice material,” Heaton said.[2]
Can you believe the hypocrisy of this CUSA rep? This student organization is funded by the compulsory monies of ALL the students at the university, yet it has the gall to say, “CUSA is a pro-choice organization.” How can this be allowed in a supposedly free society, that students can be compelled and dictated to, and forced to pay money to a student organization that violates the principle of freedom of choice in a democracy? Not only do they support the "choice" to kill the pre-born, but they deny the "choice" of students to pay or not pay student fees--to an organization that takes a position on matters that differs from the very students who pay fees! But hey, based on the evidence, I believe there is no democracy at Carleton University, only hypocrisy and discrimination.
Still, the president of the university tells us in her Globe and Mail article, “Education promotes civic engagement and is essential for democratic governance.” Pardon me while I laugh at her words, because it appears on the evidence that “democratic governance” is a sham at Carleton University. If the university was “democratic” it would not have had its pro-life students arrested. If the university was “democratic” it would take action against CUSA for discriminating against the pro-life students. If the university was democratic, it would not collect the compulsory student monies and hand them over to CUSA.
But CUSA and the university appear to be on the same rotten page. Therefore, one can only conclude regarding what has happened to the pro-life students that hypocrisy and discrimination are rampant at Carleton University.
Stephen J. Gray
November 28, 2010.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/without-access-to-education-wealth-disappears/article1672570/
[2] http://www.charlatan.ca/content/pro-life-group-gets-pulled
Roseann O’Reilly Runte president of Carleton University [1]
The words above from the president of Carleton University are surely very nice. But the arrest of pro-life Carleton Students at the behest of the university for daring to exercise their right to free speech and free expression surely makes a mockery of the words “tolerance” and “respect.” I believe the words hypocrisy and discrimination are more apt and should apply to what has happened at Carleton University.
The university had these young pro-life students arrested for daring to show pictures of the slaughter of babies by abortion. The video of this arrest can be seen here:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=XeJkBQn1-r8
One can only wonder, what is happening in Canada and on a university campus when peaceful, law-abiding students are arrested for having the courage to show the truth about the heinous (legally acceptable) depravity that kills the child in the womb? The perpetrators and supporters of this atrocity, though, like to call the act "choice." Consider the quote below by a representative of the Carleton University Student Association (CUSA):
“CUSA is a pro-choice organization,” said Sam Heaton, CUSA vice-president (student services) in an interview Oct. 18. “We do not fund through our clubs any pro-life or anti-choice material,” Heaton said.[2]
Can you believe the hypocrisy of this CUSA rep? This student organization is funded by the compulsory monies of ALL the students at the university, yet it has the gall to say, “CUSA is a pro-choice organization.” How can this be allowed in a supposedly free society, that students can be compelled and dictated to, and forced to pay money to a student organization that violates the principle of freedom of choice in a democracy? Not only do they support the "choice" to kill the pre-born, but they deny the "choice" of students to pay or not pay student fees--to an organization that takes a position on matters that differs from the very students who pay fees! But hey, based on the evidence, I believe there is no democracy at Carleton University, only hypocrisy and discrimination.
Still, the president of the university tells us in her Globe and Mail article, “Education promotes civic engagement and is essential for democratic governance.” Pardon me while I laugh at her words, because it appears on the evidence that “democratic governance” is a sham at Carleton University. If the university was “democratic” it would not have had its pro-life students arrested. If the university was “democratic” it would take action against CUSA for discriminating against the pro-life students. If the university was democratic, it would not collect the compulsory student monies and hand them over to CUSA.
But CUSA and the university appear to be on the same rotten page. Therefore, one can only conclude regarding what has happened to the pro-life students that hypocrisy and discrimination are rampant at Carleton University.
Stephen J. Gray
November 28, 2010.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/opinions/without-access-to-education-wealth-disappears/article1672570/
[2] http://www.charlatan.ca/content/pro-life-group-gets-pulled
Thursday, October 14, 2010
Are We Seeing Hypocrisy at the National Post?
The National Post of October 8, 2010 had the headline: “Do graphic anti-abortion posters cross a moral line?”
The article was raising questions about the use of graphic images by pro-life students at Carleton University. The article went on to state, “The incident raises serious questions about the use of horror and disturbing images as tools for protest and social change. Does one person’s right to free speech trump another person’s right to not be confronted by distasteful and disturbing images? Is it right, even moral, to use bodily remains to make a political point?” Oh really, this is the same National Post which states:
“Editor's note on graphic images from Haiti”
“Posted: January 15, 2010, 12:05 PM by Shane Dingman. 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. They communicate in a powerful manner the true horror of what has taken place in that country….” [1] (emphasis added)
The students at Carleton University were trying to show the “true horror” that is taking place in our country and others by showing the atrocities and slaughter committed by abortionists on the innocent victims who are exterminated by “choice.” Yet the National Post had the hypocrisy to talk about “crossing a moral line.” Surely, it is immoral to hide the evidence in any atrocity and any attempt to impose censorship on those who show the truth is surely hypocrisy.
I believe the hypocrisy of trying to make a case for censorship was alive and well in the National Post article of October 8, 2010. The writer of the article managed to find some “experts” who appeared to be in favor of censoring the graphic pictures of the slaughter of the voiceless innocents by abortion. I believe a more honest and truthful headline would have been, “Why does the media fail to show the slaughtered victims of abortion?” The article goes on to quote a “respected ethicist” who is against the showing of pictures of the atrocities. One would have thought that any “respected ethicist” would wish that the evidence be shown of the slaughter of the innocents.
The article then quotes, “John Haas, the president of the U.S. National Catholic Bioethics Center, a pro-life activist” who is quoted as saying, “…use of graphic images raises serious moral issues.” Somebody should tell Mr. Haas that the Catholic Church is full of graphic images of the crucified and bloodstained Jesus, nails driven through his hands and feet, blood pouring from his side and wearing a crown of thorns. Would Mr. Haas censor the atrocities committed on Jesus?
The article then quotes Tony Kerr, advertising program chair at the Ontario College of Art and Design in Toronto, who says this about the Carleton students using graphic images, “The students have chosen a low road…awareness is great, but does all this awareness save anyone? If I was their creative director I would tell them, ‘Awareness is not a business plan.’ ”
We are not talking “business plans” here, we are talking about the obscene business of killing by abortion. Still, one must say the writer of this article in the National Post managed to find “experts” who support the continued censoring of the slaughter of the innocents by abortion. The only other “expert” missing was Henry Morgentaler, Canada’s foremost abortionist and Order of Canada recipient, who I believe, would have concurred with the “ethicist”, the “pro-life activist”, and the “advertising program chair.”
Stephen J. Gray
October 14, 2010.
Note: See the innocents slaughtered by abortion at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Endnotes:
[1] http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/editors/archive/2010/01/15/381547.aspx
The article was raising questions about the use of graphic images by pro-life students at Carleton University. The article went on to state, “The incident raises serious questions about the use of horror and disturbing images as tools for protest and social change. Does one person’s right to free speech trump another person’s right to not be confronted by distasteful and disturbing images? Is it right, even moral, to use bodily remains to make a political point?” Oh really, this is the same National Post which states:
“Editor's note on graphic images from Haiti”
“Posted: January 15, 2010, 12:05 PM by Shane Dingman. 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. They communicate in a powerful manner the true horror of what has taken place in that country….” [1] (emphasis added)
The students at Carleton University were trying to show the “true horror” that is taking place in our country and others by showing the atrocities and slaughter committed by abortionists on the innocent victims who are exterminated by “choice.” Yet the National Post had the hypocrisy to talk about “crossing a moral line.” Surely, it is immoral to hide the evidence in any atrocity and any attempt to impose censorship on those who show the truth is surely hypocrisy.
I believe the hypocrisy of trying to make a case for censorship was alive and well in the National Post article of October 8, 2010. The writer of the article managed to find some “experts” who appeared to be in favor of censoring the graphic pictures of the slaughter of the voiceless innocents by abortion. I believe a more honest and truthful headline would have been, “Why does the media fail to show the slaughtered victims of abortion?” The article goes on to quote a “respected ethicist” who is against the showing of pictures of the atrocities. One would have thought that any “respected ethicist” would wish that the evidence be shown of the slaughter of the innocents.
The article then quotes, “John Haas, the president of the U.S. National Catholic Bioethics Center, a pro-life activist” who is quoted as saying, “…use of graphic images raises serious moral issues.” Somebody should tell Mr. Haas that the Catholic Church is full of graphic images of the crucified and bloodstained Jesus, nails driven through his hands and feet, blood pouring from his side and wearing a crown of thorns. Would Mr. Haas censor the atrocities committed on Jesus?
The article then quotes Tony Kerr, advertising program chair at the Ontario College of Art and Design in Toronto, who says this about the Carleton students using graphic images, “The students have chosen a low road…awareness is great, but does all this awareness save anyone? If I was their creative director I would tell them, ‘Awareness is not a business plan.’ ”
We are not talking “business plans” here, we are talking about the obscene business of killing by abortion. Still, one must say the writer of this article in the National Post managed to find “experts” who support the continued censoring of the slaughter of the innocents by abortion. The only other “expert” missing was Henry Morgentaler, Canada’s foremost abortionist and Order of Canada recipient, who I believe, would have concurred with the “ethicist”, the “pro-life activist”, and the “advertising program chair.”
Stephen J. Gray
October 14, 2010.
Note: See the innocents slaughtered by abortion at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Endnotes:
[1] http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/editors/archive/2010/01/15/381547.aspx
Sunday, October 10, 2010
The Dictators of Austerity
“…IMF-imposed austerity runs the real risk of plunging Ireland deeper into depression and deflation.” Financial Times, September 27, 2010.
Austerity measures are being imposed by governments of a number of countries on their populations at the behest of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF is an unelected, appointed cabal of bankers that is financed by the tax dollars of the people of various countries. The people of these countries supposedly elect democratic governments to run their systems. Therefore, the question has to be asked: Why are their governments taking orders from unelected bankers? Who are these bankers who seem to have power over the peoples elected representatives? Why are these representatives of the people punishing their own people on instructions from the dictators of austerity?
Austerity is being imposed on the people of Greece, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Iceland and other countries on instructions from the IMF, which raises the question: why bother electing governments if the International Moneychangers are going to dictate policy? And just what is the policy of the IMF? Are they planning some kind of global governance?
“The Group of Twenty ("G-20") nations, the new Financial Stability Board ("FSB"), and the International Monetary Fund ("IMF") are progressing on two fronts: the monitoring and revision of national and regional economic plans to facilitate global economic governance…” [1]
Oh really, the G20 is allowing the IMF “to facilitate global economic governance.” One wonders, how does the taxpayers of all the different countries feel about being “governed” by unelected bankers? And were the people of the countries in the G20 ever asked whether they wanted this scheme for “global governance?” In fact, dare one ask the question: Is this a form of political treason being enacted by some politicians selling out their national sovereignty?
The Managing Director of the IMF is quoted as saying this:
‘I believe the world is ready for a shift to this more “systemic” vision of IMF surveillance.’ [2]
So there you have it an unelected banker believes we are all ready to accept “IMF surveillance.” Many people in the world are starting to believe it is perhaps the bankers who need to be under surveillance. After all, the present financial crisis was caused in part by bankers and financiers peddling useless financial paper and some are even calling it a financial fraud of massive proportions. Then the bankers got bailed out with tax-payers dollars. So if the IMF is into “surveillance” perhaps it should start with taking a hard look at the brotherhood of bankers and central bankers who are running the financial system.
Finally, if it wasn’t so serious, it would be laughable. Did you ever see a bigger financial farce than this? Taxpayers of various countries who finance the IMF and whose taxes pay the bankers wages are being punished by these same unelected dictators of austerity! We are already seeing riots in a number of countries, perhaps the time has come to declare the bankers bankrupt and impose austerity on them. Or as one writer put it bluntly in an article headlined, “IMF Article Predicts New World Order”: “The IMF…[has a] history of reducing middle classes around the world to ruin…” [3]
When one sees the ruin and devastation imposed on the populations of a number of countries one can only agree that these dictators of austerity need to be fired before they do any more damage.
Stephen J. Gray
October 10, 2010.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.globalgovernancewatch.org/spotlight_on_sovereignty/g20-and-imf-officials-institutionalize-economic-global-governance
[2] http://www.imf.org/external/np/speeches/2010/022610.htm
[3] http://www.thedailybell.com/1425/IMF-Article-Predicts-New-World-Order.html
Austerity measures are being imposed by governments of a number of countries on their populations at the behest of the International Monetary Fund (IMF). The IMF is an unelected, appointed cabal of bankers that is financed by the tax dollars of the people of various countries. The people of these countries supposedly elect democratic governments to run their systems. Therefore, the question has to be asked: Why are their governments taking orders from unelected bankers? Who are these bankers who seem to have power over the peoples elected representatives? Why are these representatives of the people punishing their own people on instructions from the dictators of austerity?
Austerity is being imposed on the people of Greece, Ireland, Spain, Portugal, Iceland and other countries on instructions from the IMF, which raises the question: why bother electing governments if the International Moneychangers are going to dictate policy? And just what is the policy of the IMF? Are they planning some kind of global governance?
“The Group of Twenty ("G-20") nations, the new Financial Stability Board ("FSB"), and the International Monetary Fund ("IMF") are progressing on two fronts: the monitoring and revision of national and regional economic plans to facilitate global economic governance…” [1]
Oh really, the G20 is allowing the IMF “to facilitate global economic governance.” One wonders, how does the taxpayers of all the different countries feel about being “governed” by unelected bankers? And were the people of the countries in the G20 ever asked whether they wanted this scheme for “global governance?” In fact, dare one ask the question: Is this a form of political treason being enacted by some politicians selling out their national sovereignty?
The Managing Director of the IMF is quoted as saying this:
‘I believe the world is ready for a shift to this more “systemic” vision of IMF surveillance.’ [2]
So there you have it an unelected banker believes we are all ready to accept “IMF surveillance.” Many people in the world are starting to believe it is perhaps the bankers who need to be under surveillance. After all, the present financial crisis was caused in part by bankers and financiers peddling useless financial paper and some are even calling it a financial fraud of massive proportions. Then the bankers got bailed out with tax-payers dollars. So if the IMF is into “surveillance” perhaps it should start with taking a hard look at the brotherhood of bankers and central bankers who are running the financial system.
Finally, if it wasn’t so serious, it would be laughable. Did you ever see a bigger financial farce than this? Taxpayers of various countries who finance the IMF and whose taxes pay the bankers wages are being punished by these same unelected dictators of austerity! We are already seeing riots in a number of countries, perhaps the time has come to declare the bankers bankrupt and impose austerity on them. Or as one writer put it bluntly in an article headlined, “IMF Article Predicts New World Order”: “The IMF…[has a] history of reducing middle classes around the world to ruin…” [3]
When one sees the ruin and devastation imposed on the populations of a number of countries one can only agree that these dictators of austerity need to be fired before they do any more damage.
Stephen J. Gray
October 10, 2010.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.globalgovernancewatch.org/spotlight_on_sovereignty/g20-and-imf-officials-institutionalize-economic-global-governance
[2] http://www.imf.org/external/np/speeches/2010/022610.htm
[3] http://www.thedailybell.com/1425/IMF-Article-Predicts-New-World-Order.html
Saturday, October 9, 2010
The Hidden Slaughtered Victims
Note: I wrote the article below in 2005. It is still pertinent today. SJG.
“Things that cannot stand sunlight are not healthful” Harry Emerson Fosdick
An atrocity today that cannot stand the light and is not ‘healthful’ to the victims who are killed by it; is abortion. Anyone daring to show the bloody abused and slaughtered bodies of unborn babies killed by abortion or “choice” - as its proponents call it - are attacked and vilified for showing the truth. (they are even attacked by some so-called ethicists and supposed pro-lifers) We live in a society that pretends “choice” is wonderful and that there are no victims. There are two victims in this atrocity; the mother who is told that what is inside her is “tissue” and is “disposable” and the child who is the victim of “disposable choice.” Disguised as “choice” this “procedure” eliminates over 100,000 human lives a year in Canada. There is a wealth of information available on the humanity of the unborn baby, who can be seen on ultra sound, and is operated on to correct any health problems when the child is “wanted.” When not “wanted” the lie is continually perpetrated that the child is only “potential life.” And that “choice” is good.
The big lie of “choice” is spread by most of the media, and hailed by most politicians as a “right” to be protected, especially at election time. “Choice” is an election slogan, as witness our democratically challenged prime minister trumpeting it in the last election. Yet, “choice” kills. This “choice” propaganda is worthy of Josef Goebbels himself. He surely would have approved of these peddlers of propaganda. Tell the big lie often enough and it attains credibility. Yet, for a lie to remain as a “truth” the lie has to continue to be disseminated. This is why the media will not show the carved up and headless bodies of babies killed by abortion. They have already committed themselves as supporters of “choice” and so one lie begets another. There are no victims in abortion according to the powers that be. Therefore there is no evidence to be shown. Or to paraphrase an old saying lives deemed unworthy of living are called “choice.”
Yet some choices are bad. When somebody chose to kill bald eagles recently, the media gave this story big coverage and even showed the carved up carcases of the eagles. Questions were asked as to who was committing these atrocities and it was stated the police were investigating. The message was: Killing eagles is unacceptable and rightly so. But, in our local slaughterhouses, called abortion clinics, killing babies is acceptable. These places are described as promoting “healthcare choices.” When the language is perverted then anything is possible and permissible. After all “choice” is not horrific is it?
Most people are horrified when they see pictures on TV of baby seals being clubbed to death and the ice flows running red with their blood. Warnings are issued on TV before showing the pictures and we are told the images are gruesome. Imagine if these same TV cameras took us inside the local abortuary where babies are slaughtered, suctioned out, poisoned by a saline solution or in some cases born alive and left to die. The people would then be able to see these grisly medical butchers at work performing “choice” for the nation. Then the truth and the light would be shed on this abominable choice, and the babies killed and mutilated by abortion would no longer be the hidden slaughtered victims.
Note: To see the truth about abortion go to: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Stephen J. Gray
July 29, 2005.
“Things that cannot stand sunlight are not healthful” Harry Emerson Fosdick
An atrocity today that cannot stand the light and is not ‘healthful’ to the victims who are killed by it; is abortion. Anyone daring to show the bloody abused and slaughtered bodies of unborn babies killed by abortion or “choice” - as its proponents call it - are attacked and vilified for showing the truth. (they are even attacked by some so-called ethicists and supposed pro-lifers) We live in a society that pretends “choice” is wonderful and that there are no victims. There are two victims in this atrocity; the mother who is told that what is inside her is “tissue” and is “disposable” and the child who is the victim of “disposable choice.” Disguised as “choice” this “procedure” eliminates over 100,000 human lives a year in Canada. There is a wealth of information available on the humanity of the unborn baby, who can be seen on ultra sound, and is operated on to correct any health problems when the child is “wanted.” When not “wanted” the lie is continually perpetrated that the child is only “potential life.” And that “choice” is good.
The big lie of “choice” is spread by most of the media, and hailed by most politicians as a “right” to be protected, especially at election time. “Choice” is an election slogan, as witness our democratically challenged prime minister trumpeting it in the last election. Yet, “choice” kills. This “choice” propaganda is worthy of Josef Goebbels himself. He surely would have approved of these peddlers of propaganda. Tell the big lie often enough and it attains credibility. Yet, for a lie to remain as a “truth” the lie has to continue to be disseminated. This is why the media will not show the carved up and headless bodies of babies killed by abortion. They have already committed themselves as supporters of “choice” and so one lie begets another. There are no victims in abortion according to the powers that be. Therefore there is no evidence to be shown. Or to paraphrase an old saying lives deemed unworthy of living are called “choice.”
Yet some choices are bad. When somebody chose to kill bald eagles recently, the media gave this story big coverage and even showed the carved up carcases of the eagles. Questions were asked as to who was committing these atrocities and it was stated the police were investigating. The message was: Killing eagles is unacceptable and rightly so. But, in our local slaughterhouses, called abortion clinics, killing babies is acceptable. These places are described as promoting “healthcare choices.” When the language is perverted then anything is possible and permissible. After all “choice” is not horrific is it?
Most people are horrified when they see pictures on TV of baby seals being clubbed to death and the ice flows running red with their blood. Warnings are issued on TV before showing the pictures and we are told the images are gruesome. Imagine if these same TV cameras took us inside the local abortuary where babies are slaughtered, suctioned out, poisoned by a saline solution or in some cases born alive and left to die. The people would then be able to see these grisly medical butchers at work performing “choice” for the nation. Then the truth and the light would be shed on this abominable choice, and the babies killed and mutilated by abortion would no longer be the hidden slaughtered victims.
Note: To see the truth about abortion go to: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Stephen J. Gray
July 29, 2005.
Sunday, September 26, 2010
The Hate Crime That Goes Unpunished
In our society today there are victims who get no justice, no protection from the law, are deemed unwanted, and are therefore candidates for killing. This killing is state sanctioned and carried out by trained assassins who get paid for their grisly work. One of these workers in the fields of bloody human butchery even received his country’s highest award for his “accomplishments.” Some in the media even called him a “hero,” and some decent people who spoke out against this perversion of the political order were vilified for daring to speak out.
Speaking out or daring to show pictures of these innocent butchered hate crime victims can get one arrested or disciplined by the powers that be in this hypocrisy of a “free country.” Still, this country does have a “Charter of Rights” that allows criminals protection who land on its shores, orgies are okay as long as “no harm” is done, the perverts work has “artistic merit” and judges can “read in” words not written in the constitution. Debasement, depravity and distortion have become legitimate; therefore, it should be no surprise that ethics and morality in the land have become twisted judicially and politically.
Politicians bend to the cries of the harridans of “choice” who consider it a “right” to kill the child in the womb. Many of these politicians stand for nothing and will say and do anything to get elected. Most of them boast they are in favor of “freedom of choice” to kill the unwanted child in the womb. One even reportedly said that he would never allow a vote to stop the killing of these innocents who are unwanted. Another politician even described the slaughter of these innocent victims as “safe medical services.” One wonders what is “safe” about cutting to pieces, poisoning by a saline solution, having a sharp knife pierce the brain of the living victim and suctioning out his/her brain? Some of these hate crime victims have even been known to survive the attacks by the medical butchers and have been born alive but are left to die.
This is a country with a dead conscience. Except of course if it is dead slaughtered seals, eagles, whales, owls, dogs, cats, horses, ducks, grizzly bears etc. then all hell breaks loose if it is seen that that these non-humans have been subject to cruel and atrocious practices. (and rightly so.) Numerous written media and TV programmes will display and publicize the attacks and killing of these non-humans. But, the hate crimes against the humans who are unwanted and slaughtered are covered up by the so-called “investigative media.” No pictures are shown, the victims are hidden and this abominable criminal slaughter is called a “choice,” and one might say it is aided and abetted by these phony media who are supposed to be “searchers for truth.”
Truth has become a prisoner and is gagged and bound by those who should be protecting it. There is an evil loose in the land and this evil allows the continued extermination of these voiceless innocents who are unwanted. This hate crime agenda goes unpunished and the guilty roam free in this perverted land.
Note: See the innocent victims massacred by hate crimes at http://www.AbortionNo.org
Stephen J. Gray
September 26,2010.
Speaking out or daring to show pictures of these innocent butchered hate crime victims can get one arrested or disciplined by the powers that be in this hypocrisy of a “free country.” Still, this country does have a “Charter of Rights” that allows criminals protection who land on its shores, orgies are okay as long as “no harm” is done, the perverts work has “artistic merit” and judges can “read in” words not written in the constitution. Debasement, depravity and distortion have become legitimate; therefore, it should be no surprise that ethics and morality in the land have become twisted judicially and politically.
Politicians bend to the cries of the harridans of “choice” who consider it a “right” to kill the child in the womb. Many of these politicians stand for nothing and will say and do anything to get elected. Most of them boast they are in favor of “freedom of choice” to kill the unwanted child in the womb. One even reportedly said that he would never allow a vote to stop the killing of these innocents who are unwanted. Another politician even described the slaughter of these innocent victims as “safe medical services.” One wonders what is “safe” about cutting to pieces, poisoning by a saline solution, having a sharp knife pierce the brain of the living victim and suctioning out his/her brain? Some of these hate crime victims have even been known to survive the attacks by the medical butchers and have been born alive but are left to die.
This is a country with a dead conscience. Except of course if it is dead slaughtered seals, eagles, whales, owls, dogs, cats, horses, ducks, grizzly bears etc. then all hell breaks loose if it is seen that that these non-humans have been subject to cruel and atrocious practices. (and rightly so.) Numerous written media and TV programmes will display and publicize the attacks and killing of these non-humans. But, the hate crimes against the humans who are unwanted and slaughtered are covered up by the so-called “investigative media.” No pictures are shown, the victims are hidden and this abominable criminal slaughter is called a “choice,” and one might say it is aided and abetted by these phony media who are supposed to be “searchers for truth.”
Truth has become a prisoner and is gagged and bound by those who should be protecting it. There is an evil loose in the land and this evil allows the continued extermination of these voiceless innocents who are unwanted. This hate crime agenda goes unpunished and the guilty roam free in this perverted land.
Note: See the innocent victims massacred by hate crimes at http://www.AbortionNo.org
Stephen J. Gray
September 26,2010.
Monday, August 23, 2010
A Bankster’s Wisdom
A Bankster’s Wisdom
Satire By Stephen J. Gray
As an honorable member of the financial profession I am fed up hearing snide remarks about financial fraud. Sure, we sold what some are calling “toxic assets” to pension plans, state governments, mutual finds, and everybody and anybody who would buy them. And certainly we were selling ourselves out of these investments while promoting them as a good buy. Some are even calling this misrepresentation, or fraud! Still, some people are hard to please. But, this is how the system works: this was free enterprise at its finest. Instead of criticism we should be getting plaudits for creating and inventing a market for the buying and selling of debt-ridden financial paper.
There are reportedly trillions of this financial paper out there waiting to be snapped up. Who will take it is the problem, but a solution will be found. We are very creative in this business of finance, and that old saying holds true: “there are suckers born every minute.” And we await the suckers, oops, I mean the investors.
Meanwhile, governments invested in our financial problems, and they came through with flying colors, bailing us out with trillions of tax-payers’ cash when we were financially strapped. Some cynics were even calling it corporate socialism. Envy is a terrible thing and all because we were bailed out. The wording is more appropriate now; they don’t call it bailouts anymore. It’s called stimulus funds and I must admit stimulus does have a more respectable ring to it. Some people are calling it rewarding fraudsters, and you know hearing that kind of defamatory comment makes my blood boil. We tried to help people in their investment portfolios and this is the thanks we get.
Okay, the financial system is now in the dumpster and millions have lost their jobs. There are a reportedly 40 million plus on food-stamps in the greatest country on earth, and that is surely good that the system helps the less fortunate. We have a recession right now and everybody needs to practice austerity, except us of course. Money is our messiah, and one of our own did say we were doing, “God’s work.” One does not get higher praise than that. Oh, I know there are those who will say, “tax-payers bailed out you fraudsters with trillions,” and some of these same taxpayers are now unemployed and getting food stamps, but hey we can’t all be winners. There have to be some losers otherwise how would the market survive?
Surviving in the market will be the topic of my next investment seminar and hopefully many people will attend and hear about the buying opportunities now available. But, I digress. Now back to my take on the financial system (It’s offshore).
The system right now is broke, except of course for those who use offshore tax havens. There has to be safe havens somewhere from governments. Government printing presses are running hot trying to keep up with demand for more financial paper, also known as money. I say money is not a problem when there are tax-payers’ monies available to keep the financial system stable. A stable financial system can become unstable if it is used and abused by financial charlatans. Therefore it is people like us that are needed to run the system? After all, who would advise governments on monetary policy? Who would loan people their own money?
I believe we are indispensable to the common good. Still, it hurts immensely when I hear some people calling for jail time and saying we committed financial fraud. But, we will not stoop to the level of our accusers. We are pillars of society who keep the free market functioning and just went through a rough time. Tax-payers’ dollars pulled us through and now we are back to business as usual. In closing, I say thank you to all the taxpayers out there. If you need a loan, please come and see us; after all, it is your money that kept us in business.
Stephen J. Gray
August 23, 2010.
Satire By Stephen J. Gray
As an honorable member of the financial profession I am fed up hearing snide remarks about financial fraud. Sure, we sold what some are calling “toxic assets” to pension plans, state governments, mutual finds, and everybody and anybody who would buy them. And certainly we were selling ourselves out of these investments while promoting them as a good buy. Some are even calling this misrepresentation, or fraud! Still, some people are hard to please. But, this is how the system works: this was free enterprise at its finest. Instead of criticism we should be getting plaudits for creating and inventing a market for the buying and selling of debt-ridden financial paper.
There are reportedly trillions of this financial paper out there waiting to be snapped up. Who will take it is the problem, but a solution will be found. We are very creative in this business of finance, and that old saying holds true: “there are suckers born every minute.” And we await the suckers, oops, I mean the investors.
Meanwhile, governments invested in our financial problems, and they came through with flying colors, bailing us out with trillions of tax-payers’ cash when we were financially strapped. Some cynics were even calling it corporate socialism. Envy is a terrible thing and all because we were bailed out. The wording is more appropriate now; they don’t call it bailouts anymore. It’s called stimulus funds and I must admit stimulus does have a more respectable ring to it. Some people are calling it rewarding fraudsters, and you know hearing that kind of defamatory comment makes my blood boil. We tried to help people in their investment portfolios and this is the thanks we get.
Okay, the financial system is now in the dumpster and millions have lost their jobs. There are a reportedly 40 million plus on food-stamps in the greatest country on earth, and that is surely good that the system helps the less fortunate. We have a recession right now and everybody needs to practice austerity, except us of course. Money is our messiah, and one of our own did say we were doing, “God’s work.” One does not get higher praise than that. Oh, I know there are those who will say, “tax-payers bailed out you fraudsters with trillions,” and some of these same taxpayers are now unemployed and getting food stamps, but hey we can’t all be winners. There have to be some losers otherwise how would the market survive?
Surviving in the market will be the topic of my next investment seminar and hopefully many people will attend and hear about the buying opportunities now available. But, I digress. Now back to my take on the financial system (It’s offshore).
The system right now is broke, except of course for those who use offshore tax havens. There has to be safe havens somewhere from governments. Government printing presses are running hot trying to keep up with demand for more financial paper, also known as money. I say money is not a problem when there are tax-payers’ monies available to keep the financial system stable. A stable financial system can become unstable if it is used and abused by financial charlatans. Therefore it is people like us that are needed to run the system? After all, who would advise governments on monetary policy? Who would loan people their own money?
I believe we are indispensable to the common good. Still, it hurts immensely when I hear some people calling for jail time and saying we committed financial fraud. But, we will not stoop to the level of our accusers. We are pillars of society who keep the free market functioning and just went through a rough time. Tax-payers’ dollars pulled us through and now we are back to business as usual. In closing, I say thank you to all the taxpayers out there. If you need a loan, please come and see us; after all, it is your money that kept us in business.
Stephen J. Gray
August 23, 2010.
Thursday, July 22, 2010
A Report to Stakeholders in the Organized Crime Business
It has been another eventful year in our business, and even though there is a so-called recession we have escaped unscathed. In fact, we were able to do some good deeds and help out some financial institutions. We were hoping that these good works of ours would remain anonymous, but it was reported in a newspaper that, our drug money saved some banks during the financial crisis. Still, one good deed begets another and some banks have been laundering our drug money for us. This was reported in some media, but hey, nobody went to jail and we should be thankful for that.
There are some worrying things happening though. We used to have the numbers rackets all to ourselves, now governments are into gambling in a big way with lotteries of all kinds. And some of these governments are into online computer gambling as well, and there have been reports that some government casinos were being used to launder money. What’s an honest crook to do when the government muscles in on their territory? Perhaps, we will have to try running for public office and get ourselves the reins of power. Talking about power, have you noticed none of the really big boys in the financial industry have gone to jail over the fraudulent “toxic assets” scam? Times sure have changed at one time hard time was done when massive fraud was perpetrated. Now the respectable villains get bailed out by tax-payers monies and some of them have been known to advise governments.
Many of these governments have adapted much of our ways of doing business. For instance, in the extortion rackets we keep raising the amounts of money that the stiffs have to pay us. Now governments extort huge amounts of money from the people, only they call them taxes, and they dream up new ways to extort more money from the taxpayers, and it’s all done legally. No doubt about it, honesty is the best policy, as the saying goes, but still the taxpayers complain.
Here is another complaint about what is happening to our business. At one time we ran the porn industry, now it has gone main-stream and some of the big corporations and entertainment industry are heavily invested in it. In fact, according to one report annual revenues are in the billions for these pillars of society. Another media report stated that some of the finest financial firms in the world had speculated in food causing massive starvation in poor countries. Notice the contradiction we are vilified in our business, while the admirable speculators who cause starvation are hailed as brilliant and respected financiers! As, I said earlier, what do honest crooks do when their operations are taken over by respectable institutions? Still, I guess that’s free enterprise! But, it makes one wonder; whatever happened to decency, morality and ethics in business? It’s getting harder and harder to understand what is criminal and what is not! Sometimes, I think we are being discriminated against. We got jail time for pushing porn and selling fraudulent securities, now it appears to be acceptable.
I guess we have to accept this is the society we live in today. What was a crime yesterday does not appear to be a crime today. Change is here and we must change with the times. Convergence has arrived and it seems some criminality has become the norm. Therefore, we must put the old days behind us and work within the system that is using our ideas and business practices.
Satire by Stephen J. Gray
July 22, 2010.
There are some worrying things happening though. We used to have the numbers rackets all to ourselves, now governments are into gambling in a big way with lotteries of all kinds. And some of these governments are into online computer gambling as well, and there have been reports that some government casinos were being used to launder money. What’s an honest crook to do when the government muscles in on their territory? Perhaps, we will have to try running for public office and get ourselves the reins of power. Talking about power, have you noticed none of the really big boys in the financial industry have gone to jail over the fraudulent “toxic assets” scam? Times sure have changed at one time hard time was done when massive fraud was perpetrated. Now the respectable villains get bailed out by tax-payers monies and some of them have been known to advise governments.
Many of these governments have adapted much of our ways of doing business. For instance, in the extortion rackets we keep raising the amounts of money that the stiffs have to pay us. Now governments extort huge amounts of money from the people, only they call them taxes, and they dream up new ways to extort more money from the taxpayers, and it’s all done legally. No doubt about it, honesty is the best policy, as the saying goes, but still the taxpayers complain.
Here is another complaint about what is happening to our business. At one time we ran the porn industry, now it has gone main-stream and some of the big corporations and entertainment industry are heavily invested in it. In fact, according to one report annual revenues are in the billions for these pillars of society. Another media report stated that some of the finest financial firms in the world had speculated in food causing massive starvation in poor countries. Notice the contradiction we are vilified in our business, while the admirable speculators who cause starvation are hailed as brilliant and respected financiers! As, I said earlier, what do honest crooks do when their operations are taken over by respectable institutions? Still, I guess that’s free enterprise! But, it makes one wonder; whatever happened to decency, morality and ethics in business? It’s getting harder and harder to understand what is criminal and what is not! Sometimes, I think we are being discriminated against. We got jail time for pushing porn and selling fraudulent securities, now it appears to be acceptable.
I guess we have to accept this is the society we live in today. What was a crime yesterday does not appear to be a crime today. Change is here and we must change with the times. Convergence has arrived and it seems some criminality has become the norm. Therefore, we must put the old days behind us and work within the system that is using our ideas and business practices.
Satire by Stephen J. Gray
July 22, 2010.
Tuesday, June 29, 2010
Are We Being Ruled By A Travelling Politburo?
Are We Being Ruled By A Travelling Politburo?
Politburo: “the executive committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and of certain other nations”
( http://www.yourdictionary.com/politburo )
We see many leaders of nations travelling to different countries each year to hold meetings. Example: The G20 and the G8, the most recent example was in Toronto, Canada, where many of them congregated to discuss World Policy. In fact a number of media outlets, were calling this gathering a, “World Summit.” Which begs the question: When did the peoples’ of many of these different countries who still have a supposed “parliamentary system” hand over their national sovereignty to a travelling politburo? Are we being conditioned to accept some form of “World Government?” Or is it already here? After all, we have a “World Bank,” a “World Health Organization,” a “World Court,” an “International Monetary Fund,” which imposes austerity programmes on elected governments, so perhaps the world dictatorship has already arrived. But, we did not notice it happening. But, I digress. Now back to questions about the travelling politburo.
Are decisions being made and policies being designed to be implemented without discussion in national parliaments of the free world? Communist China is a dictatorship, yet it was a participant in these discussions by the travelling politburo. In fact its leader was an honored guest at a dinner put on by the Canadian government and attended by some powerful business interests. [1]
And the un-elected President of Europe, Herman Van Rompuy, was also a participant at these meetings. The Brussels Journal had this to say about the European Union (E.U)
“Vladimir Bukovksy, the 63-year old former Soviet dissident, fears that the European Union is on its way to becoming another Soviet Union. In a speech he delivered in Brussels last week Mr Bukovsky called the EU a “monster” that must be destroyed, the sooner the better, before it develops into a fullfledged totalitarian state.” [2]
One might ask the question: Are these heads of state giving up some of their national sovereignty? After all, whose interests are being served when these “leaders” of various countries are making decisions outside their parliaments without holding debates in their own countries about policies being enacted at these G8 and G20 meetings? And why are the parliamentary oppositions in all these countries not asking these questions? And one might ask: Why are the investigative media not asking pertinent questions about these meetings? Who is behind them? Who arranged them? Who started them? Are there other forces, unelected, behind the scenes the real powers that be? I believe, we need answers to these questions.
Other questions that could be asked are; why is there no clamp down on offshore tax havens? Another question: are these tax havens the places where many of the financial elites keep their money? We have seen huge amounts of the peoples’ tax dollars being used to bail out, oops, I mean stimulate financial institutions that in fact caused the present financial crisis. And some of these financial institutions have subsidiaries in offshore tax havens. But, instead, these so called leaders are talking about “deficits,” and “paying down the debt,” living within our means,” and all the other slogans they use to put the boots to the taxpayers. Meanwhile, the un-elected banksters are advising them on “monetary policy.”
“In recent months, G20 countries have submitted their economic plans to the IMF - which would then assess what the net impact would be on the global economy.” [3]
And “global economic governance” is now being facilitated.
“The Group of Twenty ("G-20") nations, the new Financial Stability Board ("FSB"), and the International Monetary Fund ("IMF") are progressing on two fronts: the monitoring and revision of national and regional economic plans to facilitate global economic governance…” [4]
And so the un-elected “advisers” for “global governance” have their travelling political politburo puppets making the decisions that are contrary to freedom and democracy.
Stephen J Gray
June 29, 2010.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/spector-vision/the-photo-harper-doesnt-want-you-to-see/article1617411/
[2] http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865
[3] http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/stephanieflanders/2010/06/imf_says_g20_could_do_better.html
[4]http://www.globalgovernancewatch.org/spotlight_on_sovereignty/g20-and-imf-officials-institutionalize-economic-global-governance
Further reading and links to articles below:
Bilderberg 2010: What we have learned
A huge agenda of global issues was crammed into four days of 'secret' meetings by a mysterious group of power brokers. But who elected them and why are we paying for them?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2010/jun/14/charlie-skelton-bilderberg-2010
THE BILDERBERG PLANNING SESSION ENDS: WHAT'S IN STORE?
http://www.libertynewsonline.com/article_323_29027.php
Politburo: “the executive committee of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and of certain other nations”
( http://www.yourdictionary.com/politburo )
We see many leaders of nations travelling to different countries each year to hold meetings. Example: The G20 and the G8, the most recent example was in Toronto, Canada, where many of them congregated to discuss World Policy. In fact a number of media outlets, were calling this gathering a, “World Summit.” Which begs the question: When did the peoples’ of many of these different countries who still have a supposed “parliamentary system” hand over their national sovereignty to a travelling politburo? Are we being conditioned to accept some form of “World Government?” Or is it already here? After all, we have a “World Bank,” a “World Health Organization,” a “World Court,” an “International Monetary Fund,” which imposes austerity programmes on elected governments, so perhaps the world dictatorship has already arrived. But, we did not notice it happening. But, I digress. Now back to questions about the travelling politburo.
Are decisions being made and policies being designed to be implemented without discussion in national parliaments of the free world? Communist China is a dictatorship, yet it was a participant in these discussions by the travelling politburo. In fact its leader was an honored guest at a dinner put on by the Canadian government and attended by some powerful business interests. [1]
And the un-elected President of Europe, Herman Van Rompuy, was also a participant at these meetings. The Brussels Journal had this to say about the European Union (E.U)
“Vladimir Bukovksy, the 63-year old former Soviet dissident, fears that the European Union is on its way to becoming another Soviet Union. In a speech he delivered in Brussels last week Mr Bukovsky called the EU a “monster” that must be destroyed, the sooner the better, before it develops into a fullfledged totalitarian state.” [2]
One might ask the question: Are these heads of state giving up some of their national sovereignty? After all, whose interests are being served when these “leaders” of various countries are making decisions outside their parliaments without holding debates in their own countries about policies being enacted at these G8 and G20 meetings? And why are the parliamentary oppositions in all these countries not asking these questions? And one might ask: Why are the investigative media not asking pertinent questions about these meetings? Who is behind them? Who arranged them? Who started them? Are there other forces, unelected, behind the scenes the real powers that be? I believe, we need answers to these questions.
Other questions that could be asked are; why is there no clamp down on offshore tax havens? Another question: are these tax havens the places where many of the financial elites keep their money? We have seen huge amounts of the peoples’ tax dollars being used to bail out, oops, I mean stimulate financial institutions that in fact caused the present financial crisis. And some of these financial institutions have subsidiaries in offshore tax havens. But, instead, these so called leaders are talking about “deficits,” and “paying down the debt,” living within our means,” and all the other slogans they use to put the boots to the taxpayers. Meanwhile, the un-elected banksters are advising them on “monetary policy.”
“In recent months, G20 countries have submitted their economic plans to the IMF - which would then assess what the net impact would be on the global economy.” [3]
And “global economic governance” is now being facilitated.
“The Group of Twenty ("G-20") nations, the new Financial Stability Board ("FSB"), and the International Monetary Fund ("IMF") are progressing on two fronts: the monitoring and revision of national and regional economic plans to facilitate global economic governance…” [4]
And so the un-elected “advisers” for “global governance” have their travelling political politburo puppets making the decisions that are contrary to freedom and democracy.
Stephen J Gray
June 29, 2010.
Endnotes:
[1] http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/politics/spector-vision/the-photo-harper-doesnt-want-you-to-see/article1617411/
[2] http://www.brusselsjournal.com/node/865
[3] http://www.bbc.co.uk/blogs/thereporters/stephanieflanders/2010/06/imf_says_g20_could_do_better.html
[4]http://www.globalgovernancewatch.org/spotlight_on_sovereignty/g20-and-imf-officials-institutionalize-economic-global-governance
Further reading and links to articles below:
Bilderberg 2010: What we have learned
A huge agenda of global issues was crammed into four days of 'secret' meetings by a mysterious group of power brokers. But who elected them and why are we paying for them?
http://www.guardian.co.uk/news/blog/2010/jun/14/charlie-skelton-bilderberg-2010
THE BILDERBERG PLANNING SESSION ENDS: WHAT'S IN STORE?
http://www.libertynewsonline.com/article_323_29027.php
Saturday, June 26, 2010
The Political School
I must say I am encouraged to see that we have a full class for the opening of the political school. For some time I have felt there was a need for this type of school. After all, we have schools for other occupations, such as plumbing, journalism, law, cooking, etc., so why not a political school? Looking at all you students eagerly awaiting training in this political school tells me just how much you all want to be involved in the political management of the country. It is good to see such interest.
I see from your resumes that you all come from various political backgrounds. Some want to be Socialist politicians, others Liberal and still others Conservative, with a small sprinkling of Communists, Greens and others. This is good, for we are a non-partisan school and with the blurring of political ideology, floor crossing, and double-crossing these days, political labels mean nothing. The job is the thing, and of course the remuneration that comes with it. With a starting salary of around $150,000 dollars a year plus expenses, pensions, and perks, this is a dream job (but a nightmare for the people who elected you). That is, of course, provided any of you reach the pinnacle of your political aspirations, which I am sure you will.
Where else can you get a starting salary of around $150,000 a year with no experience needed, no training, and no knowledge of how the political system works? Of course this is where the political school comes in: we will give you the tools to make a success of your political career should you manage to persuade the people to elect you in the party of your choice.
Now let us get down to the first lesson. When running for political office the first thing you must do is make nice sounding promises. Tell the people that you have a vision for the country, that you have a plan. What will your vision and plan be? This is entirely up to you. Visions and plans come in all shapes and sizes. Remember that old saying: “Throw the dogs a bone.” Well this saying holds true for people. Mind you, I am not saying people are dogs (much laughter from the class) but people do like to be fed things especially monetary promises from the taxes they have already paid. So promising them a financial inducement is always good bait in an election. Should you succeed and get into office and be government you can always renege on your promise. This is how politics works. First you ask for a cross next to your name at the ballot box then you double cross the stiffs, oops, I mean the people, once you are elected.
(More laughter ensues and the trainee politicians bang their desks just like the elected politicians do in parliament.) The teacher continues: Wow, I see most of you have learned the desk-banging trick; well done. Now as I was saying before the interruption by your quickly-learned “parliamentary procedure,” a good example of this reneging on a promise is the hated Gobbling Suckers Tax (GST). Now it is accepted and brings in billions of dollars to government coffers, and now there is another tax in the offing called the Hammer the Serfs Tax (HST) But, I digress.
Another important lesson you will learn at our school is Political speak or Poli-speak as I like to call it. I will give you an example, seeing it is your first day, but we will go into Poli-speak at length in your next lesson. Here is an example of words you will have to learn in a crisis situation: “We must move forward in this complex situation, with a measured response, but it is a challenge and challenges are good. We can become better persons because of them and fulfill our hopes and dreams in the process. Read my lips no more taxes.” So what does that all mean? It means nothing, nothing at all. They are just words to use or should I say political B.S. in a crisis situation and something for the media to report and for the masses to read in the newspapers. But the words sound good and that is what I call Poli-speak.
Notice all the words I’ve used are positive, and this is the way you will learn to speak even when, as politicians, you are, as the old saying goes, “caught with your pants down” and in poop up to your eyeballs. But, if you know the right words, all can be made clean. (More laughter ensues, and all the class seem to be enjoying the course.) And so ended the first day of the political school.
Stephen J. Gray
June 26, 2010.
I see from your resumes that you all come from various political backgrounds. Some want to be Socialist politicians, others Liberal and still others Conservative, with a small sprinkling of Communists, Greens and others. This is good, for we are a non-partisan school and with the blurring of political ideology, floor crossing, and double-crossing these days, political labels mean nothing. The job is the thing, and of course the remuneration that comes with it. With a starting salary of around $150,000 dollars a year plus expenses, pensions, and perks, this is a dream job (but a nightmare for the people who elected you). That is, of course, provided any of you reach the pinnacle of your political aspirations, which I am sure you will.
Where else can you get a starting salary of around $150,000 a year with no experience needed, no training, and no knowledge of how the political system works? Of course this is where the political school comes in: we will give you the tools to make a success of your political career should you manage to persuade the people to elect you in the party of your choice.
Now let us get down to the first lesson. When running for political office the first thing you must do is make nice sounding promises. Tell the people that you have a vision for the country, that you have a plan. What will your vision and plan be? This is entirely up to you. Visions and plans come in all shapes and sizes. Remember that old saying: “Throw the dogs a bone.” Well this saying holds true for people. Mind you, I am not saying people are dogs (much laughter from the class) but people do like to be fed things especially monetary promises from the taxes they have already paid. So promising them a financial inducement is always good bait in an election. Should you succeed and get into office and be government you can always renege on your promise. This is how politics works. First you ask for a cross next to your name at the ballot box then you double cross the stiffs, oops, I mean the people, once you are elected.
(More laughter ensues and the trainee politicians bang their desks just like the elected politicians do in parliament.) The teacher continues: Wow, I see most of you have learned the desk-banging trick; well done. Now as I was saying before the interruption by your quickly-learned “parliamentary procedure,” a good example of this reneging on a promise is the hated Gobbling Suckers Tax (GST). Now it is accepted and brings in billions of dollars to government coffers, and now there is another tax in the offing called the Hammer the Serfs Tax (HST) But, I digress.
Another important lesson you will learn at our school is Political speak or Poli-speak as I like to call it. I will give you an example, seeing it is your first day, but we will go into Poli-speak at length in your next lesson. Here is an example of words you will have to learn in a crisis situation: “We must move forward in this complex situation, with a measured response, but it is a challenge and challenges are good. We can become better persons because of them and fulfill our hopes and dreams in the process. Read my lips no more taxes.” So what does that all mean? It means nothing, nothing at all. They are just words to use or should I say political B.S. in a crisis situation and something for the media to report and for the masses to read in the newspapers. But the words sound good and that is what I call Poli-speak.
Notice all the words I’ve used are positive, and this is the way you will learn to speak even when, as politicians, you are, as the old saying goes, “caught with your pants down” and in poop up to your eyeballs. But, if you know the right words, all can be made clean. (More laughter ensues, and all the class seem to be enjoying the course.) And so ended the first day of the political school.
Stephen J. Gray
June 26, 2010.
Thursday, June 24, 2010
The Political Potentates
The political potentates from various countries were coming to visit the land. Much preparation had been done in their honor. The host potentate of the honored land was reportedly spending over a billion dollars of the serfs tax money to make them all feel at home. Fences and cameras were installed at the meeting place and it was reported that snipers were positioned on the roofs of nearby buildings. The serfs who were paying for all this security were not allowed near the place of honor, because it was said that there were those amongst the serfs who were not impressed with these would-be “princes” of politics. Still, it was a sign of how much these “rulers” were loved that they had to be isolated for their safety.
Safely ensconced in their rich and opulent surroundings, the new political “royalty” would discuss their solutions to all the problems of the world. Some of them were communist, others capitalists, some could be called dictators and others despots, some were free marketers and others were freeloaders; this was a motley group of state heads—or head cases, depending on one’s point of view. They would issue upbeat press releases to the controlled and over-taxed masses and tell them they were working on solutions and that they were all moving forward in unison to help the people everywhere. “Yeah sure,” thought some cynical people.
A number of the people thought that their political “masters” were a gathering of gossips wasting time with other peoples’ money; but hey, who cared what the serfs thought. This was the “princes of politics weekend” and they were all going to have a ball at the peoples’ expense.
No expense was to be spared for the comfort and enjoyment of the political potentates. A fake lake was even built courtesy of the serfs tax dollars; now the people knew the meaning of that old saying, “money flows like water.” The honored ones would also be watered and fed in a manner fitting their status as political princes. The camp followers of the political potentates would also be part of the extravaganza; some were called “sherpas” and they in turn had assistants called “yaks.” These are the new buzz words of the political elites. After all, “sherpas” sounds better than sycophantic bureaucrats feeding off the serfs tax dollars and “yaks” is a good fit, for there will be plenty of noisy yakking going on as they spend the serfs’ tax dollars.
Big dollars for big personages would be spent to “showcase” the land, and a political flack reportedly said, the gathering of the “great” was worth every penny! Still, some of the serfs were thinking over a billion dollars was a lot of pennies for an orgy of political excess. But, these were considered to be negative people whose only contribution to this gathering of the “greats” would be their tax dollars paying the bills.
Alas, bills are the serfs lot in life, and to be ruled and fooled, and taxed to the max by out-of-control political “princes.” At one time, political leaders used to be described as servants of the people. Now the people are servants, or serfs, of these political potentates.
Stephen J. Gray
June 24, 2010.
Safely ensconced in their rich and opulent surroundings, the new political “royalty” would discuss their solutions to all the problems of the world. Some of them were communist, others capitalists, some could be called dictators and others despots, some were free marketers and others were freeloaders; this was a motley group of state heads—or head cases, depending on one’s point of view. They would issue upbeat press releases to the controlled and over-taxed masses and tell them they were working on solutions and that they were all moving forward in unison to help the people everywhere. “Yeah sure,” thought some cynical people.
A number of the people thought that their political “masters” were a gathering of gossips wasting time with other peoples’ money; but hey, who cared what the serfs thought. This was the “princes of politics weekend” and they were all going to have a ball at the peoples’ expense.
No expense was to be spared for the comfort and enjoyment of the political potentates. A fake lake was even built courtesy of the serfs tax dollars; now the people knew the meaning of that old saying, “money flows like water.” The honored ones would also be watered and fed in a manner fitting their status as political princes. The camp followers of the political potentates would also be part of the extravaganza; some were called “sherpas” and they in turn had assistants called “yaks.” These are the new buzz words of the political elites. After all, “sherpas” sounds better than sycophantic bureaucrats feeding off the serfs tax dollars and “yaks” is a good fit, for there will be plenty of noisy yakking going on as they spend the serfs’ tax dollars.
Big dollars for big personages would be spent to “showcase” the land, and a political flack reportedly said, the gathering of the “great” was worth every penny! Still, some of the serfs were thinking over a billion dollars was a lot of pennies for an orgy of political excess. But, these were considered to be negative people whose only contribution to this gathering of the “greats” would be their tax dollars paying the bills.
Alas, bills are the serfs lot in life, and to be ruled and fooled, and taxed to the max by out-of-control political “princes.” At one time, political leaders used to be described as servants of the people. Now the people are servants, or serfs, of these political potentates.
Stephen J. Gray
June 24, 2010.
Thursday, June 17, 2010
Was the Rand Decision a Fix?
I wrote this some years ago. SJG
------------------------------------
“It cannot be stressed enough that the coercion which unions have been permitted to exercise contrary to all principles of freedom under the law is primarily the coercion of fellow workers” (F. A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty).
The architect of compulsory union dues in Canada was an appointed judge: Mr. Justice Ivan C. Rand. Judge Rand was appointed arbitrator in the dispute between the Ford Motor Company in Windsor, Ontario, and the United Auto Workers Union now known as the C.A.W. He handed down his decision on January 29,1946, a decision, that made union dues compulsory.
The Liberal politician who helped “bring about his appointment” was Mr. Paul Martin Senior, who wrote in his memoirs, A Very Public Life (Volume 1, pages 395-396),
“Although I knew that Rand’s views on the rights of labour were encompassed within a progressive social outlook, I wondered whether I could convince the cabinet to appoint him…Privately, I knew that the workers were getting fed up and might revolt against the strike leaders if a settlement was not found soon. This I wanted to avoid, for it would set the cause of unionism in Canada back ten years…I encouraged Pat Conroy and George Addes to urge the mass meeting on 14 December to vote for a new ballot. Conroy knew, because I had told him confidentially, that Mr. Justice Rand would be the arbitrator…”
Mr. Paul Martin Senior, a Liberal cabinet member at the time, is also quoted in an article by David Moulton (in the book On Strike, edited by Irving Abella, page 147):
“…Martin, who knew Rand personally, recalls, ‘I talked with him [Rand] about these problems…I knew his views…he was a man who knew the evolution that was taking place in social thinking… he had been thinking about these questions for a long time…and it just happened I was in a position to help bring about his appointment’”
And the union leaders are quoted on page 146 of On Strike as saying:
“…Conroy came up and gave us to understand that the government would pick a strictly impartial person sympathetic enough… they almost told us they would give us some kind of union security…we couldn’t tell the workers that…” [emphasis added]
(Note: Pat Conroy was Secretary/Treasurer of the Canadian Congress of Labour at this time.)
It would appear by the aforementioned quotes that arrangements had been made and that the politically correct decision would come down, and it did. A person didn’t have to “belong” to the union, but must pay union dues. Involuntary dues payment was now legalized in Canada.
This decision by Justice Rand was eventually enacted into labour legislation across Canada. Now over 30% of the workforce are compelled into financing and supporting--with their compulsory union dues--socialism, same-sex marriage, abortion clinics, and numerous other issues unrelated to the workplace.
Stephen J. Gray
December 1, 2007
------------------------------------
“It cannot be stressed enough that the coercion which unions have been permitted to exercise contrary to all principles of freedom under the law is primarily the coercion of fellow workers” (F. A. Hayek, The Constitution of Liberty).
The architect of compulsory union dues in Canada was an appointed judge: Mr. Justice Ivan C. Rand. Judge Rand was appointed arbitrator in the dispute between the Ford Motor Company in Windsor, Ontario, and the United Auto Workers Union now known as the C.A.W. He handed down his decision on January 29,1946, a decision, that made union dues compulsory.
The Liberal politician who helped “bring about his appointment” was Mr. Paul Martin Senior, who wrote in his memoirs, A Very Public Life (Volume 1, pages 395-396),
“Although I knew that Rand’s views on the rights of labour were encompassed within a progressive social outlook, I wondered whether I could convince the cabinet to appoint him…Privately, I knew that the workers were getting fed up and might revolt against the strike leaders if a settlement was not found soon. This I wanted to avoid, for it would set the cause of unionism in Canada back ten years…I encouraged Pat Conroy and George Addes to urge the mass meeting on 14 December to vote for a new ballot. Conroy knew, because I had told him confidentially, that Mr. Justice Rand would be the arbitrator…”
Mr. Paul Martin Senior, a Liberal cabinet member at the time, is also quoted in an article by David Moulton (in the book On Strike, edited by Irving Abella, page 147):
“…Martin, who knew Rand personally, recalls, ‘I talked with him [Rand] about these problems…I knew his views…he was a man who knew the evolution that was taking place in social thinking… he had been thinking about these questions for a long time…and it just happened I was in a position to help bring about his appointment’”
And the union leaders are quoted on page 146 of On Strike as saying:
“…Conroy came up and gave us to understand that the government would pick a strictly impartial person sympathetic enough… they almost told us they would give us some kind of union security…we couldn’t tell the workers that…” [emphasis added]
(Note: Pat Conroy was Secretary/Treasurer of the Canadian Congress of Labour at this time.)
It would appear by the aforementioned quotes that arrangements had been made and that the politically correct decision would come down, and it did. A person didn’t have to “belong” to the union, but must pay union dues. Involuntary dues payment was now legalized in Canada.
This decision by Justice Rand was eventually enacted into labour legislation across Canada. Now over 30% of the workforce are compelled into financing and supporting--with their compulsory union dues--socialism, same-sex marriage, abortion clinics, and numerous other issues unrelated to the workplace.
Stephen J. Gray
December 1, 2007
Monday, June 7, 2010
Harper says No to Bank Tax, Yes to HST
“…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” (CBC News, October 7, 2009).
The Harmonized Sales Tax, or Hammer the Serfs Tax (HST), will be coming into force July 1st 2010, and our tax dollars, from the Harper Tories, will be paying the Liberal governments of BC and Ontario to impose it upon us. Now we know the meaning of that old saying, “Liberal, Tory, same old story.”
This is the same Mr. Harper who is on record as saying this: “I don’t believe any taxes are good taxes.” [1]
Oh really Mr. Harper? Then why is your government handing over “almost $6 billion” of the peoples’ tax dollars to provincial Liberal governments to bring in the HST?
And the Globe and Mail quoted Mr. Harper as saying this:.
“We believe there is no justification for levies on banks and financial institutions,” [2]
Many of these banks and financial institutions have subsidiaries in offshore tax havens. A CBC news story of May 31, 2010, said this:
“CBC News and the Globe and Mail newspaper reported last fall that the CRA probed Royal Bank of Canada Dominion Securities (RBCDS) for information on 15 Canadians, all with alleged links to Liechtenstein. The CRA said that probe ended up confirming the agency’s suspicions.” [3]
And an article in the Guardian newspaper of 13th December 2009 had these headlines:
“Drug money saved banks in global crisis, claims UN advisor”
“Drugs and crime chief says $352bn in criminal proceeds was effectively laundered by financial institutions” [4]
Mr. Harper does not want a tax on banks or financial institutions. Surely these banks and financial institutions in offshore tax havens should not only be taxed but investigated as well if they are engaged in nefarious activities?
Still, the big activity in Canada will be July 1st Canada Day, and the imposition of the Hammer the Serfs Tax (HST]. This HST will tax just about everything that moves and does not move. It is a politician's dream and the people's nightmare. It’s too bad Mr. Harper is not as good as fighting for the people of Canada as he is for the big banks. He says No to a Bank tax but says Yes to the HST.
Stephen J. Gray
June 7, 2010
Endnotes:
[1] http://blog.canadianbusiness.com/no-taxes-are-good-taxes-harper/
[2] http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/g8-g20/economy/canada-eu-at-loggerheads-over-bank-tax/article1557236/
[3] http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/05/27/liechtenstein-banks-tax.html
[4] http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2009/dec/13/drug-money-banks-saved-un-cfief-claims
The Harmonized Sales Tax, or Hammer the Serfs Tax (HST), will be coming into force July 1st 2010, and our tax dollars, from the Harper Tories, will be paying the Liberal governments of BC and Ontario to impose it upon us. Now we know the meaning of that old saying, “Liberal, Tory, same old story.”
This is the same Mr. Harper who is on record as saying this: “I don’t believe any taxes are good taxes.” [1]
Oh really Mr. Harper? Then why is your government handing over “almost $6 billion” of the peoples’ tax dollars to provincial Liberal governments to bring in the HST?
And the Globe and Mail quoted Mr. Harper as saying this:.
“We believe there is no justification for levies on banks and financial institutions,” [2]
Many of these banks and financial institutions have subsidiaries in offshore tax havens. A CBC news story of May 31, 2010, said this:
“CBC News and the Globe and Mail newspaper reported last fall that the CRA probed Royal Bank of Canada Dominion Securities (RBCDS) for information on 15 Canadians, all with alleged links to Liechtenstein. The CRA said that probe ended up confirming the agency’s suspicions.” [3]
And an article in the Guardian newspaper of 13th December 2009 had these headlines:
“Drug money saved banks in global crisis, claims UN advisor”
“Drugs and crime chief says $352bn in criminal proceeds was effectively laundered by financial institutions” [4]
Mr. Harper does not want a tax on banks or financial institutions. Surely these banks and financial institutions in offshore tax havens should not only be taxed but investigated as well if they are engaged in nefarious activities?
Still, the big activity in Canada will be July 1st Canada Day, and the imposition of the Hammer the Serfs Tax (HST]. This HST will tax just about everything that moves and does not move. It is a politician's dream and the people's nightmare. It’s too bad Mr. Harper is not as good as fighting for the people of Canada as he is for the big banks. He says No to a Bank tax but says Yes to the HST.
Stephen J. Gray
June 7, 2010
Endnotes:
[1] http://blog.canadianbusiness.com/no-taxes-are-good-taxes-harper/
[2] http://www.theglobeandmail.com/news/world/g8-g20/economy/canada-eu-at-loggerheads-over-bank-tax/article1557236/
[3] http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/05/27/liechtenstein-banks-tax.html
[4] http://www.guardian.co.uk/global/2009/dec/13/drug-money-banks-saved-un-cfief-claims
Sunday, May 16, 2010
Canada’s ‘indentured servants’
Please note the article below was written a number of years ago, and the misuse of trade union time and money continues...SJG.
---------------------------------------------------
“…the CLC does not allow members of one union to leave and join another. A union member is like an indentured servant.”
Buzz Hargrove, president CAW, page 201 in his book “Labor of Love”
In Canada today union members are bound to and servants of the union. You cannot work unless you join the union and pay compulsory union dues. At one time union dues were supposed to be intended for collective bargaining. Now they are also used for collective coercion. Union members are forced into funding all kinds of special interest groups and causes with their compulsory union dues. Some of these groups are: National Action Committee on the Status of Women (NAC), Women's Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF) Abortionist Morgentaler's defence fund, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) …
Note: There is a list of organizations receiving trade union time and/or money on my website at http://graysinfo.blogspot.com/2010/03/groups-organizations-and-causes-that.html See article headed: “Groups, organizations and causes that have received union time and/or money.”
The union bosses excuse for the misuse of their members dues is that all these non work issues are decided democratically at conventions. Yet unions are funded by compulsion, so how can you have compulsory democracy? Millions of dollars have been given to the NDP over the years by the union bosses. But, now the federal government funds all political parties according to the number of votes the parties received in the last election. This now means there are lots more compulsory union dues money available for all the special interest groups that unions support. Surely this money would be better off in the hands of laid off union members? After all it is THEIR money. Obviously union dues are to high and union members are paying union bosses to much money when these bosses can be involved in so many non-work related issues.
In fact, one might say that if any other organizations in Canada were using their memberships funds in the way that many trade unions are doing, charges would be laid. Union members have never been individually polled as to whether they want to support all these non work issues. A politically correct few impose their views on the whole membership. A good example of this is the huge amounts of compulsory union dues handed over to the NDP without consulting ALL the union membership.
"There is not a single union in Canada that can claim a mandate from its rank-and- file members for continued financial and political support for the NDP.”
Buzz Hargrove, Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) union president, quoted in Vancouver Province, June 13, 2002, page A20.
Brother Buzz states unions have no mandate for giving away all the millions of dollars handed over to the NDP. Then why are the political and judicial authorities not laying charges over the misuse of union funds? Are trade unions a protected species and above the law? I believe it would be a real eye opener to union members across Canada if ALL the union books were opened up and the membership could see all the names, causes and organizations receiving union funding. In fact if the politicians had any guts they would hold an inquiry into where all the union memberships funds are going. But don’t hold your breath on that happening for union bosses appear to be even more powerful than our elected representatives. In fact union boss Buzz Hargrove gets some of the credit for the recent Federal Liberal/NDP budget. “Martin actually tried to tell his caucus last night the budget represented their ideas and vision -- when he knows full well it was concocted in a hotel room with the NDP and union leader Buzz Hargrove….” (Editorial, Toronto Sun, May 20, 2005.)
If this statement by the Toronto Sun is correct then not only are union members ‘indentured servants’ but the Prime Minister and the leader of the NDP appear to be captive to the union agenda as well.
Stephen J. Gray
August 5, 2005.
---------------------------------------------------
“…the CLC does not allow members of one union to leave and join another. A union member is like an indentured servant.”
Buzz Hargrove, president CAW, page 201 in his book “Labor of Love”
In Canada today union members are bound to and servants of the union. You cannot work unless you join the union and pay compulsory union dues. At one time union dues were supposed to be intended for collective bargaining. Now they are also used for collective coercion. Union members are forced into funding all kinds of special interest groups and causes with their compulsory union dues. Some of these groups are: National Action Committee on the Status of Women (NAC), Women's Legal Education and Action Fund (LEAF) Abortionist Morgentaler's defence fund, Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA) …
Note: There is a list of organizations receiving trade union time and/or money on my website at http://graysinfo.blogspot.com/2010/03/groups-organizations-and-causes-that.html See article headed: “Groups, organizations and causes that have received union time and/or money.”
The union bosses excuse for the misuse of their members dues is that all these non work issues are decided democratically at conventions. Yet unions are funded by compulsion, so how can you have compulsory democracy? Millions of dollars have been given to the NDP over the years by the union bosses. But, now the federal government funds all political parties according to the number of votes the parties received in the last election. This now means there are lots more compulsory union dues money available for all the special interest groups that unions support. Surely this money would be better off in the hands of laid off union members? After all it is THEIR money. Obviously union dues are to high and union members are paying union bosses to much money when these bosses can be involved in so many non-work related issues.
In fact, one might say that if any other organizations in Canada were using their memberships funds in the way that many trade unions are doing, charges would be laid. Union members have never been individually polled as to whether they want to support all these non work issues. A politically correct few impose their views on the whole membership. A good example of this is the huge amounts of compulsory union dues handed over to the NDP without consulting ALL the union membership.
"There is not a single union in Canada that can claim a mandate from its rank-and- file members for continued financial and political support for the NDP.”
Buzz Hargrove, Canadian Auto Workers (CAW) union president, quoted in Vancouver Province, June 13, 2002, page A20.
Brother Buzz states unions have no mandate for giving away all the millions of dollars handed over to the NDP. Then why are the political and judicial authorities not laying charges over the misuse of union funds? Are trade unions a protected species and above the law? I believe it would be a real eye opener to union members across Canada if ALL the union books were opened up and the membership could see all the names, causes and organizations receiving union funding. In fact if the politicians had any guts they would hold an inquiry into where all the union memberships funds are going. But don’t hold your breath on that happening for union bosses appear to be even more powerful than our elected representatives. In fact union boss Buzz Hargrove gets some of the credit for the recent Federal Liberal/NDP budget. “Martin actually tried to tell his caucus last night the budget represented their ideas and vision -- when he knows full well it was concocted in a hotel room with the NDP and union leader Buzz Hargrove….” (Editorial, Toronto Sun, May 20, 2005.)
If this statement by the Toronto Sun is correct then not only are union members ‘indentured servants’ but the Prime Minister and the leader of the NDP appear to be captive to the union agenda as well.
Stephen J. Gray
August 5, 2005.
Wednesday, April 28, 2010
Pro-abortion propaganda from Vancouver Sun
I wrote this a few years ago.I believe it is still pertinent today. SJG.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Good journalism is supposed to be about the search for truth. Yet the Vancouver Sun article of March 15, 2007, headlined, “Rural women still face abortion hurdles” was nothing else but a written advertisement for abortion providers. A real journalist and newspaper would have given all the information on this issue. But instead the writer of the article and the editors at the Vancouver Sun chose to print a one-sided version on this “procedure” that destroys innocent human life. What happens to human life during an abortion? The Vancouver Sun does not tell us. And so, for the information of the “investigative journalist” who wrote the article and the editors at the Vancouver Sun, here is what happens during an abortion (Source for the following information on abortion methods is http://www.lifesite.net/abortiontypes/ ):
Suction Aspiration
This is the most common method of abortion during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. General or local anaesthesia is given to the mother and her cervix is quickly dilated. A suction curette (hollow tube with a knife-edged tip) is inserted into the womb. This instrument is then connected to a vacuum machine by a transparent tube. The vacuum suction, 29 times more powerful than a household vacuum cleaner, tears the fetus and placenta into small pieces which are sucked through the tube into a bottle and discarded.
Dilation and Curettage (D&C)
This method is similar to the suction method with the added insertion of a hook shaped knife (curette) which cuts the baby into pieces. The pieces are scraped out through the cervix and discarded [Note: This abortion method should not be confused with a therapeutic D&C done for reasons other than pregnancy.]
….
Dilation and Evacuation (D&E)
This method is used up to 18 weeks' gestation. Instead of the loop-shaped knife used in D&C abortions, a pair of forceps is inserted into the womb to grasp part of the fetus. The teeth of the forceps twist and tear the bones of the unborn child. This process is repeated until the fetus is totally dismembered and removed. Usually the spine must be snapped and the skull crushed in order to remove them.
Salt Poisoning (Saline Injection):
Used after 16 weeks (four months) when enough fluid has accumulated. A long needle injects a strong salt solution through the mother's abdomen into the baby's sac. The baby swallows this fluid and is poisoned by it. It also acts as a corrosive, burning off the outer layer of skin. It normally takes somewhat over an hour for the baby to die from this. Within 24 hours, labor will usually set in and the mother will give birth to a dead or dying baby. (There have been many cases of these babies being born alive. They are usually left unattended to die. However, a few have survived and later been adopted.)
…
Prostaglandin Chemical Abortion:
This form of abortion uses chemicals developed by the Upjohn Pharmaceutical Co. which cause the uterus to contract intensely, pushing out the developing baby. The contractions are more violent than normal, natural contractions, so the unborn baby is frequently killed by them -- some have even been decapitated. Many, however, have also been born alive.
…
Five steps to a partial birth abortion:
1) Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby's legs with forceps.
2) The baby's leg is pulled out into the birth canal.
3) The abortionist delivers the baby's entire body, except for the head
4) The abortionist jams scissors into the baby's skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the skull.
5) The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child's brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed.
[End of procedure descriptions as provided by aforementioned link.]
Most people are horrified when they see pictures on television of baby seals being clubbed to death and the ice flows running red with their blood. Warnings are issued on TV before showing the pictures and we are told the images are gruesome. Imagine if these same TV cameras or if The Vancouver Sun took us inside a local abortuary where babies are slaughtered, suctioned out, poisoned by a saline solution or in some cases born alive and left to die. The people would then be able to see these grisly medical butchers at work performing “choice” for the nation. Then the truth and the light would be shed on this atrocity called “choice.” But, don’t expect The Vancouver Sun or its “investigative journalist” to give you the TRUTH on abortion; they prefer the propaganda of “choice.”
To see the truth about abortion go to: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Stephen J. Gray
March 24, 2007.
--------------------------------------------------------------
Good journalism is supposed to be about the search for truth. Yet the Vancouver Sun article of March 15, 2007, headlined, “Rural women still face abortion hurdles” was nothing else but a written advertisement for abortion providers. A real journalist and newspaper would have given all the information on this issue. But instead the writer of the article and the editors at the Vancouver Sun chose to print a one-sided version on this “procedure” that destroys innocent human life. What happens to human life during an abortion? The Vancouver Sun does not tell us. And so, for the information of the “investigative journalist” who wrote the article and the editors at the Vancouver Sun, here is what happens during an abortion (Source for the following information on abortion methods is http://www.lifesite.net/abortiontypes/ ):
Suction Aspiration
This is the most common method of abortion during the first 12 weeks of pregnancy. General or local anaesthesia is given to the mother and her cervix is quickly dilated. A suction curette (hollow tube with a knife-edged tip) is inserted into the womb. This instrument is then connected to a vacuum machine by a transparent tube. The vacuum suction, 29 times more powerful than a household vacuum cleaner, tears the fetus and placenta into small pieces which are sucked through the tube into a bottle and discarded.
Dilation and Curettage (D&C)
This method is similar to the suction method with the added insertion of a hook shaped knife (curette) which cuts the baby into pieces. The pieces are scraped out through the cervix and discarded [Note: This abortion method should not be confused with a therapeutic D&C done for reasons other than pregnancy.]
….
Dilation and Evacuation (D&E)
This method is used up to 18 weeks' gestation. Instead of the loop-shaped knife used in D&C abortions, a pair of forceps is inserted into the womb to grasp part of the fetus. The teeth of the forceps twist and tear the bones of the unborn child. This process is repeated until the fetus is totally dismembered and removed. Usually the spine must be snapped and the skull crushed in order to remove them.
Salt Poisoning (Saline Injection):
Used after 16 weeks (four months) when enough fluid has accumulated. A long needle injects a strong salt solution through the mother's abdomen into the baby's sac. The baby swallows this fluid and is poisoned by it. It also acts as a corrosive, burning off the outer layer of skin. It normally takes somewhat over an hour for the baby to die from this. Within 24 hours, labor will usually set in and the mother will give birth to a dead or dying baby. (There have been many cases of these babies being born alive. They are usually left unattended to die. However, a few have survived and later been adopted.)
…
Prostaglandin Chemical Abortion:
This form of abortion uses chemicals developed by the Upjohn Pharmaceutical Co. which cause the uterus to contract intensely, pushing out the developing baby. The contractions are more violent than normal, natural contractions, so the unborn baby is frequently killed by them -- some have even been decapitated. Many, however, have also been born alive.
…
Five steps to a partial birth abortion:
1) Guided by ultrasound, the abortionist grabs the baby's legs with forceps.
2) The baby's leg is pulled out into the birth canal.
3) The abortionist delivers the baby's entire body, except for the head
4) The abortionist jams scissors into the baby's skull. The scissors are then opened to enlarge the skull.
5) The scissors are removed and a suction catheter is inserted. The child's brains are sucked out, causing the skull to collapse. The dead baby is then removed.
[End of procedure descriptions as provided by aforementioned link.]
Most people are horrified when they see pictures on television of baby seals being clubbed to death and the ice flows running red with their blood. Warnings are issued on TV before showing the pictures and we are told the images are gruesome. Imagine if these same TV cameras or if The Vancouver Sun took us inside a local abortuary where babies are slaughtered, suctioned out, poisoned by a saline solution or in some cases born alive and left to die. The people would then be able to see these grisly medical butchers at work performing “choice” for the nation. Then the truth and the light would be shed on this atrocity called “choice.” But, don’t expect The Vancouver Sun or its “investigative journalist” to give you the TRUTH on abortion; they prefer the propaganda of “choice.”
To see the truth about abortion go to: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Stephen J. Gray
March 24, 2007.
Thursday, April 22, 2010
Blatant Discrimination at University Of Calgary
Universities are supposed to be bastions of free speech and free expression. Yet, it appears that this is not so at the University of Calgary. The university had threatened to expel some pro-life students for daring to show the truth about abortion. Yet, the future boss of the University, who takes over July 1, 2010, is quoted as saying she believes in the following:
"Active engagement with students, faculty and the broader community. Openness and inclusiveness, these are the promises I make to you today. And I will seek it from all members of the university family…” (Calgary Herald, March 25, 2010).
It sounds very nice doesn’t it? I wonder if she has noticed that the university she is going to be head of is not practicing “openness and inclusiveness” to its pro-life students? One wonders, are these students not part of the “university family?” In fact, these pro-life students might be expelled for having the courage to show the atrocities committed by abortionists. Still, the University of Calgary is a research facility, and one wonders what their "research” shows on the dismembering and cutting to pieces of the human life attacked and destroyed in an abortion. Have they done any?
Notably, the university also receives big tax-payers dollars in grants, and the interim president is quoted as saying this:
“Today’s announcement is another example of the Government of Canada’s strong support for research and a recognition of the important role universities play in driving the economy through innovation and a highly trained work force,” said Dr. Warren Veale, interim President, University of Calgary. “Programs such as the Canada Research Chairs program are critical to ensuring the University of Calgary continues to be among the country’s leading research-intensive institutions” (http://www.ablonczy.ca/).
Yeah sure, the university is a “among the country’s leading research-intensive institutions.” Yet, this same university is attempting to suppress the truthful research shown in gory pictures of the slaughter of innocent lives. Surely this is an “important role” in exposing what is happening in our society today. Yet, the university wants to censor this information. Which makes one wonder, what are they afraid of? Could it be that this heinous crime of abortion has been covered up for so long that even the “institutions of higher learning” are part of the cover-up?
It is appalling that we are seeing these courageous young students being terrorized and threatened with their careers being ruined all because U of C cannot stand the atrocity of abortion being exposed for what it is: the murderous killing of unborn children in the womb, who have no voice to speak out for them. Now the university is attempting to silence the voices of the pro-life students. This is blatant discrimination, and I believe there should be charges laid against the university.
Stephen J. Gray
April 22, 2010.
Note: See the speech by Cameron Wilson, one of the pro-life students at U of C at:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/apr/10042105.html
See the Slaughtered victims of abortion at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
"Active engagement with students, faculty and the broader community. Openness and inclusiveness, these are the promises I make to you today. And I will seek it from all members of the university family…” (Calgary Herald, March 25, 2010).
It sounds very nice doesn’t it? I wonder if she has noticed that the university she is going to be head of is not practicing “openness and inclusiveness” to its pro-life students? One wonders, are these students not part of the “university family?” In fact, these pro-life students might be expelled for having the courage to show the atrocities committed by abortionists. Still, the University of Calgary is a research facility, and one wonders what their "research” shows on the dismembering and cutting to pieces of the human life attacked and destroyed in an abortion. Have they done any?
Notably, the university also receives big tax-payers dollars in grants, and the interim president is quoted as saying this:
“Today’s announcement is another example of the Government of Canada’s strong support for research and a recognition of the important role universities play in driving the economy through innovation and a highly trained work force,” said Dr. Warren Veale, interim President, University of Calgary. “Programs such as the Canada Research Chairs program are critical to ensuring the University of Calgary continues to be among the country’s leading research-intensive institutions” (http://www.ablonczy.ca/).
Yeah sure, the university is a “among the country’s leading research-intensive institutions.” Yet, this same university is attempting to suppress the truthful research shown in gory pictures of the slaughter of innocent lives. Surely this is an “important role” in exposing what is happening in our society today. Yet, the university wants to censor this information. Which makes one wonder, what are they afraid of? Could it be that this heinous crime of abortion has been covered up for so long that even the “institutions of higher learning” are part of the cover-up?
It is appalling that we are seeing these courageous young students being terrorized and threatened with their careers being ruined all because U of C cannot stand the atrocity of abortion being exposed for what it is: the murderous killing of unborn children in the womb, who have no voice to speak out for them. Now the university is attempting to silence the voices of the pro-life students. This is blatant discrimination, and I believe there should be charges laid against the university.
Stephen J. Gray
April 22, 2010.
Note: See the speech by Cameron Wilson, one of the pro-life students at U of C at:
http://www.lifesitenews.com/ldn/2010/apr/10042105.html
See the Slaughtered victims of abortion at: http://www.AbortionNo.org
Wednesday, April 14, 2010
The Political Parasites of Taxland
The political parasites ruled and infested a place called Taxland. This was a land where the people were modern day taxpaying serfs. The serfs over many years had been taxed into submission by the political parasites. The people were now prisoners of a system that was uncontrollable. Political parasites of all shapes, sizes, and genders ruled; and they chewed and munched their way through the serfs tax dollars. There was no escape from the ravenous appetites of the political leeches. These political bloodsuckers took a part of everything the serfs earned, bought, traded or received. Taxes had to be paid on just about everything, and the political parasites aim was to eventually tax everything. Nothing was going to be immune from the parasites and an antidote had not yet been found to control their parasitical infestation into the lives of the people. The people were being literally eaten alive by taxes from these tax addicted creatures of Taxland.
In this land if the serfs bought a new house it would be taxed. If they had to put a new roof on an older house because it was leaking, they were taxed on their misfortune. If they bought clothes or needed clothes for their children they were going to be taxed. If they bought a car they were taxed. If the car had to be repaired they were taxed. If they bought gas for their car they were taxed. If they bought toilet paper they were taxed. If they needed a new toilet it was taxed. There was no escape from these bottom feeding parasites. The taxing list was endless, though there had been a few exemptions. But, now the political parasites had decided to “improve” their system of taxing the serfs. They created a new tax called Hammer the Serfs Tax (HST). This tax would “simplify” the system and tax everything that moved and did not move. This would be a tax feeding bonanza for the political parasites, and the serfs hard earned money would flow like water into the coffers of Taxland. Taxes had become a racket, and gangsters and racketeers everywhere were complaining that the political parasites had usurped their territory and copied their system.
Still, the system was good to the political parasites. They themselves had huge salaries paid for by the serfs. Tax-free allowances, a rich pension plan that the serfs could only dream of. Some of them had limousines to take them from place to place as they went about their taxing business of ruling over the serfs. The serfs were also told by some of the lackeys of the parasites that some of these new taxes would create jobs. And, a big banker reportedly said, “taxes had to be raised.” Which was a rich statement coming from a banker, especially when some of these big banks had subsidiaries in offshore tax havens. Still, this was how the game was played in Taxland, the powerful and the political parasites ganged up on the serfs.
The serfs were being taxed while alive and at death. They were prisoners without chains in a system called a political “democracy.” They voted in these political parasites that fed off them and then they were punished by them. One wondered if the serfs would ever rebel, or were they conditioned into accepting their tax slavery as “normal?” This then is Taxland where political parasites rule.
Stephen J. Gray
April 14, 2010.
In this land if the serfs bought a new house it would be taxed. If they had to put a new roof on an older house because it was leaking, they were taxed on their misfortune. If they bought clothes or needed clothes for their children they were going to be taxed. If they bought a car they were taxed. If the car had to be repaired they were taxed. If they bought gas for their car they were taxed. If they bought toilet paper they were taxed. If they needed a new toilet it was taxed. There was no escape from these bottom feeding parasites. The taxing list was endless, though there had been a few exemptions. But, now the political parasites had decided to “improve” their system of taxing the serfs. They created a new tax called Hammer the Serfs Tax (HST). This tax would “simplify” the system and tax everything that moved and did not move. This would be a tax feeding bonanza for the political parasites, and the serfs hard earned money would flow like water into the coffers of Taxland. Taxes had become a racket, and gangsters and racketeers everywhere were complaining that the political parasites had usurped their territory and copied their system.
Still, the system was good to the political parasites. They themselves had huge salaries paid for by the serfs. Tax-free allowances, a rich pension plan that the serfs could only dream of. Some of them had limousines to take them from place to place as they went about their taxing business of ruling over the serfs. The serfs were also told by some of the lackeys of the parasites that some of these new taxes would create jobs. And, a big banker reportedly said, “taxes had to be raised.” Which was a rich statement coming from a banker, especially when some of these big banks had subsidiaries in offshore tax havens. Still, this was how the game was played in Taxland, the powerful and the political parasites ganged up on the serfs.
The serfs were being taxed while alive and at death. They were prisoners without chains in a system called a political “democracy.” They voted in these political parasites that fed off them and then they were punished by them. One wondered if the serfs would ever rebel, or were they conditioned into accepting their tax slavery as “normal?” This then is Taxland where political parasites rule.
Stephen J. Gray
April 14, 2010.
Wednesday, March 31, 2010
The Instigators of Human Rights Commissions (HRCs)?
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.
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.
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
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)