‘Truth matters, lies have consequences’

 Comments Off on ‘Truth matters, lies have consequences’
Jan 202020
 

Kari Simpson and Culture Guard rebuke lawyer Sarah Leamon’s slanderous commentary in Georgia Straight

Jan. 20, 2020 (RoadKill Radio News) — In a stinging rebuke, Culture Guard executive director Kari Simpson has demanded a retraction and apology from Vancouver lawyer Sarah Leamon.

Leamon wrote a commentary, published in the Jan. 15, 2020 Georgia Straight, in which she radically mischaracterised Culture Guard as engaging in activities to deprive the LGBTQ community of its rights. In fact, Ms. Simpson has many friends among the LGBTQ community—some of whom endorse Culture Guard’s opposition to campaigns by a minority of radical sex activists to impair the constitutionally-protected rights of parents and students.

Simpson states that she is “no longer going to tolerate lies and false information being published without consequences.

“These are dangerous times for those who are on the front lines, those willing to expose the sex activist extremism and the taxpayer-funded industry that operates as a bully-powered political movement,” Simpson says, adding that she, her family and those who work alongside her have been the targets of death threats and harassment, and have been denied public venues for speaking engagements because of the tactics of those whose politics include corrupting children, forcing compelled speech on citizens in violation of their Charter-protected free speech rights, and other anti-democratic views.

Simpson says she will also report Leamon’s misconduct to the Law Society of BC, and will make similar demands of The Georgia Straight newspaper and its editor, Don McLeod.

Simpson states: “As a lawyer, Leamon ought to know better.”

=30=

 

Contact: Kari Simpson (778) 277-2201

Feb 252014
 

Kari and Ron read the “House Blues”—the first report of proceedings in the BC Legislature—and discover a blatant deception: NDP MLA Spencer Chandra Herbert crowing about having the Gay Pride flag raised at the Legislature, with the Speaker and Attorney-General (and only two or three others, including paid flag-raisers) watching.

The ostensible reason for honoring that flag—symbol of the ‘gay rights’ attacking any who disagree with their propaganda—was to protest Russia’s “oppression of gay people.”

But homosexuality was decriminalized in Russia 21 years ago!

The law Herbert and other gays (and most ‘lamestream’ media) were protesting—and dragging the BC legislature into their deception—doesn’t mention homosexuality; it forbids exposing minors (i.e., children) to propaganda (read: ‘lies’) about non-traditional sex (which could be homosexual, heterosexual, or onanistic).

In short: “Don’t lie to the kids!”

That’s what RoadKill Radio has been saying for years!

Another thing RKR says—often—is: Use your 3 Vs—Voice, Vote & Value—to make your opinions heard! Call the Premier and your MLA; tell them you don’t want BC’s Legislature abused as a medium for propaganda.

Do it today!

Feb 192014
 

Feb. 19, 2014 (RKRNews) — Clearly, BC’s government officials are too busy gushing and chumming with sex-activist-cum-MLA Spencer Chandra Herbert to learn the facts behind his “Nyet!” to Sochi, and his lies about the status of homosexuals in Russia.

“Instead,” says Kari Simpson, “Premier Clark, Attorney-General (and Justice Minister) Suzanne Anton, and Speaker of the House Linda Reid built him a media platform, right under the Legislature flagpole, with the Speaker of the House—decked out in full regalia—slapping him on the back and applauding as lie after lie slithered out.”

“It’s shameful, and a disgrace! These women are supposed to be role models? They’re goofs, gullible and silly—and apparently, will swallow anything,” says Simpson.

Simpson, president and CEO of the Internet public affairs site RoadKillRadio.com, has written to Spencer Chandra Herbert, challenging him to provide facts to support his serious accusations about Russia.  In her letter, she flatly calls Herbert a liar.

Simpson is armed with both a legal opinion about the law recently passed by the Russian Federation, and an English translation of it; and clearly, nothing in the new law makes “criminals” of Russian homosexuals.

Suzanne Anton, Attorney General for British Columbia, released this bizarre statement in an email to her, says Simpson:

Equal rights for the LGBT community are fundamental human rights so we are pleased to join with colleagues from across the political spectrum and support the raising of the Pride Flag at the British Columbia Legislature. The flag will be raised after Question Period today at approximately at 3:00 pm.”

The politically-motivated flag-raising took place Feb. 13, 2014. “Clearly she is ill-informed, grossly naïve, and ripe for a good sex activist punking; moreover, she seems to have forgotten that the flags that fly at the Parlaiment Buildings represent the people of British Columbia, not a small minority of political activists with a fraudulant agenda,” says Simpson.

Simpson says it is time for British Columbia to have a constructive look at what is happening in schools, and also the colossal medical and social costs to taxpayers associated with the practice of homosexuality in British Columbia.

“The media and our elected officials have to grow up and begin to have an informed, open, logical, truthful and reasoned discussion about the issue,” she said.  “Most British Columbians would be horrified to see how their tax dollars are being used and abused, and even more horrified to learn how students—a captive audience for sex activists—are being subjected to politically-motivated propaganda that has life-changing, and often deadly, consequences.

In the meantime, says Simpson to the Premier and the Attorney General, “Take down the flag. Every day it flies, you are advertising to those of us who are informed that you are so punkable. You owe British Columbians a big apology for disgracing us in this way.”

Homosexuality was decriminalized in Russia in 1993, Simpson points out; and the recently-passed law only prohibits propaganda that promotes non-traditional sex from being disseminated to minor children.

“Russia is on the right track,” says Simpson. “They just say: ‘Don’t lie to the kids!’ That’s what we should say, too.”

                  =30=

Contact:

Kari Simpson                (604) 514-1614  Email: cultureguard@gmail.com

Simpson’s letter to Spencer Chandra Herbert click here

Legal Opinion on the Russian law here

English translation of the law in Russian to protect children here

 

RoadKill Radio: Charles Lugosi in Defense of Mary Wagner

 Comments Off on RoadKill Radio: Charles Lugosi in Defense of Mary Wagner
May 212013
 

After decades teaching constitutional law in the United States, Dr. Charles Lugosi is back practicing law in Canada, and has taken Mary Wagner as his client. Her case highlights some foundational issues in Canadian constitutional law. Kari Simpson and Ron Gray interview this distinguished legal scholar and pro-life activist (his doctoral dissertation posited that slavery and abortion are almost identical human rights violations) to learn how the Wagner case represents all Canadians’ free speech rights.

Family Freedom Fighters: Should Guns Be Outlawed?

 Comments Off on Family Freedom Fighters: Should Guns Be Outlawed?
May 132013
 

Ron Gray gives his own opinion on one of the hot topics of the year: gun control. When many people offer quick and "easy" solutions to gun violence, Ron points out a few realities that will keep this subject alive and unresolved for a long, long time.

The Mark Hasiuk Show: Diane Watts Stands Up for All Women

 Comments Off on The Mark Hasiuk Show: Diane Watts Stands Up for All Women
Apr 202013
 

Mark Hasiuk is joined by Diane Watts, researcher for Real Women of Canada (.ca), who expresses her organization's stance on such varied topics as equality in the work place, abortion, family rights, child care, abuse, slut-walking, and feminism as a socialist agenda. Tune in to hear a Real Woman of Canada who believes that women – as equals to men – are not to be coddled as a weak, needy, special interest group.

Mar 232013
 

by Don Spratt

Again today I’m in mourning; because freedom is dying in Canada, and so are her defenders. It began with the Whatcott decision, and now I mourn the loss of one of free speech’s greatest defenders: Douglas Christie, who died March 11.

But what bothers me most is that too few people—too few Christians—seem to notice or care about what it bodes for our future as a nation; few seem to recognize the gathering storm and what it means for coming generations.

Yes, we all want to remain free, but few are willing to pay any real price to ensure that freedom into the future.

doug-christieYet I hope—and fervently pray—that recent events will serve as a wake-up call, warning us that we must stand together, and bring to bear the indispensable political pressure it will take to bring about peaceful political change before it’s too late.

With Mr. Christie’s untimely passing, not only are his loving wife and family left in sorrow, but my good friend and co-defendant Sissy von Dehn is left without her able lawyer. As I watched him defend Sissy (beside my equally dedicated legal council, Ron McDonald), I came to a new appreciation for Mr. Christie—not only as a lawyer, but as a true friend of freedom for all Canadians… not just the politically correct and powerful, who need no protection.

He often laboured at reduced rates or pro-bono for people who could not find or afford legal council. Such was the high value he put on free speech; the right to a fair trial, even for people with unpopular or repugnant ideas with which he might personally disagree.

The Whatcott decision was a direct attack on our God-given, rights to freedom of religion and freedom of expression in the public square—supposedly “guaranteed” Section 2 of The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. The specific provisions of the Charter that are supposed to protect individuals from oppressive and tyrannical government measures were again swept aside by the judges, who simply invoked Section 1 to unjustly deny those rights.

The worst part of the decision is the high court’s statement that objective truth is no defence.

The Latin word, Veritas (meaning Truth) is inscribed on monuments and plaques all over the Supreme Court building, but stating the TRUTH is no longer a defence if that truth offends someone, and they haul you before a Human Rights Commission! All it takes is for one thin-skinned, specially-protected person from a government-favoured group to say that his/her feelings are hurt by you stating objective truth, and you’re legal and financial toast!

So, be aware: subjective political correctness and hurt feelings trump the centuries-old values of truth, equal justice before God, and the rule of law in our courts. Even if no one was harmed, it still doesn’t matter!

On top of that, the government—we, the taxpayers—will have to pay for the complainant’s legal council; while the hapless defendant must defend himself, or pay for a lawyer out of his or her own pocket. And if he loses, the defendant can be fined and assessed court costs, which can be financially ruinous.

Equal justice before the law is as dead as an aborted baby!

At the same time all this is going on, Sissy von Dehn and I are still waiting on the BC Court of Appeal for a decision, to find out whether they will uphold our Section 2 Charter rights by overturning lower court decisions that also denied our free speech rights by the abuse of Section 1 of the Charter.

In our case, the court put the act of simply informing the public on a public sidewalk (that they can be arrested within a bubble zone) on the same level as crying “fire” in a crowded theatre when there is no fire.

We are also denied a trial by jury, because these are not Criminal Code cases, and prison time would be below two years if convicted. This, of course, eliminates the possibility of jury nullification—the tactic Henry Morgentaler used to defeat his clear and open defiance of the abortion section of the Criminal Code—and therefore any Common Law common-sense impact of a decision by a jury of our peers.

Everything is stacked against pro-life and pro-family activists.

Sure we have freedom of speech in Canada—but only as long as it isn’t politically incorrect speech, spoken on the public streets or in the public square; and especially not in a “bubble zone” around a government-protected, tax-funded child killing facility!

If we, as free Canadians, don’t soon stand up and demand that our God-given rights be respected, we’ll have to learn to whisper our opinions in hushed tones, and only to our most trusted friends, like my friends in the former Soviet Union, lest they end up in the gulag!

Some might say, “That can’t happen here.” Then why are Linda Gibbons and Mary Wagner repeatedly put in prison? Why am I under probation for passing out copies of government legislation, if our political and legal system is not headed in that direction? Who is next? And who will defend you when all the Doug Christies are gone?

After surviving the Nazi prison camps, German Pastor Martin Niemoller wrote this warning:

First they came for the communists, and I did not speak out,
because I was not a communist;
Then they came for the socialists, and I did not speak out,
because I was not a socialist;
Then they came for the trade unionists, and I did not speak out,
because I was not a trade unionist;
Then they came for the Jews, and I did not speak out,
because I was not a Jew;
Then they came for me—
and there was no one left to speak out for me.

The loss of Mr. Christie is a loss for free speech in Canada, because few other lawyers will defend the free speech rights of people who hold unpopular views, such as abortion abolitionists. This is especially true in a day and age where the politically correct and powerful can expect the courts to unfairly discriminate against their pro-life and pro-family opponents, under unjust “bubble zone” and “hate speech” laws.

Everything Hitler did had been legalized, too; but it was not just.

Linda Gibbons has recently been released, having served her sentence (over 4 months) in remand. Mary Wagner still languishes in an Ontario prison, this time for over six months.

Where most criminals are given as much slack as possible, and are often quickly back out on the street; peaceful pro-life activists only get added persecution!

Meanwhile, Mary Wagner remains in prison, destitute—with her lawyer, Charles Lugosi, being denied legal aid to defend her. If you want to contribute to Mary’s defence, please send cheques to:
“Charles Lugosi at Law”
107 Wellington Street
Brantford, ON, N3T 2M1

Please write, “Mary Wagner defence” on the memo line.

The “crime” for which Linda has spent more than 10 years in jail, is obeying Jesus commandment to “love your neighbour as yourself,” by peacefully pleading for the lives of innocent, voiceless, defenceless, oppressed and unwanted pre-born babies. Linda and Mary offer a true “choice”, with practical help for girls and women in crisis pregnancies; girls who are often being coerced and almost dragged into abortuaries by partners, and sometimes parents. I’ve witnessed this with my own eyes, feeling helpless because a bubble zone law kept me away, under threat of more prison time.

But Linda perseveres, and more than 100 young women have accepted her practical help, and carried their babies to term. Some of those rescued babies are now having their own babies.

What kind of a perverted legal system would imprison a saint like that, while handing millions of our tax dollars, full police state protection and the Order of Canada to Henry Morgentaler? It is Henry who should be in prison, as he once was! Only a corrupt, politicized, violent and merciless legal system would do that!

How have we forgotten that the first and most fundamental God-ordained purpose for civil government is to protect the innocent and vulnerable, and to punish evil-doers? Today that is turned completely upside down; good is called “evil”, and evil is called “good” in our court system!

Isaiah 5:20-21 says:

What sorrow for those who say that evil is good and good is evil, that dark is light and light is dark, that bitter is sweet and sweet is bitter. What sorrow for those who are wise in their own eyes and think themselves so clever.

The courts get away with inverted justice because, first of all, the biased pro-abortion major media outlets hardly ever report on this injustice! Second, even when we are aware of the injustice inflicted upon Linda and Mary, except for a handful of notable exceptions… we let the authorities get away with it—because we, for the most part, say nothing.

As a prisoner of conscience myself (although doing far less time) I personally know a little bit about what Mary Wagner and Linda Gibbons must feel as they languish in prison for doing the right thing in the face of an unjust law. I know what it is to sit in prison for upholding God’s law, despite a perverted human law that forbids it.

I felt as Martin Luther King did while sitting in jail and remember his words,

In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies but the silence of our friends.

It was also Dr. King who said,

Injustice anywhere is a threat to justice everywhere.

So today I mourn the loss of freedom, liberty, and justice under the rule of law. I mourn the fact that those like Linda Gibbons and Mary Wagner stand virtually alone, with little moral or financial support beyond the prison system meals, bed and a roof over their heads—all for defending the most innocent and defenceless among us: the 300 pre-born who will die today, and every day until we finally stand up and say “NO MORE!”

And I mourn for Bill Whatcott, who gallantly refuses to stop his witness to the truth and defence of the bedrock of Canadian society: the family! How long until he ends up in prison too, forgotten and alone?

In the end, it is up to us, and no one else! The free ride of freedom, paid for by our forbearers, is over. Further complacency will cost future generations dearly—in injustice, slavery and death.

If the last century taught us anything, it is that appeasement of evil only encourages more evil—until it finally reaches you.

The German church kept “going along to get along” with Hitler and the Nazis in the 1930s, thinking his growing tyranny would not affect them—only to send their boys off in the ’40s to a deadly war that affected every German family and many Canadian families!

Will we learn from this history, or repeat it?

I have a workable plan to stop the child-killing, restore our God-given rights under God and the rule of law—if we, as Christians, and all other Life- and Liberty-lovers, will stand and work together relentlessly before the next federal election, in a non-partisan political campaign behind our long-cherished moral and political principles—a stand that will get the attention of every politician and aspiring politician. Remember: “politicians do not see the light until they feel the heat (electorally and financially)!”

This will not be a cheap or easy win; it will cost us all, in terms of time, money; social, political and media opposition; and even persecution—but it is a price we must pay to remain free. It may cost us some socio-political and economic pain now, but that is much better than the blood, sweat and tears it will cost future generations if they have to rise up in armed revolt or a civil war to regain the God-given freedom, justice and prosperity we are squandering on ourselves.

If you want to join me in the fight for Life and Liberty in Canada; an organized effort to see Linda and Mary released, the repeal of bubble-zone laws, and the restoration of respect for God and the rule of law, let me know what you can contribute in skills, time and finances. See how you can donate financially below.

The funds will be used for FreeLinda and FreeMary web pages and bill-board signs in Ontario. I have a donor for signs in Saskatchewan. The funds will also cover organization, travel and expenses, as well as providing funds to Linda and Mary as needed, in or out of prison. An independent individual will do the bookkeeping. No tax receipts can be issued, but financial supporters will be able to ask for reports.

Please give all you can financially as soon as possible. If I don’t hear from you with tangible support, then there is little I can do on my own, although I’ve tried and have given all I have for 30 years defending the pre-born; and now some 14 years in the courts and prison for defending our God-given Charter rights to freedom of expression and religion, mostly at my own expense. My family and I have sacrificed much for this cause, so I think you can trust me with God’s money. Pray for all of us on the front line, and please join us!

Remember those in prison, as if you were there yourself. Remember also those being mistreated, as if you felt their pain in your own bodies. (Hebrews 13:3) Also read Matthew 25:31-46.

Ask yourself these questions in light of the above Scriptures and of Jesus’ command to “love your neighbour as yourself”:

If you were innocent and defenceless, yet scheduled to be killed tomorrow, merely because you were unwanted, wouldn’t you want somebody to speak in your defence, and even try to rescue you?

If you were unjustly kept in jail for obediently “loving your neighbour as yourself”, wouldn’t you want Christian brothers and sisters to come to your defence and demand your release? Wouldn’t you want them to come to your defence by the thousands, or hundreds of thousands? I would; but it’s never happened. We better change that before it’s too late!

Join me in defending Life and Liberty!!

You can conveniently and quickly donate on-line by going to: Life-Liberty.net and use the PayPal button on the right side.

Or use this link:






OR
Make checks payable to:

Life & Liberty Network
4705 W. 6th Ave.
Vancouver, BC V6T 1C4

Blessings!

More on the plan next time… Stay tuned!

Mar 182013
 

Ron Gray presents big cash incentives to those of you who want to help Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin maintain her lies about Kari Simpson. Chief Bevy's fate is in your hands, folks, since failure to prove her lies will mean she will have to resign from the court! You see, contrary to the legal requirement of proving a case involving libel, defendant Rafe Mair failed to provide any foundation for his lies, admitting that he never even heard Kari Simpson speak on the issues central to the case. But Chief Bevy decided to believe Mair's unfounded lies and went a step further by publishing his lies as the "factual" basis of her decision.

Here's the deal: Produce verifiable evidence (not hearsay or more lies) that makes any of these lies true. This is your chance – 4 chances, actually – to make big money by merely proving what Rafe Mair, Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin, and the 2008 Supreme Court of Canada (the panel that presided over Simpson's case) say about Kari Simpson. Simply prove to us and to the world that Kari Simpson led the opposition to the infamous "3 Books" in Surrey, or that she's "opposed to any positive portrayal of a gay lifestyle," or that she's intolerant of homosexuals and/or is anti-gay, or – for the really big money – that the Supreme Court of Canada has any right to change a legal test and then use the new test to make a finding without letting the parties know the legal test they have to meet.

So far it's looking bad for Chief Justice Bevy. Since no one is stepping up with the evidence, she should start packing up her office. Canadians will not tolerate a liar and an arrogant, out-of-touch cheat for a Chief Justice of the high court!

RoadKill Radio: Is Feminism Stressing You Out!?

 Comments Off on RoadKill Radio: Is Feminism Stressing You Out!?
Mar 122013
 

Helen Ward, President of Kids First Parenting Association, joins Kari Simpson and Ron Gray for a lively discussion about the health problems associated with over-worked, over-stressed women. As Kari says, DUH!

RoadKill Radio: Canada Loses Its Free Speech!

 Comments Off on RoadKill Radio: Canada Loses Its Free Speech!
Mar 052013
 

A livid Kari Simpson and Ron Gray speak with Bill Whatcott about the recent Supreme Court of Canada decision against him, a decision rife with contradictions, perverted logic, and outright lies, a decision that officially suppresses Free Speech in Canada! How could this have happened? Well, obviously, Canadians have been asleep at the switch! If they don't fight to regain their rights, they deserve to lose them.

Feb 192013
 

Howard "The Galvanator" Galganov is back! This show is not only really fun, but informative and … well, surprising! Tune in and watch as Kari Simpson gets a stunning confession from Ron Gray!! You won't believe who Ron Gray once voted for!! This is a show you will be cheering about. Make sure you forward it to your friends! Is it time that we organized a national association of hard-working, common-sensed Canadians with enough clout to instil electoral fear into any politician that dares waste tax-payer dollars on anti-Canadian policies? YES!!

Galganov: 250,000 Reasons NOT to Fight for Freedom… One Reason FOR

 Comments Off on Galganov: 250,000 Reasons NOT to Fight for Freedom… One Reason FOR
Feb 132013
 

If you’re an American reading this . . . try to imagine being punished to the tune of A QUARTER OF A MILLION DOLLARS – ONLY for refusing to use a language other than English on your own PRIVATE commercial sign . . . by standing up to say NO.

FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION . . . WITH THE COURT’S PERMISSION THAT IS:

Over the past few years, with some financial help from a number of people who visit Galganov.com, with just a very few individuals with somewhat deeper pockets, and about fifty or so working-class and retired grass-roots folk who are part of a RIGHTS organization, we did our best to cover the cost of a very basic fight to preserve our MOST fundamental Freedom, which is FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION.

When I say that we did our best . . . I really mean that we did our best.

By the time the dust settled, between how much money I put-in, and what others contributed, we spent well MORE than $100,000 in a case against an insignificant Township to preserve our FREEDOM of EXPRESSION.

IN A NUTSHELL . . . a miniscule number of French Language Activists located just East of the City of Ottawa (Canada), in a Township called Russell, in collusion with an English speaking politically motivated LEFTIST Mayor, and two French speakers on his Council, passed a bylaw FORCING merchants to use FRENCH on their signs alongside English, whether the Merchants wanted to or not.

NO GUARANTEE TO FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION IN CANADA:

Canada’s Charter of Rights and Freedoms, according to Section 2b, which GUARANTEES Freedom of Expression . . . DOESN’T REALLY GUARANTEE ANYTHING. It’s a sham.

What happened in the Russell FORCED Bilingual Sign Law Case is equivalent to saying that the FIRST AMENDMENT in the American Constitution is open to Judicial interpretation on when and where the English language can be used.

THINK SPANISH AND WHAT YOUR POLITICIANS WILL BE WILLING TO SELL FOR VOTES:

I’m not writing about screaming fire in a crowded movie theater. Nor am I writing about using words to defame someone.

What I’m writing about . . . is being FORCED by the government, in this case a lowly Township, to use a language not of your own choosing, in spite of your own objections, on your own PRIVATE commercial sign (property).

There’s no debate or argument over the message of the sign . . . IT’S ONLY ABOUT THE LANGUAGE.

THIS IS NOTHING LESS THAN LINGUISTIC AFFIRMATIVE ACTION ON STEROIDS:

According to this sign-law, I am breaking the law in this community (as well as three others with similar laws) if I put up a sign that does not carry the English message in French . . . same size same message.

Therefore . . . the government is ORDERING private citizens to express themselves in ways that are AGAINST THEIR OWN FREE WILL.

BUT THERE’S MORE TO IT THAN THAT . . .

Because of French Language Activism in Canada, there is a loophole in our Constitution that allows special accommodation to the French language . . . that includes ABROGATING the Constitutional RIGHTS of English speakers.

YOU READ THAT RIGHT . . . If it favors French Speakers, English Speaker’s RIGHTS do not count; meaning that for Anglos, there is no Constitutional Guarantee to Freedom of Expression when French becomes a factor.

THE DEMOGRAPHICS ILLUSTRATE TYRANNY OF THE MINORITY:

In all of Canada, excluding the French Separatist and linguistic racist ethnocentric Province of Quebec, there are ONLY 3% of the population who consider themselves to be French Speakers.

But, unless you can pass a French proficiency exam, which just about all Anglos CANNOT, it is nearly impossible to get a job working anywhere in the country for the federal government.

How’s that for linguistic discrimination at the hands of a 3% minority?

Ontario is about 4% French. And of those 4%, most of them live in small French communities scattered throughout the province, with a preponderance living within an hour of the National Capital (Ottawa), and the border to the Ethnocentric English-Hating French Province of Quebec, where the unrestricted use of the English language is AGAINST the law.

And of that 4% – just about 100% speak English . . . so why the problem?

Because a small town Mayor (Ken Hill) with political dreams of grandeur decided to pass a bylaw usurping the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms, for no purpose other than to make a few French TRIBALISTS feel good about themselves, and possibly give himself the French vote in a larger political context, the Court Costs awarded AGAINST me are $250,000 because we lost.

BUT HOW CAN ANYONE LOSE FIGHTING FOR FREEDOM OF EXPRESSION?

These costs include our first loss at Superior Court, where the self-declared French Activist Judge Monique Metivier said in Court; that even though the Russell Bylaw violated Freedom of Expression, it was the RIGHT THING TO DO.

The cost also included the THREE Judges of the Ontario Court of Appeal who said the same thing. IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

And then there’s the cost for the Activist Supreme Court of Canada, which refused to hear our APPEAL, even though this bylaw and various other challenges we made to the Supreme Court in our request for LEAVE, actually violated their own jurisprudence.

Even though all the Judges agreed that it was the RIGHT THING TO DO, not one of them said why and how it’s supported by the Constitution . . . And here is where it gets really serious:

CANADA HAS A NEW LANGUAGE LAW . . . AND NO ONE KNOWS IT:

Because the Supreme Court refused to hear our appeal . . . this linguistically racist bylaw against the English majority in just one community, introduced by a pissant mayor and council, all of whom were defeated in the follow-up election . . . IS NOW THE LAW OF CANADA.

WHERE WAS THE MEDIA?

Canada’s media can teach LEFTIST journalism to most American News Providers. How scary is that?

If any issue casts a shadow of doubt on the BIG CANADIAN LIE, that Canada is a bilingual country, which is as far removed from the truth as you can possibly get, the Canadian media stays as far away from it as they can . . . as if it was the plague.

I used the headline – 250,000 REASONS NOT TO FIGHT FOR FREEDOM, because it’s true.

Ask yourself this . . . Why would anyone want to fight a battle for the FREEDOM of some thirty-three million people who are lost in a fog, and wouldn’t so much as lift a finger to defend themselves or contribute to their own defense?

FOR ME – THE ANSWER IS SIMPLE . . . Even though there were 250,000 reasons for me NOT to have done this, there is only one reason that I did.

IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO BECAUSE THERE IS NO SUBSTITUTE FOR FREEDOM.

Young men and women . . . and not so young men and women have fought, and are still fighting all over this planet for the FREEDOMS of others, while in our own countries (the USA and Canada), people take our FREEDOMS for granted.

We allow our politicians, nameless and faceless bureaucrats, and ACTIVIST JUDGES to nibble away at our FREEDOMS everyday, as if our FREEDOMS are mere suggestions opposed to ironclad guarantees.

I TOOK A $250,000 BEATING – BUT I DIDN’T DIE. AND I WASN’T WOUNDED.

My father, as a young Canadian landed on the shores of Sicily, before the D-DAY Invasion. He was wounded at the Battle of Casino, but fought-on nonetheless. He was decorated and mentioned in dispatches many times. And was awarded the Bronze Lion by her Majesty Queen Wilhelmina of the Netherlands FOR BRAVERY ABOVE AND BEYOND THE CALL OF DUTY.

My dad fought in Italy, the Netherlands, Belgium, France and Germany. And like MILLIONS of brave soldiers who fought all over the world so the world could be FREE, he did it not because he was forced to, and not because there was some kind of reward at the end of the war . . . BUT BECAUSE IT WAS THE RIGHT THING TO DO.

How do you compare living under the daily threat of mutilation or death in war, to being whacked for a Quarter of Million Dollars by lawyers who profit in the DEATH of Constitutional FREEDOMS?

THERE IS NO COMPARISON . . . And like my dad who fought-on with a bandaged shrapnel wound to his head at Monte Casino . . . I DON’T QUIT EITHER.

It is obvious that we cannot win in the Courts, where Freedom is what the Judges have decided Freedom should be. But, WE CAN WIN IN THE COURT OF PUBLIC OPINION, where Freedom MUST be more than just a suggestion.

Whether you’re a Canadian or an American . . . you have a duty to yourself and to your country to get into the fight. Because, if you accept that your Freedoms should be open to the interpretation of the government and Courts, then you don’t deserve to enjoy the FREEDOMS other people bled and died for you to have.

I DON’T HAVE $250,000 . . . And this loss is not without real personal consequences for me. But I would do it all over again. ACTUALLY, I have no intention whatsoever of slowing down, let alone stopping, and not just about language.

If ONE FREEDOM is under attack . . . all of our FREEDOMS are under attack, and I will not stand silent or passive. To the LEFT, the RIGHTS of Government over the RIGHTS of the INDIVIDUAL have long been an International Conspiracy.

OUR GLOBAL DEFENSE FOR INDIVIDUAL FREEDOM AND LIBERTIES MUST BE NO LESS.

So, when I ask visitors to Galganov.com from time to time to help out financially, you can now see why.

And if I care enough about all of our FREEDOMS to have laid my fiscal life on the line, the least people can do who enjoy reading my editorials is care a bit too.

The mark of success is not in winning, since winning can be defined in a million ways.

REAL SUCCESS . . . is fighting against a much greater foe knowing that you probably won’t win, but getting into the fight nonetheless, because it is the right thing to do. And no matter how much of a pounding you take . . .

YOU NEVER GIVE UP – AND YOU NEVER STOP . . . NO MATTER HOW TOUGH IT GETS.

Best Regards . . . Howard Galganov

Peter Stockland: This is Ultra-Tolerance

 Comments Off on Peter Stockland: This is Ultra-Tolerance
Feb 062013
 

From The Cardus Daily

In the gilded age of newspapers, the best understanding of the politics of the day came from reading Ann Landers or Dear Abby.

Puff-chested pontificators could empty their bloated egos into front-page stories about what a deputy minister said to a sub-committee. But the real temper of the times was in the two paragraphs of advice Ann and Abby gave their millions of readers.

When Ann Landers turned to promoting homosexual rights, for example, the gay lobby notched final victory. The times were not just a-changin’ any more. They were overthrown, carrying a solon of middle-class morality and comportment with them. Everything in the same-sex crusade has been a mopping up operation ever since.

Newspapers are a shredded simulacrum of what they once were, of course, yet their readers still—you may insert the word ‘inexplicably’ here if you wish—look to them for advice on matters great and small.

The Globe and Mail, true to its projection of itself as that much better than the slobs it serves, maintains a full fleet of advice columnists. Few are worth the candle. None are more readable than David Eddie, who writes a weekly advice column called Damage Control.

Even by his revealing standard of measuring the world entirely against his own foibles, one of Eddie’s recent columns could only be read with wonder. In it, he advised a concerned mother to be “ultra-tolerant” of the sado-masochistic lesbian who routinely walks her girlfriend on a dog’s leash in front of the neighborhood children.

Rather than upbraiding the offending party for flaunting her fetish in front of confused preschoolers, Eddie wrote, the worried mom should focus on ensuring her own four-year-old daughter grows up to understand that such public conduct is perfectly normal, natural, and acceptable.

If your daughter somehow discovers the truth [about what the S&M lesbians were really doing]—well, that’s no biggie, either, in the grand scheme. Just take her hand in yours, look into her eyes and say “Honey, it takes all kinds to make up this world.” Maybe it’ll help her grow up to be ultra-tolerant and hard to surprise.

When I read that paragraph, it provoked a memory from my own childhood of a couple getting carried away—really carried away—on a public beach where my family was spending the afternoon. My mother did not take time to write to the newspaper. She simply walked over and ordered—really ordered—them to stop. Immediately.

When the incontinent lout involved tried to talk back, she bellowed at him in a voice that carried to every ear on the beach: “You have corrupted the morals of every child on this beach. At least get up in the bushes where you belong. Are you a man or a dog?”

My mother was five-feet-two at her tallest. When she was in high school, she knocked a bully unconscious by hitting him over the head with a geography textbook to stop him picking on her older brother. When she lost her temper, it was like watching blind Fury take human form—and take over a human face. The lout, looking into it, slunk.

What struck me in contrasting that long ago episode with Eddie’s response was not the juxtaposition of strength against weakness but the difference in the vocabulary available then to my mother, an ordinary citizen, and now even to an advice columnist in Canada’s national newspaper.

Her language relied on a shared morality, yes. Much more importantly, it expressed a common code of expected public conduct even when that morality broke down. As a mother and as a citizen, she was protesting the corruption of the morals of children by forced exposure to sexual activity, true. But she was also infuriated by children having to witness human beings refusing to exercise minimal public self-restraint. She demanded, as she could, that a man on a beach differentiate himself from a dog on a lawn.

In Eddie’s case, what has replaced that vocabulary is a void. A professional writer now lacks the lexicon to articulate for an inquiring reader why it should be morally repulsive and socially intolerable for adult human beings to, publicly and in front of children, treat each other like animals or slaves.

No biggie. Avoid surprise: expect the worst. Expect, in other words, that human beings are simply slaves to animal passion and lack any capacity to consider first their public obligations to you or anyone else. This is ultra-tolerance. This is the true politics of the day.

You will find it, if you know how to look, in the writings of the bloviators who fill the front page with deputy ministers and sub-committees. But in its most vivid form, it’s tucked in the back, where readers still seek advice.

 

Jan 262013
 

It has been said that the greatest way to measure a society is by the way it treats its weakest members.

Using this criterion as a thermometer, how does Canada fair? Are we a country in which the disenfranchised are taken advantage of? Do we have the social structures in place to care for the poor and downtrodden, those who can’t care for themselves or speak up in the face of injustice?

Judging by the increasing level of unrest in recent months, you could safely assume that as a country, we’re not doing very well; the mercury in the thermometer is steadily falling. The Idle No More movement, road and rail blockades, and pipeline protesters fill the front pages of newspapers with charges of one injustice after another.

It is a good thing that we have the ability to reflect on current practices and make adjustments as necessary; this is a virtue of a solid country. I am sure that there are ways to improve the lives of the First Nations, and there is certainly a plethora of ideas on how best to use our natural resources in an environmentally responsible manner that still allows for enough revenue to facilitate the many social programs Canada offers.

Whether or not these current issues should be regarded as injustices is perhaps debatable, but regardless of one’s position on them, the reality is that these are movements made up of people who can speak for themselves and address the way in which they are being treated.

This is quite different from another demographic who are not able to do so. Pre-born children of all ages face incredible injustices in Canada, more so than in any other country in the world. Since the injustice is for the most part invisible and the victims certainly can’t speak against it, it rarely makes the front page of the newspaper.

There is room for improvement in this area. Monday will mark 25 years of no legal protection for children at any stage of development in the womb. This gives us every reason to reflect on the status quo. Undoubtedly there will be some who celebrate this as a huge achievement for women’s rights. It’s unfortunate that many Canadians have accepted the dogma that states that abortion is solely a women’s rights issue. The reality is, it’s a human rights issue and Canada fails to measure up when it comes to its treatment of these weak members of the human family.

Statistics Canada reports that in 2009, there were more than 11,000 abortions after 13 weeks gestation. Interestingly, other western nations, some of which are more secular than ours, recognize in law the rights of pre-born children at 12 weeks gestation. Not only is Canada out of line with other democracies, we are also in contravention of the United Nations Convention on the Rights of a Child, which states: “the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including appropriate legal protection, before as well as after birth.”

Just because the quandary posed by blockades, pipelines and reserves is difficult, it is not an excuse to neglect the real concerns expressed. So also, though the issue of legal protection for children in the womb is difficult, it should not be an excuse for inaction.

It’s time for Canada to start setting things right, to coax the mercury back up the proverbial thermometer. Yes, the politics are complicated and difficult, but that should never excuse a First World nation from doing everything it can to protect the truly weakest members of society.

Mike Schouten is the campaign director for weneedaLAW.ca, a national organization that advocates for federal abortion legislation in Canada.

by Mike Schouten, © Copyright The Calgary Herald

A Free Society Should Tolerate a Christian-Based Law School

 Comments Off on A Free Society Should Tolerate a Christian-Based Law School
Jan 232013
 

John Carpay, Vancouver Sun, January 21, 2013

William Flanagan argues that Trinity Western University (TWU) should not be allowed to set up its own law school because this Christian university is guilty of “discrimination on the basis of sexual orientation.”

As the dean of the faculty of law at Queen’s University, Flanagan should know that a free society tolerates a wide range of opinion on all topics, including sexual morality. No law compels anyone to agree with Flanagan’s opinions about sex and sexuality, nor is he compelled to agree with Christian teaching about sex and sexuality.

A free society allows adherents of all religious and non-religious faiths (including agnostics, atheists, and people who believe in God without adhering to any particular religion) to proclaim what they believe to be the truth. A free society also allows people of like mind to associate together and establish their own institutions, including charities, schools, hospitals, churches, universities, and even law schools. For Flanagan to suggest that all Canadian law schools must comply with one, single government-enforced ideology about sexual behaviour is the opposite of a free society. The imposition of one world view on all institutions is the hallmark of totalitarianism.

Further, Flanagan is wrong in accusing TWU of “discriminating” against gays. Consistent with over 2,000 years of Christian teaching, TWU’s “community covenant” imposes a range of penalties (including expulsion) on heterosexual students who engage in sex outside of marriage. This community covenant applies to all staff and all students, regardless of sexual orientation, prohibiting adultery, pornography, promiscuity, etc. Any student, whether gay or straight, who does not wish to abide by TWU’s code of conduct is free to attend another university. Nobody is required to abide by these rules, unless a person voluntarily submits to them. For Flanagan to characterize these rules as “anti-gay” is misleading.

In TWU v. College of Teachers, the Supreme Court of Canada addressed Flanagan’s concerns by ruling that “there is nothing in the TWU Community Standards, which are limited to prescribing conduct of members while at TWU, that indicates that graduates of TWU will not treat homosexuals fairly and respectfully.” The court also noted that religious public education rights are enshrined in Section 93 of the Constitution Act, 1867.

Canada has indisputably the most monolithic body of law schools in the western world. They are all of the same model, promoting a politically correct world view which rarely if ever questions the progressive orthodoxies of radical feminism, socialist economics, aboriginal entitlements, and libertine sexual politics. Those who shout the loudest for “tolerance” and “diversity” are in fact the most intolerant of any real diversity in opinion, as can be seen by the Canadian Council of Law Deans opposing the creation of a law school which might be different from all the others.

Whatever Flanagan’s views about sex may be, he is free to persuade other people of their correctness. Apparently not content with this freedom, Flanagan seems to believe that every law school in Canada must comply with and teach his ideology. This hostility to authentic diversity runs counter to the fundamental freedoms of expression and association, both protected by the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Canada’s fundamental freedom of religion and conscience is not limited to people who are religious as such. Every person holds metaphysical beliefs in respect of questions like: Why do we exist? What is right and wrong? How should we behave? Science can tell you how to end the life of a convicted murderer, but not whether it is right or wrong to do so, or why, or under what circumstances, if any. The Charter protects the rights of atheists, agnostics and theists alike to ponder these questions, arrive at their own conclusions, share those conclusions with their fellow citizens, and act upon their convictions.

A free society protects atheists and agnostics from government coercion as much as it protects theists. To insist that all law schools (or other institutions) must subscribe to a particular set of beliefs about sexual behaviour threatens the freedom of everyone — including Flanagan’s freedom.

Calgary lawyer John Carpay is President of the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms (www.jccf.ca).

John Carpay, B.A., LL.B.
President
Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms
#253, 7620 Elbow Drive SW
Calgary, Alberta, T2V 1K2
Phone: (403) 619-8014

www.jccf.ca

“Defending the constitutional freedoms of Canadians”

Jan 212013
 

It seems that Bill Flanagan, president of the Council of Canadian Law Deans, is opposed to the establishment of a law school at a highly respected Christian university.

Flanagan sent out a hysterical letter to his cohorts, attempting to galvanize opposition to Trinity Western University’s decision to once again expand the educational opportunities available to its students, to now include a law school.

TWU is no stranger to deconstructionists attempting to usurp the rights of the civil majority by demonizing constitutionally-protected beliefs, opinions, practices and associations; a few years ago, the Langley university had to battle cultural terrorists from the BC College of Teachers all the way to the Supreme Court of Canada, when they wanted students enrolled in TWU’s School of Education to be certified to teach in BC schools.

Of course, TWU won.

Mr. Flanagan and his gaggle of law deans are now squawk-boxing their repulsion about the code of conduct requirements that students agree to. Students wanting to attend TWU agree not to engage in swearing, profanity, drunkenness, porn-viewing, adultery, premarital… or sexual orgies/activities that seem to be sanctioned by secular universities like the University of Toronto; but the proviso that really has their pork stewing in the pit is the agreement students make not to engage in (gasp!) homosexuality.

Oh my! Imagine a school when civility, morality and sexual health are encouraged!

For more on this story

National Post click here:
http://news.nationalpost.com/2013/01/18/attempts-to-start-canadas-first-christian-law-school-come-under-fire-because-of-b-c-universitys-ban-on-gay-relationships/

LifeSiteNews story about the sex party/orgy being facilitated by tax-payer funded university click here: http://www.lifesitenews.com/news/university-of-toronto-sex-party-isnt-an-orgy-its-strictly-consensual-say-or

For a copy of the letter sent out by Bill Flanagan, President of the Canadian Council of Law Deans, click here.

If you wish to express your opinion or outrage to Mr. Bill Flanagan and the Council of Canadian Law Deans for discriminating against Christians, a constitutionally protected group, you can use this contact information:

Please direct your correspondences in care of:
Brigitte Pilon
Executive Director
57 Louis Pasteur
Ottawa, Ontario
Canada K1N 6N5
Telephone: (613) 824-9233
Facsimile: (613) 824-9233
E-mail: brigitteccld@rogers.com