Mike Schouten of WeNeedaLaw.ca joins Brian Lilley of Sun News to discuss his campaign for an abortion law in Canada.
Bill Whatcott spoke to Rob Breakenridge of NewsTalk770.com about the recent Supreme Court of Canada's upholding of suppression of free speech in Canada. Listen to this informative discussion about how the courts are systematically stripping away the rights of Canadians – especially Canadians with religious or moral beliefs.
Richard K (not pictured left) maintains a fun and informative blog at eyecrazy.blogspot.ca that at times influences reason to rear its rarely-seen head and make things a little more right for Canada. A recent case in point: Mr. K’s blog, Communist-promoting Toronto District School Board leaders have a learning disorder, exposing the Communist and Black Panther sympathies of the Toronto District School Board, and the sequel Toronto District School Board is shamed into removing Black Panther and El Salvadoran Communist party lessons, detailing the TDSB’s hasty retreat from their ultra-left curriculum once exposed to the light of day (and shocked parents). Kudos, Richard K!
TO: Each judge of the Supreme Court of Canada
March 4, 2013
Your recent decision regarding the Whatcott case is EXTREMELY DISAPPOINTING in that it further restricts freedom of speech in Canada.
Your decision indicates that a claimant is allowed to make a complaint to the Human Rights Commission or the courts if that person is “offended” by something I may have said to him/her. That is so broad it is Gestapo-like fearful to us.
On the Supreme Court website, beside a photo of Justice McLachlin, she makes a statement about Canada’s Supreme Court philosophy: “accommodation of differences”. These three words clash with what your decision amounts to. You make no “accommodation” for people of faith to freely express their beliefs with full religious conviction.
i.e. I talk to my neighbor and tell him about God’s Word as recorded in the Bible and he gets offended. I cannot and will not apologize for having quoted a direct quote from the Bible. He then can, with the endorsement of the recent decision, lodge a complaint about me having offended him.
Does this not justify the common perception that comes from the public that you judges are really “activists judges”?
All evangelical churches exist to proselytize, and due to the diminished interest in religion, many people who don’t want to hear what the Bible has to say are offended. And that will enable them to have the opportunity to lodge a complaint. Then the complainant has no legal expenses, but the defendant might have some hefty legal bills.
You have set Canada on a path that is vastly different from what freedoms we have had in the past. This is not merely disappointing, it is highly offensive to us. Would this now be grounds for us lodging a complaint against the judges of the Supreme Court because we are deeply offended?
You are playing alarmingly loose with our freedoms.
~ Leonard Remple
Every family and child throughout Canada is vulnerable to the agency’s authority. Poor parents and children are at even greater risk. The Children’s Aid Society (also known as Family and Children’s Services and Ministry of Child and Family Development) can remove a child from a home, with or without a reason. While the law requires the agency to obtain a warrant for an apprehension, they rarely do – and they get away with it in court. This behaviour encourages malicious behaviour from teachers and principals, neighbours, adversaries, and health-care providers to use the agency as a weapon to avenge a personal vendetta – one of the most common reasons the agency is called. A parent best be careful not to swear at the principal, challenge a child’s teacher, argue with a malicious neighbour, or irritate a medical professional at the hospital – because the odds are against them. All it takes is a phone call. No warrant required.
View the entire documentary at blakout.ca
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.
Ron Gray presents your chance to make $10,000! Merely prove that Chief Justice Beverley McLachlin and the Supreme Court of Canada did not lie when they officially pronounced that Kari Simpson was involved in opposing the infamous "Surrey Three Books", a key element in their corrupt decision endorsing Rafe Mair's lies and defamation of Kari Simpson. The Supreme Court's LIE has been repeated ad nauseam throughout the Internet, TV, radio, books, newspapers, and law school curriculum ever since. Every source that repeats this LIE is guilty of LYING.
In a landmark unanimous/split decision by the Supreme Court of Canada, the Supremes found for Mr. Whatcott on 2 counts, yet against him on another 2 counts of alleged hate speech. Their official decision is rife with lies and contradictions, so Mr. Whatcott is vowing to ignore their corrupt decision and carry on with his crusade to protect Canadians from rampant Christian-bashing, politically correct suppression of the truth, and the willful spread of decadence and disease in our society. If enough of us don’t join him soon, we’ll have no free speech left at all! Read the LifeSiteNews article.
Three stories popped up in this week’s headlines that all have to do with governments trying to legislate sex, more or less. Whether it’s forcing gay-straight alliances into religious schools, deciding if Canadians can express their religious beliefs about sodomy, or taking measures to keep so-called gay propaganda out of the reach of children, governments are certainly not shying away from imposing their opinions about sex on the public. Read on…
Some Manitoba religious schools say the government is infringing on their religious freedoms with its new anti-bullying law.
About 1,000 staff, students and parents met Sunday night in the gymnasium at Steinbach Christian High School for an information and prayer event regarding Bill 18.
A clause in the bill concerns some religious educators and school communities because it would force schools to accommodate students who want to start specific anti-bullying clubs, including gay-straight alliances. Read more here.
Canada’s controversial 20-year-old legal definition of hatred is set to be updated or even overturned on Wednesday, as the Supreme Court of Canada rules in the case of William Whatcott, a born-again anti-gay pamphleteer who ran afoul of Saskatchewan’s Human Rights Code.
Pitting freedom of religion and speech against a legal regime that bans the repeated public expression of hate, the Whatcott case could see the legal foundation of several anti-hate laws crumble, including Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act. Read more here.
Russia’s foreign minister on Tuesday rejected criticism from the Dutch government and the European Union about proposed legislation that would outlaw “homosexual propaganda.”
Responding to Dutch assertions that the legislation may be contrary to Russia’s international obligations, Foreign Minister Sergey Lavrov said there were no such obligations.
“We don’t have a single international or common European commitment to allow propaganda of homosexuality,” he said. Read more here.
Gordon Watson, part owner of the private cowshare co-op OUR Cows Inc., and Michael Schmidt, the agistment (cow keeper) for the co-op, have been battling the government for years to legalize raw milk in Canada. Raw milk – REAL milk – that has not been tainted by industrialized processes, is legal and popular throughout the world, yet banned in Canada. We commend Watson and Schmidt for their hard work and personal sacrifices to help bring Canada out of the dark ages of ignorance and government / corporate control. Learn more from The International Raw Milk Symposium.
by Faye Sonier (LifeSiteNews.com) – In Saturday’s Bushwhackers embarrass PM piece, Sun Media’s National Editorial Writer Mark Bonokoski proves that you don’t need facts to write an opinion article.
He labels three Members of Parliament, Maurice Vellacott, Leon Benoit and Wladyslaw Lizon “obviously stupid bushwhackers” for having asked the RCMP to investigate late-term abortions as homicides. Had they done so, I would have been the first to tell them that their efforts were a waste of time given the state of the law in Canada. Abortion is legal through all nine months of pregnancy in our fair country.
But that’s not what they did. The MPs asked the RCMP to investigate 491 cases of possible homicide. Between 2000 and 2009, 491 newborns survived attempted abortions and subsequently died after birth. We don’t know how they died, but they did. According to the Criminal Code, the same one Bonokoski alludes to reading, when human beings are born they are considered human beings in law. And when human beings are killed or neglected to death, we expect the police to investigate.
The MPs didn’t hide their motives or the language of their request. They clearly set out both in the letter they sent the RCMP, which was posted on Mr. Vellacott’s website and recirculated widely. All Bonokoski had to do was read it.
Bonokoski then attempts to summarize the decision by which Supreme Court of Canada decriminalized abortion. Unfortunately, it appears as though he didn’t read that either. The Court said the existing abortion legislation was unconstitutional, and Parliament was free to pass abortion legislation that would be. They even offered suggestions as to language for constitutionally acceptable legislation. Parliament just hasn’t done so. There is, in fact, no constitutional right to abort your child in Canada. Joyce Arthur of the Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada even admits to that.
Lastly, he argued that since he doesn’t have a uterus, he cannot form an opinion on abortion and that this position isn’t a cop-out, but a fact. He’s wrong. It’s a total cop-out.
I’m not a woman who has suffered abuse, but I have an opinion on domestic abuse. I’m not a man, but I have an opinion on funding for prostate cancer research. I’m not a slave, but I have an opinion on human trafficking. I’m not a soldier or live in a war zone, but I have an opinion on Canadian military engagement. I’m not an Aboriginal person, but I have an opinion on the Idle No More movement.
Perhaps he believes that he must have first-hand knowledge of every human experience before he can form an opinion, but this seems like an odd, if not impossible, position for a national media editor to take. And I can assure him that the rest of the society doesn’t function that way. We form opinions and vote accordingly, even though we haven’t walked a mile in every Canadian’s shoes.
Bonokoski, a senior media personality, formed and shared outrageous opinions on the actions of three MPs and Canadian abortion law seemingly without having read the MPs’ request to the RCMP, the relevant provisions of the Criminal Code or the Supreme Court of Canada’s decision on abortion. Who says you need to do research and rely on facts to write an opinion piece?
Faye Sonier is Legal Counsel for the Evangelical Fellowship of Canada. She blogs at ActivateCFPL.
The recent National Post article by Rex Murphy is really light on facts and leads me to believe communism is out in Russia and perhaps is planting it’s tentacles in our western media. To compare the sexual anarchists who comprise Pussy Riot to the brave man who stood down a tank in Tianamin Square is really offensive, not the least to the real martyr, who suffered for real freedom in China, not the ones who were spreading hate and sexual anarchy on someone else’s (the Orthodox Church’s) private property.
Given that Rex Murphy has chosen to jump on the Pussy Riot bandwagon, I am sure he is aware of some facts that he has neglected to share with his readers. These women did not stage a peaceful protest on a city street, they stormed a church alter shouting blasphemies and were singing sexually vulgar lyrics. Doing this in Canada actually could bring about a criminal conviction. Unfortunately Rex probably is right, storming church alters and swearing in the middle of a service might not get much of a sentence, as Canadian courts may think such a violation of believer’s rights is no big deal nowadays. However, I would like to remind Rex in addition to freedom of speech there is another freedom that should be protected and that is freedom of worship, a freedom these girls clearly trampled on for the dozens who were in the Moscow church that day to listen to their priest, not the anti-Christian punk rock group who wanted to swear and blaspheme. Had the girls chosen to blaspheme on the sidewalk outside the church and sing their sexually lewd lyrics, they probably would have been ridiculed but not arrested in Putin’s Russia. Anti-Putin protests have certainly happened in Russia with thousands in attendance and with no arrests, but our media seems to neglect to consider this when championing Pussy Riot.
Our media is aware, but they seem not to be reporting on it much these days, these girls also got a two year sentence because they are not first time offenders. Some of the stunts they have pulled off are burning a police car, French kissing on duty police officers in the Moscow Subway, and engaging in public sexual intercourse in supermarkets. The fact our media is championing the cause of this sort of trash, and are ignoring two peaceful pro-life women (Linda Gibbons and Mary Wagner) who have been in prison in Canada for longer than the Pussy Riot girls speaks to the Marxist depravity prevalent in our media.
Mary Wagner and Linda Gibbons have never copulated in a supermarket, nor have they torched a cop car, nor have they ever denied socialists the right to their freedom of belief by storming an NDP convention, jumping on a stage and blaspheming Jack Layton while singing Bible verses. If Linda and Mary did the above and went to jail, I would have no problem with their incarceration and I would not call Canada a sick democracy. What Linda and Mary did is more akin to what Rex Murphy would have you believe Pussy Riot is all about. These two girls have violated an injunction imposed by the NDP in the 1990s in Ontario, prohibiting all peaceful protest around abortion clinics. These girls stand on public sidewalks with signs condemning abortion and the police show up and arrest them. These Canadian girls are never accused of violence or disrespect. Their actions typically net them sentences in the one to two year range. To date Linda has been in prison for more than a decade.
For the media to champion Pussy Riot, sanitize Pussy Riot in order to garner sympathy the punk rock group does not deserve, and ignore these to pro-life Canadian girls languishing in jail for real peaceful protest tells me the communists and tyrants are no longer in the Kremlin, they are spreading their poison and deception here in the west and their cheerleaders seem to be infesting the western media.
Bill Whatcott
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!!
RoadKill Radio's "Drive For Justice" host Ron Gray reveals the genesis of the name "RoadKill Radio", and shows that sometimes Good Things can come from Canada's corrupted court system.
As tax time nears (when is it ever far away?), Ron Gray muses over the many ways the government takes our money – and the money of our children and grandchildren. To compound the many ways the government steals without representation, we see them also lie about it and other important issues. Is this truly what voters want from their public servants? If so, we deserve the inevitable collapse of Canada.
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