Thursday, May 31, 2007

Earth-worshippers go on the offensive

When the leftists want to push forward yet another dubious doctrine, they don't bother to prove that their statements are truthful. Instead they twist the words and change the subject of the debate, so instead of discussing whether or not what leftists say is right, the debate is mainly on whether or not opposing yet another utopia is wrong.

We've seen that with every single subject the leftists want us to accept as undisputable dogma: abortion, redefinition of marriage, multi-cult, nanny-state and now - the climate deviations which they believe to be nothing but a man-made global warming. Don't expect them to prove it was actually caused by human activity. Don't expect them to explain why they believe the planet is doomed if we don't act in 8 months (as some of them claim) or even 9 years and 3 months - as the infamous "flick off" site suggests. Don't ask them what kind of human (or alien) activity could've caused similar "global warming" effects on Mars or even Neptune [Src2]. They won't answer. They'll just call you names.

That's their tactics. Earth-worshippers have no scientific explanation to their theory; Al Gore with his "honorary degrees" is not a scientist. It's much easier for them to blame SUV drivers (but not all those "green" celebrities that fly around in private jets and spend tens of thousands a month to heat their mansions) than get a PhD in Astronomy and compare what happens on Earth with climate deviations on another planets of the Solar system. So when someone opposes Earth-worshippers' cult, they don't argue with him, they ridicule him. They use the word "denier" to portray every oponent as ignoramus who doesn't bother to notice the obvious - without making a distinction between the change in temperature and the theory that this change is caused by humans.

It would have worked, just as any previous leftist brainwashing campaign worked if the Kyoto utopia wasn't that costly. Too many people started realizing that committing to the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Kyoto would lead to the worst economic crisis since Great Depression. Too many real scientists dare to question Earth-worshippers' theories and it seemed like being called "deniers" didn't scare people much. So earth-worshippers went on the offensive.

The trial balloon was launched by Elizabeth May few weeks ago when she said that Harper's approach to climate change would be worse than allowing Hitler to commit genocide globally. The mainstream media was ok with such comparison and even the Jewish organizations seemed to have swallowed that without much objections. Earth-worshippers considered that a carte-blanche. Those who dare to speak against their fear mongering are now - Holocaust deniers, no more, no less.
There’s a holocaust coming that’s going to make the WWII holocaust look like a bad traffic accident. The coming holocaust is forecast to result in scores of millions of dead and upwards of a billion people permanently displaced from their homelands.
Canada’s last crop of holocaust deniers was bad enough but they merely argued that history didn’t happen. Our new crop is so much worse. They deny what is already happening and about to happen on a horrific scale and work to ensure that it does. But this is Canada, a place where these people are still treated with great civility and respect. I guess that alone makes us all a bit culpable.
That's their logic. Ironically, the eco-fear monger named his blog "Rolling Back the Tide of Extremism, One Post at a Time" and calls for "restoring progressive democracy". "You really can't make this stuff up", says the author of the Step To The Right blog. I couldn't agree more. Hypocrisy and turpitude of the Kyoto stormfront has reached the levels none of us could ever think of.

Wednesday, May 30, 2007

Senate Reform - One year and counting

If you had the opportunity to choose between two systems of representation, would you prefer a candidate who's contested the election and received his mandate from the voters or would you prefer someone appointed by the governing party, without receiving a single vote from the people he would be representing? Would you prefer a lawmaker with a limited term mandate, who could be voted out of the office if his constituents decide so or would you rather have the lawmakers stay in the legislature for decades without going to the voters?

If you choose a representative who is elected for a fixed term - then we have a common ground on Senate reform. We may disagree on everything else but at least we both agree that a lawmaker elected by the people for an 8-year term is better than a non-elected appointee that's going to hold his seat until he turns 75. Too bad most of the Liberal MPs and Senators don't agree with that.

Both Australia and the US had moved towards elected Senate long ago. In fact, the system which is proposed by the Harper government would resemble the Australian model. With the Senators elected to a twice longer term than MPs, we would end up having half of our Senators going to the voters in every general election. Just as in Australia, the Senators would be elected province-wide, using a Single Transferable Vote.

Of course, unlike Australia, we would still have the "grandparented" Senators, some of whom are scheduled to retire only in 2030s. I'd like to believe that once we start electing our Senate nominees, some current Senators will choose to resign and contest an election to win their seat back. However it looks like most of the Liberal Senators not only wouldn't want to let go of their seats (which would be "grandparented" anyway) but they also wouldn't want to let go of their majority status in the Senate.

Senate bill S-4, which would limit Senate tenure to 8 years was introduced one year ago today. It took nearly 8 months for the bill to get out of the Special Committee on Senate Reform and pass the second reading. Then it went back to the committee, this time on Legal and Constitutional Affairs. That's where the bill is now. The Liberals have a 3:1 majority in the Senate, so they don't need to work overtime to have the bill stalled.

Neither do they welcome another Senate Reform bill (C-43), that would make Senate nominees elected. (Technically they'd still be appointed by the PM, but the list of nominees would be compiled in a province-wide election.) The bill was introduced in December but hasn't moved beyond the second reading debates so far. The Liberals do their best to obstruct the bill. Most likely they look forward for the next election, after which they hope to fill the vacant Senate seats with the nominees of their own, thus perpetuating Liberal majority in the Senate. The NDP calls for abolishing the Senate so they oppose the bill that would give the Upper Chamber the legitimacy from the voters. The Block? Elected Senate doesn't add to the Separatist cause, they know that. So don't expect them to support the bill.

The Conservative party, frustrated with the Liberal filibustering over the Senate reform has launched a series of ads, calling Stephane Dion not a leader. Some consider that to be a personal attack. I don't think so. A true leader is concerned about the next generation, not about the next election. So if all Dion can dream of is winning a minority (or a coalition with NDP) next election and turning a 3:1 Liberal majority in the Senate into a 4:1 majority - he is truly not a leader.

Tuesday, May 29, 2007

How is that going to make the air cleaner?

Air Canada couldn't wait until the opposition parties overwhelm the Conservative minority and force carbon taxes on Canada. The airline decided to act alone, suggesting passengers to pitch in for their share of a plane's carbon emissions. Those who believe in man-made global warming can now "clear their conscience" (as per Globe and Mail), as well as their wallets by purchasing "carbon offsets" when they buy their tickets. The green indulgence ranges from $1.60 for short-haul routes such as Montreal-Boston to as much as $40 for the longest flights such as Toronto-Hong Kong.

The Globe and Mail article mentions "guilt over global warming" and suggests that passengers will be "obtaining a guilt-free trip" by agreeing to pay yet another surcharge on top of the sales taxes, airport improvement fees, NavCan charges, fuel surcharges, air security taxes and many other fees that drive the price of a $99 ticket to $170-$180. Proceeds from the new surcharge will be donated to an organization named "zero footprint", a self-appointed carbon-trading organization that offers "carbon offsets" right on their website. A token donation of $12.80 added to the cost of a Vancouver-Montreal return flight may be enough for some passengers so they no longer feel guilty for not going to Montreal on a bicycle. But will this "green" surcharge actually make the air cleaner?
Troy Tohm, 31, a guest service agent at a Calgary hotel, was flabbergasted when told about Air Canada's initiative.

“You've got to be kidding. That's one of the stupidest things that I've ever heard,” Mr. Tohm said. “It's ridiculous because we already pay environmental taxes. Enough is enough. If I really want to donate, I will donate on my own.”
It's worse than ridiculous. It's a fraud. By acting as a "carbon offset" salesman for the "zero footprint", Air Canada de-facto recognizes the organization as a legitimate carbon-trading body which has the monopoly on hot air sales. Let alone they contribute to the "global warming" scare.
The Greens are really going to go after you because you put out 49 per cent of the countries emissions. Does anybody ask 49 per cent of what? Does anybody know how small that number is?
Let's do the math ourselves. Carbon Dioxide (CO2) is only 0.0383% of the atmosphere. Only 3.2% of that is man-made which brings us to 0.001225%. Canada's contribution is 2% of the above or 0.0000245% (0.245 parts per million) which, let's not forget, is the product of carbon emissions from over a century. The environmental fanatics want Canada to reach its "Kyoto target" which will require reducing carbon emissions by one third or so in less than 5 years. Even if we forget about the economic impact of such measures, how many years will it take for the amount of CO2 in the atmosphere to go down from 383ppm to 382.99?

But the Protocols of the Learned Elders of Kyoto allow bypassing actual emission cuts by purchasing "carbon offsets" from other countries. That will result in recession, skyrocketing utility prices, rolling blackouts and considerably lower standard of living for Canadians. But will it make the air any cleaner? Neither will the "green" surcharge on airline tickets.

Monday, May 28, 2007

Former Soviet Citizen Rediscovers The Right To Life

Soviet Union was not only the first country to make atheism its official religion, it was also the first country to adopt the "life starts at birth" concept. Abortion used to be the most common (sometimes - the only) form of contraception, thus multiple abortions became the way of life for many. Even now, fetal rights are unheard of in most part of Russia and the former Soviet republics.
Like most Soviet-era fetuses conceived in Russia by couples who were already parents, I was scheduled for abortion as a matter of course. In a society where abortion was the only form of birth control, where men didn't trouble themselves to "pull out," and some women had double-digit abortion counts, often the appointment would be scheduled before a couple even stopped to remember that they wanted a second child.
Now, after the Soviet regime is gone, things are changing. But with the number of abortions per capita outnumbering Canada nearly 10 to 1, it will take years for people to rediscover fetal rights. And it will take decades to recover from a severe demographic crysis, paying the harsh price for killing millions of babies in the womb.

Friday, May 25, 2007

Welcome To The Conservative Party

A young woman was about to finish her first year of college. Like so many others her age, she considered herself to be a good NDP'er, and was very much in favor of the redistribution of wealth. She was deeply ashamed that her father was a rather staunch Conservative, a feeling she openly expressed. Based on the lectures that she had participated in, and the occasional chat with a professor, she felt that her father had for years harbored an evil, selfish desire to keep what he thought should be his.

One day she was challenging her father on his opposition to higher taxes on the rich and the addition of more government welfare programs. The self-professed objectivity proclaimed by her professors had to be the truth and she indicated so to her father. He responded by asking her how she was doing in school. Taken aback, she answered rather haughtily that she had a 4.0 GPA, and let him know that it was tough to maintain, insisting that she was taking a very difficult course load and was constantly studying, which left her no time to go out and party like other people she knew. She didn't even have time for a boyfriend, and didn't really have many college friends because she spent all her time studying.

Her father listened and then asked, "How is your friend Audrey doing?" She replied, "Audrey is barely getting by. All she takes are easy classes, she never studies, and she barely has a 2.0 GPA. She is so popular on campus; college for her is a blast. She's always invited to all the parties, and lots of times she doesn't even show up for classes because she's too hung over." Her wise father asked his daughter, "Why don't you go to the Dean's office and ask him to deduct a 1.0 off your 4.0 GPA and give it to your friend who only has a 2.0. That way you will both have a 3.0 GPA and certainly that would be a fair and equal distribution of GPA."

The daughter, visibly shocked by her father's suggestion, angrily fired back, "That wouldn't be fair! I have worked really hard for my grades! I've invested a lot of time, and a lot of hard work! Audrey has done next to nothing toward her degree. She played while I worked my tail off!" The father slowly smiled, winked and said gently, "Welcome to the Conservative Party".

Thursday, May 24, 2007

What's proposed for Ontario: just to make things clear

As the Mixed-Member model proposed for Ontario is being discussed on blogs and forums, it appears that not everyone understands how it works. Some believe that the proportionality will only apply to the 39 list seats with the 90 local seats being left out. So, they assume, if a party wins 50 local seats (out of 90) and 41.1% of the vote on a party list ballot, it will receive 39x41.1%=16 list seats on top of the 50 local seats it already has, thus winning majority of seats without majority of votes. Even Giuseppe Gori, the leader of the Family Coalition Party of Ontario made similar mistake in one of the interviews when he mentioned that the party would need a little over 2.5% of the vote to win a single list seat. Such system is called Parallel Voting but that's not how the Mixed Member Proportional system works.

Under the proposed model, the proportionality will apply to all 129 seats. The number of local seats will be taken into account when list seats are distributed - to provide overall proportionality. Therefore, a party that wins 50 local seats and 41.1% of the party list vote, will be entitled to 129x41.1%=53 seats. Since the party already won 50 local seats, it will only receive 3 list seats.

But what happens if that same party wins 55 local seats? The party keeps all the local seats but of course it receives no list seats. Initial proposal also suggested adding "overhang" seats to accommodate fair share of seats to other parties. But the final report published by the Citizen's Assembly (page 23) states that the size of the legislature won't change in this case. So if the party wins too many local seats - it will remain slightly overrepresented.

As for the smaller parties - they must win more than 3% of the province-wide party list vote to qualify for list seats, so 2.56% of the list vote won't be enough. However with just over 3% of the vote (3.1% to be precise) the party will be entitled to as many as 4 seats. That may not sound much but that could make a difference in a minority Parliament.

Wednesday, May 23, 2007

Now they are telling us?

McLean's magazine has found out that Canada has a baby deficit.
Ontario's Ministry of Education predicts that, by 2010, total elementary and secondary school enrolment will drop by nearly 100,000 students from 2002 numbers.
Let me reiterate - that's Ontario. A province that hosts more than a half of all the new arrivals to Canada. That's nearly 150,000 people, among them - at least 20,000 children. Still, as it appears, Ontario needs over 12,000 more children coming to the province every year to keep elementary and secondary school enrolment from dropping. Immigration may be the way to address skilled labour shortage but, contrary to what the Liberal politicians suggested in 1990s, immigration alone cannot avert a demographic crisis.

The lengthy cover story does mention secularization, birth control and a "heightened desire for personal freedom" (e.g. selfishness believed to be virtue) as factors that contribute to the lack of children. But McLean's didn't mention over 100,000 abortions that take place in Canada every year; some 36,000 to 38,000 of them - in Ontario, the same province that has the school enrolment shrinking. (Well, which province doesn't?)

The article discusses social assistance and various other incentives for families to have more children. But there's nothing there about a lengthy campaign waged by the courts and the political left to demean, distort and finally - destroy the traditional family and marriage. Instead of defending the unitive and procreative nature of marriage, the lawmakers decided to water it down for the sake of equality. First they made it unnecessary for partners that already live together to get married. Then they redefined "marriages for civic purposes" so those two partners don't necessarily have to be a man and a woman. What's left of marriage nowadays may still have a use for tax and estate planning but it appears to be far too weak for a foundation the families are built upon.

The author prefers not to mention the cult of so called "safe sex" which dominates the public schools. What kind of birth rate can we expect when the "sex education" lectures promote nothing but contraception and perversion? When the government uses public funds to subsidize a paper trash (known as the "little black book") which recommends abnormal types of intercourse as "safe" because they won't result in pregnancy; when young girls are taught that they could "choose" to destroy an "unwanted" baby anytime during the pregnancy - we should be thankful for those few babies that are born.

McLean's cover story is over 30 paragraphs long. It analyzes different ways in which governments worldwide respond to demographic crisis, admitting that even the most successful measures still fall short of bringing the birth rate to the replacement level. There's only one measure left out: The Culture Of Life.

Monday, May 21, 2007

Germany: Blitzkrieg Against Homeschooling Continues

The ordeal may be over for the Busekros family since their homeschooled daughter Melissa is now 16. But life isn't any easier for other homeschooling families that still live under constant threat of hefty fines, loss of custody over their children and even criminal charges as the German government officials make it clear they won't let go of a Hitler-era law which bans homeschooling.

A federal prosecutor in the German state of Hesse has announced that he's not satisfied with the fines that Juergen and Rosemarie Dudek were forced to pay for homeschooling their six children. He is appealing the verdict, seeking nothing less than three-month prison terms on the grounds that in the state of Hesse, a family's failure to follow the mandatory school attendance laws violates not only administrative regulations, but the criminal code.

Dudek family, well aware of the mandatory school attendance laws had applied for approval of a "state-recognized private school". But the officials decided that a school run by families that have done excellent job educating their on children, "has no chance to succeed at any rate". Now Juergen and Rosemarie Dudek are planning to leave the region - even that doesn't satisfy the authorities that obviously don't like the idea of letting those six kids growing up to become independently thinking voters.

According to Home School Legal Defence Association there are about 400 homeschooling families in Germany. Virtually all of them either forced into hiding or in court. The authorities lost their fight for the custody of Melissa Busekros - a German appeals court ordered legal custody returned to her family few weeks after Melissa had run away from her foster parents. Snatching a girl from her family and lying about it in a TV interview did somewhat damage their reputation. Now they want to show other homeschooling families that the state has no intention to back down.

Michael Farris, founder of the HSLDA, has said he believes the German treatment of Christian homeschoolers is the "edge of the night that's coming" for believers.
"Germany is the only Western democracy taking this incredibly hard-line approach, but there are growing clouds on a number of national horizons," Farris told WND.

"The philosophy that the government knows best how to raise children is really becoming a worldwide phenomenon," Farris said. "I think Germany represents the edge of the night that's coming."
A website calling to boycott German goods in support of Melissa Busekros is still functional and it has the contact information of German embassy in US. The minister of education for Hesse, Karin Wolff, can be reached at The more of us speak up, the more freedom will we have to make decision over our children's education.

Sunday, May 20, 2007

Important Recall Notice

The Maker of all human beings is recalling all units manufactured, regardless of make or year, due to a serious defect in the primary and central component of the heart. This is due to malfunction in the original prototype units code named "Adam" and "Eve", resulting in there production of the same defect in all subsequent units.

This defect has been technically termed "Subsequent Internal Non-morality", or more commonly known as S.I.N., as it is primarily expressed.

Some other symptoms:
1. Loss of direction
2. Foul vocal emissions
3. Amnesia of origin
4. Lack of peace and joy
5. Selfish or violent behavior
6. Depression or confusion in the mental component
7. Fearfulness
8. Idolatry
9. Rebellion

The Manufacturer, who is neither liable nor at fault for this defect, is providing factory authorized repair and service free of charge to correct this S.I.N. defect.

The Repair Technician, JESUS, has most generously offered to bear the entire burden of the staggering cost of these repairs. There is no additional fee required.

The number to call in all areas is: P-R-A-Y-E-R. Once connected, please upload your burden of S.I.N. through the REPENTANCE procedure. Next, download ATONEMENT from the Repair Technician, JESUS, into the heart component. No matter how big or small the S.I.N. defect is, JESUS will replace it with:
1. Love
2. Joy
3. Peace
4. Patience
5. Kindness
6. Goodness
7. Faithfulness
8. Gentleness
9. Self control

Please see the operating manual, the B.I.B.L.E (Basic Instructions Before Leaving Earth), for further details on the use of these fixes.

WARNING: Continuing to operate the human being unit without correction voids any manufacturer warranties, exposing the unit to dangers and problems too numerous to list and will result in the human unit being permanently impounded. For free emergency service, call on JESUS.

DANGER: The human being units not responding to this recall action will have to be scrapped in the furnace. The S.I.N. defect will not be permitted to enter Heaven, so as to prevent contamination of that facility.

Thank you for your attention!


P. S. Please assist where possible by notifying others of this important recall notice.

"To one who has faith, no explanation is necessary. To one without faith, no explanation is possible."
Courtesy of God's Rose

Saturday, May 19, 2007

Pro-Life Walk Across Canada

Terry Fox ran the Marathon of Hope across Canada, raising money for cancer research and raising awareness among Canadians about cancer and its threats. Terry Fox ran 143 consecutive days, totalling 5,373km and even though his health prevented him from reaching the West Coast, he raised millions of dollars and touched people's hearts. Many cities hold an annual Terry Fox Run to commemorate the courageous athlete and his Marathon of Hope.

Today, a group of determined pro-lifers is starting the Pro-Life Walk Across Canada, looking forward to spread the message about unborn children's right to life across the country. Their journey begins at 2PM (Pacific time) today and they plan to reach Ottawa on August 11th, having travelled about 4,500 kilometres on foot.

Some may say they've copied their idea from Terry Fox. Others may add that Terry Fox was running, not walking and that his goal was to run from coast to coast, not just from Vancouver to Ottawa. That's true. But unlike Terry Fox, whose struggle was understood by all, Etienne O'Toole and his friends campaign for a cause that many Canadians regard as attack on what they believe is a personal choice. Raising awareness of fetal rights, explaining people that the unborn is a child, not a choice, facing those resorting to personal attacks or even violence when they run out of arguments - all that makes the journey far more difficult. Yet they are ready for it.
Thus it is in this spirit that I take to the roads and the highways, keeping in mind those immortal words spoken by the great Pope John Paul II: “do not be afraid”. We will not be afraid, equipped as we are with the true conviction that life is worth defending and protecting. We will not be afraid to defend life where it is being attacked and to fight against the forces which seek to rob the unborn of their value and dignity as human beings.
The Pro-Life Walk Across Canada starts about 14 hours from now. I wish all the best to everyone who participates. I hope it changes Canada to the better - just as the Marathon of Hope did 27 years ago.

Thursday, May 17, 2007

International Day Against What?

Some group of perverts wants to proclaim May 17 "international day against homophobia". They don't bother to define what "homophobia" is but judging on the way the word is used, "homophobia" refers to any thought, statement or fact that homosexual activists don't agree with.

Let's say you tell a homosexual that you respect his choice. Guess what - that's "homophobic". Because in the eyes of their activists, their lifestyle choice is not a choice but rather a "hereditary predetermination". They were "born this way", get it? Facts prove otherwise? Too bad for the facts.
Evidence from twin studies does in fact support the conclusion that heritable factors play a role in male homosexuality. However, the likelihood that the identical twin of a homosexual male will also be gay is about 20% (compared with 2-4 percent of males in the general population), indicating that sexual orientation is genetically influenced but not hardwired by DNA, and that whatever genes are involved represent predispositions, not predeterminations.
There are many other researches which make it clear that so called "sexual orientation" could be changed and the success rate for those who seek help is high. But homosexual activists would dismiss the facts as "homophobic". They'll keep showing a picture of a baby with the label "homosexual" on his hand, claiming that perverse behaviour is something people are born with and therefore - it should be accepted as normal.

Normal? A man who worked closely with these people does not think so:
I don't like the word "gay" used in the context of homosexuality. Like "queer" it is a perfectly useful word which has nothing to do with the real issue raised in a later post: the practice of sodomy. People who take it up the back door tend to die young, from horrible diseases or from complications arising from other aspects of that lifestyle. That they are often very bright, kind-hearted people, and that they leave no copies of themselves, does not make their suffering and untimely deaths less heartbreaking.
Medical researches show that homosexuals are responsible for about 2/3 new AIDS infections, that Syphilis is on the rise among homosexual, bisexual men (now they account for about 60% of the new cases), that their life expectancy is significantly lower.
In Denmark, the country with the longest history of "gay marriage", for 1990-2002, married heterosexual men died at a median age of 74yrs., while the 561 partnered gays died at an average age of 51.

In Norway, married heterosexual men died at an average age of 77 and the 31 gays at 52 yrs. In Denmark, married women died at an average age of 78 yrs. compared to 56 yrs. for the 91 lesbians. In Norway, women married to men died at an average age of 81. v. 56 for the 6 lesbians.
Homosexual activists have no arguments against any of that. When another blogger, JemDude posted these stats on his blog, he got about two dozen angry comments from mostly anonymous users calling him "homophobic" or "closet homosexual". I checked all the comments - I found no arguments from the pro-homosexual side. Not a single one, because name calling and "I know you are but what am I" can't be considered as such.

Jemdude is a true fighter. He won't give up just because a bunch of perverts calls him names. But there are others, who think the same way but afraid to speak their mind because that may result in being fired or sued for "hate mongering". The word "homophobia" stands for "fear of homosexuals". But the only group that actually makes people fear is the homosexual lobby. Which gives a different definition to the well-abused word:

Homophobia - fear of reprisals from homosexual lobby; lack of courage to speak up against homosexual propaganda at schools, workplaces and government offices; leads to failure to stand up for traditional marriage and family values as well as inability to analyze the facts which clearly prove that homosexual lifestyle choice is neither morally acceptable nor biologically normal.

So if we want May 17th to be the International Day Against Homophobia - I'm ready to support that. Provided we actually fight Homophobia - as defined above, speaking up against the homosexual lobby, rather than trying to silence people who have the courage to oppose massive propaganda of perverse lifestyles.

Wednesday, May 16, 2007

Earth-worshipers' dirty marketing

The government of Ontario must have hired a team of professional marketers to design the "flick off" campaign. The climate change paranoia is marketed to teens under a short one-syllable name, which is easily turned into a slogan by adding an adverb like "off". To make things worse, the campaign name closely resembles a swearword and sometimes could be read as such.

Of course all that makes the campaign quite popular among teens who like being rebellious and obviously welcome the new word which looks quite similar to a famous dirty word, sounds quite similar, yet it's not the actual swearword and thus - could be said, written and worn on a t-shirt despite the objections from parents.

It's quite disturbing to see corporations resorting to such kind of advertising when marketing a gadget or a snack. But when such notorious methods are used by the government to market political message to teens - that's outrageous.

A swearword-like name lures teens to a site full of catchy slogans and political statements that nobody bothers to prove. "We only have 10 years to reduce emissions or we're screwed", shows the banner on a front page. The reader then finds out that in fact we only have 9 years, 3 months and so many days. But there's no article explaining how come we only have 9 years and 3 months, not 9 and three quarters and what exactly will happen on September 1st, 2016 if we don't submit to the "flick off" campaign.

So don't ask the flick fans about carbon trading or emission credits - they won't be able to answer. Don't try to explain them that since 1990 Canada's population increased by over 20%, which makes it impossible to bring emissions down to the 1990 level without a severe recession - they won't listen. All they know is that "if we don't act now - we're screwed" and those who think otherwise shall "go flick themselves".

These are becoming the dogmas of the new environmentalist cult for which "the inconvenient truth" is the Bible. This cult has nothing to do with science which shows no evidence of man-made global warming, it is based on nothing but beliefs that "global warming" exists and that developed nations are to blame for it.

Luckily, there are still young people smart enough not to fall for these dirty tricks. Jesse Fontaine, a 14 year-old homeschooled Christian teen from Timmins, Ontario wrote an open letter to the Ontario PM Dalton McGuinty where he expresses his discontent with the "flick off" campaign.
There must be a better way to relay the importance of conserving energy to young people without throwing our morals and values out the window to do so.

Regardless of what a person's religious beliefs or values are, surely the majority of Ontario's Canadians would not see the actions of your environment minister as wise or even as acceptable.

I am confident that the Canadian flag which currently flies from the flag pole that I set up in our yard, stands for a higher moral standard than those used by your Minister in establishing the method chosen to communicate with us in the "FLICK OFF" program.
Well said!

Jesse's letter was published in The Timmins Press and hopefully will be noticed at Queen's Park. I also hope that the parents who are concerned about the values their children are taught at public schools also notice this letter and ask themselves: Is it a coincidence that most teenagers who retain independent thought and stand up for high moral standards are homeschooled Christians?

Tuesday, May 15, 2007

Action alert: Pro-Life Physicians and Protection of Conscience

Received by e-mail from Suzanne.
Dear Pro-Life Friends,

The National Post recently reported that the National Abortion Federation is lobbying the Canadian Medical Association to remove its "conscientious objector policy, which allows physicians to refuse to refer patients for abortions," saying that doctors should put the interests of women seeking abortion before their own "religious and moral convictions." (See article copied at the end of this email, "Doctors asked to change national abortion policy," by Melissa Leong, National Post, May 10, 2007).


Currently, the CMA's abortion policy allows doctors to refuse to make an abortion referral when such would violate their religious / conscientious beliefs. The director of ethics at CMA, Dr. Jeff Blackmer, recently clarified CMA's position in the April 24, 2007 issue of the Canadian Medical Association Journal (CMAJ) after the CMA's policy was misrepresented in a guest editorial in the CMAJ last July by lawyers Sanda Rodgers and Jocelyn Downie who claimed that doctors who refuse to refer for abortion are committing "malpractice." Dr. Blackmer's letter of clarification was reprinted in the National Post on May 5 (see below).

However, according to an earlier story in the National Post, Dr. Blackmer has said that "a huge groundswell from the membership one way or another" could force a reevaluation of CMA's abortion policy. ('The "A" word: How did abortion, that most contentious of issues, become one that is simply not discussed publicly?" by Anne Marie Owens, National Post, Saturday, May 5, 2007). Within 5 days of that report, we hear that the National Abortion Federation is lobbying CMA to change its policy to take away a physician's right to freedom of conscience and religion.

What can be done:

If CMA's policy were to be changed so that doctors were compelled to make abortion referrals against their conscientious / religious beliefs, Canada may one day find itself without any practicing pro-life doctors. Canadian Physicians for Life is already in dialogue with the CMA, the CMAJ, and CPL's membership regarding this issue (and has been ever since the offending guest editorial was published in the CMAJ in July 2006). But if you, as a member of the Canadian pro-life public, are also concerned about the pressure that is currently being put on pro-life doctors to participate directly or indirectly in an abortion, please consider writing to Dr. Blackmer and to the president of CMA, Dr. Colin McMillan, the president-elect, Dr. Brian Day, and the editor-in-chief of the CMAJ, Dr. Paul Hebert, THANKING them for upholding and clarifying the CMA's abortion policy, while politely asking that the protections for doctors with respect to freedom of conscience be strengthened.

Contact info for CMA/CMAJ:

Dr. Jeff Blackmer, Executive Director, Office of Ethics (

Dr. Colin McMillan, President (
Dr. Dr. Brian Day, President-Elect (email:

Dr. Paul Hebert, Editor-in-Chief, Canadian Medical Association Journal, (

You might also consider copying your letter to the National Post:;

After you send your letter to CMA/CMAJ, we'd appreciate it if you could forward a copy of it on to us at so that we have some idea of how pro-life Canadians are reacting to this issue. Thank you.

If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to contact us.

Barbara McAdorey (Administrator), on behalf of the board of

Canadian Physicians for Life
PO Box 1289
Ottawa ON K0A 2Z0
ph/fax: 613-728-LIFE(5433)

The so called "national abortion federation" is the same organization that claims access to abortions has fallen to the "alarming lows" (despite over 100,000 of them performed in Canada every year). Now they want CMA to rewrite its policies so the doctors would be compelled to make abortion referrals despite their conscientious opposition to abortions on demand. Not only they want to make access to abortions even easier than it is now but they also want to force pro-life doctors to choose between their conscience and their jobs.

Monday, May 14, 2007

Déjà Vu?

Five Commandments For A Soviet Citizen:
  1. Don't think.
  2. If you think - don't say it.
  3. If you say it - don't write.
  4. If you write it - don't sign.
  5. If you think, if you say it, if you write it and if you sign it - don't complain!
That's the way it used to be in Soviet Union. And here's how the lefties want it to be in Canada or any other Western country for that matter.

The Liberal Left’s Ten Commandments:
By Rev. Dr. David M. Berman Th.D., CWN:
  1. “Thou shall not speak against the liberal world view”
  2. “Thou shall not think contrary to what the left deems acceptable”
  3. “Thou shall have no other gods but political correctness
  4. “Thou shall not raise thy children according to your Christian faith”
  5. “Thou shall have no school choice for that would curtail indoctrination”
  6. “Thou shall remember to always speak evil of Christians
  7. “Thou shall never admit the founding fathers had a Christian world view”
  8. “Thou shall always have faith in government programs
  9. “Thou shall never claim anything as absolutely true unless it is in keeping with the atest leftist propaganda
  10. “Thou shall always worship the mother who kills her unborn child
(Courtesy of The Black Kettle)

Saturday, May 12, 2007

New Brunswick needs babies!

We had quite a few great speakers at the March For Life rally in Fredericton. Among them was Susan Leger, president of the New Brunswick Right To Life. I was lucky to obtain the text of her speech - which I post here with Susan's permission.
I am more than delighted to greet you on this most beautiful spring day. On behalf of the executive board of directors, volunteers and staff of New Brunswick Right To Life, welcome and thank you all for making the extra effort to stand with us today. I’ve come with three points to share and just two minutes to do it. So no elaboration, just short and sweet.

First: New Brunswick needs babies!

I trust most of you have been keeping up on the latest developments. I’ll spare you getting into all the statistics, but folks, at 1.4 children per family we’re not even replacing ourselves. 2.1 is needed just to maintain the population. I’m aware there are other considerations but I submit to you today that abortion is a large part of our problem. Common sense alone tells me that the aborting of about 1000 New Brunswick babies a year is certainly not the solution! We are desperately in need of pro-child policies. Policies set in place to encourage young couples to have babies.

Second: most women have abortions not because they want to but because they feel pressured or have lack of sufficient information about available choices.

Many face a daily internal struggle between condemning themselves and defending their “choice”. A struggle that manifests itself in harmful behaviors, depression, suicidal urges, flashbacks, nightmares etc. What these women really need is proper information; support through and beyond their pregnancies.

I strongly believe our government has the capacity of doing more to get this information where it is badly needed: education in our schools, advertising campaigns. This all costs money. There are at least ten existing centers in our province that are ready to promote such projects - but for lack of funding. Wouldn’t it be refreshing to see some of our hard-earned tax dollars moving toward a stronger, more alive New Brunswick?

Which brings me to my third point: As a woman I am extremely disturbed that the New Brunswick Advisory Council on the Status of Women unabashedly supports and relentlessly pursues as a women’s right abortion on demand. And they have the audacity to imply that they speak for all the women of New Brunswick.

The letters and commentaries I have read sound more like they are promoting the views of a radical feminist agenda. They are most certainly not representing the views of the majority of New Brunswick women. And here’s the crunch: they’re doing it all with our tax dollars.

When we as a human society devalue the life of a tiny defenseless human baby, in his/her mother’s womb, we have devalued your life and mine. In fact we have devalued every human life.

Is it not time to turn the tide and begin to restore our beautiful province into a thriving vital alive one, that makes room for all?

Friday, May 11, 2007

CBC - Cheating & Bluffing Corporation (part 2)

Check out the National March For Life Video, posted by Suzanne from Big Blue Wave. What do you think; how many people were there? Judging from the video, there must have been at least a few thousands. The average crowd for the National March For Life is about 5000 to 6000. This year's goal was 10,000. Not sure if that was achieved but it's obvious that we are talking about thousands of participants, rather than hundreds.

Yet when the March For Life was finally mentioned in The National, it sounded like that:
About 1500 people gathered on the Parliament Hill to protest abortion. A dozen MPs were there, most of them - Conservative, none of them - in the Cabinet.
That's all, believe it or not. And yes, they said fifteen hundred, not fifty.

Peter Mansbridge doesn't wear glasses but after seeing the video I bet he needs them badly.

Update as of May 11, 19:40 ADT: There were about 7000 participants. Campaign Life President Jim Hughes stood on the corner with the counter to get the accurate numbers. He said 6800 people participated in the March For Life while 100 or so stayed on the Parliament Hill after the rally was over. These numbers look much closer to what could be seen in the video and the pictures.

Here's a great article by John Pacheco about the media ignoring the March. Check out this picture too. Looks like the crowd was somewhat larger than 1500, wasn't it? Nearly five times as large I would say.

Thursday, May 10, 2007

New Brunswick March For Life - May 10, 2007

Over 300 people came today to the Legislature building in Fredericton to speak up for the unborn children's right to life. The New Brunswick March For Life was held in conjunction with the National March For Life in Ottawa. It attracted participants from all across the province. People were coming even from as far as Bathurst and Miramichi, let alone Saint John and Moncton. Despite the long drive for many of us, we gathered together by the New Brunswick Legislature to rise our voices in defence of the silent victims - the unborn children.

About 1000 abortions are performed in New Brunswick each year. That's a lot for a province that has less population than the city of Ottawa. The Morgentaller's clinic in Fredericton is responsible for roughly 600 abortions a year. Another 400 are performed in the hospitals, guised under the well watered-down rules of medical necessity even though mother's life is almost never under threat and absolutely no attempts are made to save the life of a child. Those 400 abortions are paid for with our tax dollars.

To make things worse, the pro-abortion activists with Morgentaller among them are suing the province. The activists want even those watered-down restrictions on abortions lifted and abortions on demand - publicly funded. Morgentaller is looking forward for more "clients" once the courts force the province to assume the cost of abortions on demand. The hearing of a lawsuit will commence next week. We came to the Legislature to encourage the lawmakers not to give up the fight.

There were as many as 16 MLAs (out of 55), Liberals and Conservatives watching our rally at the gates of the Legislature building. Lawmakers from both parties were among the speakers, pledging support for fetal rights and calling on their fellow MLAs to form a united pro-Life caucus in the Legislative Assembly of New Brunswick. Even the delegates from the unions who came to meet the MLAs for their own reasons were sympathetic to our cause.

The rally at the Legislature lasted about an hour. 100 roses were laid by the Legislative Assembly building, commemorating 1000 unborn children that were denied the right to life during the past year. After that we marched through downtown Fredericton to the Mother And Child Welcome Centre. The Morgentaller's clinic is located right next to it. Few cars were in their parking lot - apparently belonging to the managers of the facility where children are put to death. Just across the fence from them, hundreds of New Brunswickers, men and women, young and old stood together rallying for life.

Wednesday, May 9, 2007

A "choice" to eliminate gilrs

Situations when unborn girls are aborted because their parents want boys are not specific to China or India. It happens in Canada too. Moreover - sex-selection abortions phenomenon is not something new to Canada. It's been happening for years and the consequences could now be noticed in schools.
Heather Stilwell has given out 5,000 book bags to Surrey, B.C. kindergartners over more than a decade. In recent years, the number of pink bags has decreased as the number of girls in the classes has been falling.
The government is doing its best to hide this information from the people. In 2001, the B.C. government passed Bill 21, a law that tightly restricts public access to abortion data, making any such information a "password-protected database". But the consequences of gender selective abortions could be clearly visible. While the normal ratio is 105 boys for 100 girls, in some communities there could be as many as 110 to 114 boys for every 100 girls. While the unborn boys are obviously no exception when it comes to abortions, more girls are denied right to life - just because they are girls.

What's the most frustrating is the response from organizations that claim to defend women's rights. The so called "abortion rights coalition of Canada" claims that being "pro-choice" means supporting this "choice" even if it's a choice to eliminate girls. Those same radical feminists who shed crocodile tears commemorating the victims of the Montreal Massacre are perfectly fine when girls are being murdered for being girls while they are still in the womb.

Tuesday, May 8, 2007

Environment-friendly suicide

Environmental fanatics have found themselves a new enemy - the children. A group that calls itself "optimum population trust" suggests that having one less child will reduce greenhouse gas emissions by the equivalent of 620 return flights a year between London and New York. They call on couples in the developed countries to "think of the environmental consequences" when they are "planning" their family.

The environmental fanatics don't care that the Western world is dying; that if families bother to listen to them, we'll end up with as little as 5 or 6 children for every 20 adults of parental age. The group co-chairman John Guillebaud (who also happens to be the "professor of family planning" at University College London) claims that children in the rich countries have higher carbon dioxide output per capita and therefore he believes it's the Western world that must commit a demographic suicide for environment's sake.

As any other utopian scheme, Guillebaud's utopia requires getting rid of millions of undesirables. In this case the undesirables are the prosperous citizens of the Western world that in the eyes of the misanthropic "professor" consume too much goods and produce too much greenhouse gases. Instead of resorting to firing squads and gas chambers, Guillebaud and his gang want the undesirable society to abort and contracept itself out of existence.

There's no doubt these ideas will become very popular among various anti-life organizations from poor-choicers to the euthanasia supporters. So don't be surprised if our leftard politicians use our tax money to fund a series of brochures or school textbooks in which killing the unborn or denying care to the elderly is presented as fight against "climate change".

Our response should be the culture of life as an alternative to the environmental suicide. The Gospel of Life and the Faith in God should replace the paranoya of worshiping the earth. And yes - we should lead by example and have more children. Because being environment-friendly doesn't mean being childless.

Sunday, May 6, 2007

Leftie To English Dictionary

Need help translating Leftie Newspeak to English? Here's a great dictionary compiled by Marginalized Action Dinosaur. I choose one entry for each letter but there's certainly much more than that.
  • Aggressive outreach - the process of actively soliciting trade for social workers. Generally employed when ‘customers’ fail to show required enthusiasm for services on offer.

  • Bigoted - used to describe those who refuse to view all lifestyles, religions, cultures and deviances as equally valid.

  • Child-centred - education: “we can’t be bothered to teach them… perhaps they’ll do it themselves”.

  • Double plus good - archaic - First real mention of political correctness, read 1984.

  • Equal - not ‘opportunities’: describes the desire to have a workforce resemble the population it comes from, rather than the best person getting the job. See ‘diversity’.

  • Free Speech - only “progressives” may have opinions this is free speech, opinions contrary to progressives are usually “Hate Speech.”

  • Gender issues - grouping people by their sex rather than how they think, feel or behave as individuals. Usually involves some feminist claiming to represent all women.

  • Hate-crime - same as ‘normal’ crime as far as victims are concerned - but much more distressing for Lefties.

  • Intolerance - This can only committed against certain defined groups of people. These do not include Americans, the middle class, white males, rural people, business and obviously Christians.

  • Justice - Government: as in ‘social justice’. Means taking money earned by the general taxpaying public to give to particular groups that Lefties approve of. Replaces market economics. Does not apply to legal system.

  • Key - Government: most things are ‘key’, in particular ‘drivers’, ‘learnings’, ‘deliverables’. In education, all school ‘stages’ are ‘key’.

  • Legitimate grievances - foreign affairs: why we’re to blame for deranged Islamists murdering people in the developed world.

  • Middle-Ages Warm Period - something lefties want to make go away. A time in the past that was warmer than today, caused by Vikings driving SUV’s, the Goracle thinks it was in the year 1400.

  • NGO - Non Governmental Organization – the repository of all moral authority in Lefty World and whose words and motives may never be questioned. Don’t even think about it!

  • Over Represented - if your ethnic group commits 10 times as many crimes as societies average then they should have the same incarceration rates as others. Otherwise it’s blatant racism. ie White should do 10 times the time for the exact same crime. This makes sense to MSM’s.

  • Palestinians - archetype ‘victims’ no matter how many teenagers they murder in bars and fast food outlets. Never responsible for anything they do – or done in their name - because of ‘root causes’ or ‘legitimate grievances’.

  • Al Qaeda - Muslim ‘militants’ who for some reason or other continue to kill far more Muslims than people of any other faith. Heroes of the left.

  • Racist - means “shut up!” - and is much, much worse than being genocidaly violent, thoughtless or unkind. In fact, easily the worst crime ever conceived of. Only white males are capable of this crime. ie Robert Mugabe throwing whites off farms isn’t racist not having a hiring quota is.

  • Spouse / Partner progressive terms for Wife or Husband which are offensive to homosexuals so McGuinty banned them. That banning the words husband and wife offended hetronormative people is not important enough to be considered.

  • Tolerance - The act of accepting that everyone else is right and you are always wrong.

  • United Nations - the NGO of NGOs. All foreign policy has to be ‘in partnership with the committee of dictators at the UN and our European Allies’, unless bombing Serbia - which requires neither.

  • Victim - see ‘Terrorist’, ‘Palestinians’, ‘gender issues’, ‘race issues’ and ‘social exclusion’, usually caused by you not giving enough of your money or existing.

  • Workers - notional ‘class’ of people that Lefties once claimed to represent. Now replaced by college lecturers, human rights lawyers, pressure group employees, Abortionists, Civil Servants with ‘liaise’ in their job title - and other people you would probably not want over for supper.

  • Zionist Entity - the state of Israel but some can’t be permitted to say that.
  • Saturday, May 5, 2007

    A new personality cult?

    Gaia Napa Valley Hotel decided to become California's first hotel certified as "green" or environment-friendly. Visitors will find the rooms equipped with waterless urinals, solar lighting and recycled paper. But that's not all.
    Visitors to the Gaia Napa Valley Hotel and Spa won't find the Gideon Bible in the nightstand drawer. Instead, on the bureau will be a copy of "An Inconvenient Truth," former Vice President Al Gore's book about global warming. (
    Gore replaces God. The mind boggles, says Scott Gilbreath (aka StatGuy) from Magic Statistics. In Soviet Union it was called a personality cult.

    While Al Gore still believes his book can share the nightstand drawer with the bible which he often quotes during his lectures, his 'holier-than-thou' disciples want their idol to stop quoting the rival scripture. They want "An Inconvenient Truth" to be the only inerrant source of information when it comes to discussing climate change.

    As for the managers of the Gaia Napa Valley Hotel and their desire to make it the greenest hotel in the world - how come they forgot about Sheryl Crow the Brownfinger who suggested limiting the use of toilet paper to one square per visit? How come we've heard nothing about high tech toilet paper dispensers that would record the information from magnetic key cards, ensuring nobody gets more than one square per visit? Why would the first certified green hotel allow its guests to waste toilet paper?

    Apparently they realize that if they limit toilet paper the guests will reach for the Gospel of Saint Al in the nightstand drawer.

    Friday, May 4, 2007

    Toronto police handcuffs 11 year-old girl

    The same Toronto police that can't rid the city of the armed street gangs was quick to handcuff 11 year old girl for lashing out at a school teacher.
    The girl says she was dragged to the office and that's when she fought back, punching, kicking and screaming at her teacher.
    Thanks God the girl didn't have anything sharp on her, like a hairpin. Otherwise our brave policemen would have to seek reinforcement from the military.

    Now, beside the bitter sarcasm, there are few things of which I'd like to find out more. First - what was so wrong with the girl wearing her jacket in the class? As far as I know, elementary school students in Ontario are not required to wear uniform. So why did the teacher insist that the girl takes off her jacket?

    Next - how come a teacher (presumably - a professional who must have taken at least an introductory class in child psychology) couldn't convince an 11 year-old to take off her jacket and had to drag her kicking and screaming to the principal's office? What kind of a teacher is that? And what kind of a principal would watch a teacher doing this to a girl but won't intervene? (Or intervenes in a manner that only makes the things worse.)

    Finally - how come our police force handcuffs a schoolgirl as if she was a dangerous offender? Even if the police nowadays must stay on high alert because of ever increasing violence among teens, how come they can't distinguish between a crying 11 year-old and an armed hoodlum?

    There's plenty of commotion going on over some hockey player saying something bad about French Canadians. I'm not sure what he said and I don't really care since freedom of speech hasn't been abolished yet. But I wonder if all those justice seekers that were quick to demand reprisals against that hockey player would even bother to notice what was done to the poor 11 year-old? I'd like to see this happen. None of those responsible for this outrage should ever again be allowed to hold any position of authority.

    Thursday, May 3, 2007

    Homeschooling doesn't exclude socialization

    Many school socialization advocates argue that homeschooling precludes children from experiencing real life.

    Instead of being locked behind school gates in what some would consider an artificial setting characterized by bells, forced silence and age-segregation, homeschoolers frequently extend their everyday classroom to fire departments, hospitals, museums, repair shops, city halls, national parks, churches and colleges, where real community interaction and contacts are made.

    Dismantling the stereotype that home learners spend their days isolated from society at kitchen tables with workbooks in hand, NHERI reports that they actually participate in approximately five different social activities outside the home on a regular basis.

    Here's a great article that denounces the myth about homeschooled children being isolated from the outside world and from other kids their age. I'd recommend it to any parents that are concerned with the amount of time their children spend away from home - being influenced by peers and education workers but not by the parents.

    Wednesday, May 2, 2007

    A SoCon Party? Worth considering.

    John Pacheco proposes to establish a broad-based, "moderate" social conservative, populist party which would help pull and keep the CPC to the right. I think it's an idea that's worth considering. Thanks to the combination of a Supreme Court ruling (which had struck down the requirement for at least 50 candidates) and a "gag law" passed by the Liberals in 2003 which restricts political advertising during the election campaign, establishing a ghost party is the best way for the influence groups to raise funds while issuing tax receipts and to promote their cause once the election is called.

    The animal rights activists have been using this loophole already with their Animal Alliance - Environment Voters Party. They only run one candidate in the past election, winning nothing but 72 votes. Yet this is a registered political party that is allowed to endorse and denounce candidates during the campaign with fewer restrictions than a "registered third party organization".

    In our case, establishing a Social Conservative party would not only provide SoCons with funds and voice during the election campaign but it will strengthen the Social Conservative voice in the ridings that would otherwise have no SoCon candidate. It's known that Independent candidates don't get many votes unless they have exceptional name recognition in the riding. Having a party name on the ballot not only helps identifying one's political stand but it also presents the candidate as a member of a team. It will be a message to the voters that Social Conservatives are no longer lone players.
    So in other words...

    1) We need a handful of officers;

    2) 250 confirmed electors;

    3) Run 1 candidate in an election.

    That's about it. There are some more administrative issues involved, but as far as involvement of interested parties, the above 3 conditions are all that is required. These conditions are not a big hurdle to overcome at all.