Fighting for Information & Transparency in Prosecution of Christians by BC Human Rights Tribunal

Kelly Ainsley

and to : those who care about good governance in British Columbia

your email to me, above, is not good enough.

Her Majesty the Queen in right of British Columbia does business, everywhere in the province, at all times.

apparently  … just dealing with my simple request for information about due process within a judicial ?   proceeding triggered a case of the heebie-jeebies … so bad that  Mr Adamson bailed-out of his  safe space there at the Seat of All Wisdom, ie.  the BCHRC HQ.   Back in my day, civil servants were made of sterner stuff.

if one of the Queen’s bureaucrats cannot take the stress of blowback from the non-sense for which he’s the flak-catcher,  he does not have the luxury of taking a time-out while the scandal dissipates.    The BC Human Rights Commission would like us to believe it’s  a Person. Thus : the Commission is obliged to co-operate with me in its functioning … not just put out ‘gone fishin’ sign. Text Mr Adamson at his hideout  that :   I’m just getting warmed up.

we have in hand a transcript of the seminar given by psychiatrist W Wong, boasting that he has “over 500 patients going through transition, all in care of the Ministry’ .  Meaning : Wong and his  pals are running a   racket in which they manipulate children to align demselves with the sexual perversions of the Apotemnophilia cult, then bill  provincial accounts for concomittant services / drugs / etcetera.  Point being : many many children are being mutilated by a bunch of quacks. BC taxpayers are being bilked out of funds by monsters – Wong and the rest, especially the proponents of the SOGI propaganda – as they ruin lives with “experimental medicine” .  I remind all concerned that war criminal Joseph Mengele was involved in much the same kind of “research’.  The excuse used by Wong et al. is not any different in principle than what the ghouls who run Red China do there … = harvest organs from living human beings.    What went on in the show-trial of Oger vs Whatcott, and now the Commission’s refusal to provide a transcript of it,  exemplify  how tyrants resort to censorship when they’re being exposed.

Gordon S Watson


On Thu, Apr 18, 2019 at 3:30 PM Kelly, Ainsley AG:EX <> wrote:

Dear Gordon,


Thank you for your email. I am writing to advise you that the Tribunal Registrar Steven Adamson is away from the office until April 29, 2019 and will respond to your inquiry after his return.



From: Gordon S Watson <>
Sent: Thursday, April 18, 2019 1:19 PM
To: BC Human Rights Tribunal AG:EX <>
Cc: watson.gordons <>
Subject: Publicity is the soul of Justice


Steven Adamson, Registrar

BC Human Rights Commission


following below is a 2-page letter which I faxed at 12:45 pm today to the HR Commission

please acknowledge receipt of my fax.
And also, acknowledge that you’re aware I have requested the Transcripts described.
If this letter does not suffice as a proper request, then I need to know what the BC Human Rights Commission wants, in order for me and others, to get the Transcript of the Oger Whatcott hearing

Gordon S Watson
>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<<

April 18th 2019
British Columbia Human Rights Commission

Attention : Steven Adamson, Registrar

This is the first page of 2 pages, total, faxed to 604 775 2020

Re : Oger versus Whatcott your file # 16408

1. When the first session of the Tribunal in this matter convened I was in the audience. 
My notes show that Chairwoman Juricivic stated 
‘this matter is being recorded. A transcript may be available if a person requests it stating his reasons’.
2. at paragraph 14 of the Reasons for the ruling in this matter, Devyn Cousineau folded-in a paraphrase of what Bill Whatcott had said while testifying. Apparently, a transcript has been made of – at the very least – his testimony. Unless told otherwise by you, I’m going to assume that the testimony of Ronan/ Morgane Oger has also been transcribed.

3. I wish to have a copy of the transcript of what witnesses Oger and Whatcott testified before the Tribunal. Please advise me of the cost of each item and how to go about getting them?
My Reasons for having a copy of the Transcripts are :

4. I stood as a candidate to be a member of the Legislature in the general election of 2001. 
I intend to do so in the next provincial election. An essential part of my platform will be ; informing electors and taxpayers as to the implications of what went on in the Oger Whatcott Tribunal. It is of utmost importance for Canadians to appreciate how the ruling in this matter effectively outlaws the preaching of the Gospel of the Kingdom of Heaven, as proclaimed by Jesus Christ and the prophets of Israel. The submission by Dr Lugosi on behalf of Bill Whatcott responding to the Attorney General’s position in this case, sums-up what’s at stake : liberty to participate in democracy during an election, at all. I require the transcripts of the witnesses in order to make them available to the public : this matter is a perfect example of the maxim “Publicity is the soul of Justice” The written record of what was said is crucial for them to make up their own minds about the fitness for office of candidates of the New Democratic Party … for deciding who to vote for, or not vote for.

5. The Bible tells us that “by two or three witnesses a thing is confirmed”. I was not in the room when Complainant Oger gave his testimony. But two of my friends were. They each told me that he related an incident which – ostensibly – demonstrated why the Whatcott flyer was “hate speech” i. e. because a man was so moved by it that he attempted to assault NDP candidate Oger. Ronan / Morgane Oger is a classic example of the fragile homosexual. His type will do and say anything for attention. Had such a thing really happened then he – masterful at using social media – would have maximized it in cyberspace for purposes of his campaign. The lack of any report in the public record, of anything like unto what he pretended, speaks volumes.

6. The Commission is no doubt aware that I have a complaint underway to the Attorney General as to Devyn Cousineau’s fitness to sit on that Tribunal. Cousineau is a longtime partisan political activist on the issue which is the centrepiece of the Oger Whatcott matter. There is hard evidence of her contributing funds to a group which advocates for still more special treatment for the ?L?G?B?T?Q?/whatever? people. It doesn’t take a degree in law or political science, to realize that Devyn Cousineau was biased in the very first instance. It is outrageous that the thing went ahead with her on the panel
7. The notion that Oger ‘was about to be attacked and was only saved by intervention of a police officer’, is a classic example of emotional blackmail / playing on the sympathy of the public conscience – one of the favourite tactics of the Marxists. Had such an incident taken place, Devyn Cousineau would certainly have known about it : she would have used it as part of her Reasons. The fact that she didn’t, tells us that ‘it never happened’.

8. I am unlearned in the law. Nevertheless, I am one of Canada’s most experienced laymen in the laying of private Informations. I have good reason to believe and I verily do believe that, while testifying under Oath, Ronan Oger aka Morgane Oger committed Perjury. I require the transcripts as evidence for substantiating charges against him of Perjury and obstruct/ pervert Justice.

9. The Commission will be aware that at the Supreme Court of British Columbia Lawcourts at 800 Smithe Street Vancouver, anyone may arrange to listen to the recording of a proceeding, for free. As well, a party to it may obtain a copy of the entire proceeding of his or her case, on CD …. called ‘the DARS disc’. Someone asking for it, must apply to a Justice, and swear an Affidavit that such a disc will be used ONLY for purposes of refreshing their memory. But not for publication. Then, if the Order is granted, they pay a fee of $25

10 Please advise me if Bill Whatcott or his lawyer may obtain a copy of the DARS disc of the entire hearing before the Tribunal of file 16408 ?. I need that information in order for me to subpoena them to the Process Hearing when I lay the private information against Oger.

Gordon S Watson

Justice Critic, Party of Citizens Who Have Decided To Think for Ourselves & Be Our Own Politicians

Angry students want outspoken liberal prof Camille Paglia replaced with ‘queer person of color’ over her #MeToo, transgender criticisms

Angry students want outspoken liberal prof Camille Paglia replaced with ‘queer person of color’ over her #MeToo, transgender criticisms

In this age of adults charged with running college campuses actually bowing in terror to every woke demand of leftist students, it was only a matter of time before the youngins at University of the Arts in Philadelphia would go after Camille Paglia, a world-renowned, outspoken feminist and professor at the school.
Paglia, you see, is a longtime liberal. But she’s often voiced views that liberals — particularly of the far-left persuasion — don’t like.
When Hillary Clinton was running for president, Paglia wrote that Clinton’s “blame-men-first-feminism” wasn’t doing her campaign any favors. Soon after that Paglia pointedly asked, “What is it with the Hillary cult?” And after Clinton lost the election to President Donald Trump, Paglia ripped the Democratic nominee, saying misogyny didn’t lose her the election.

Why are students angry at Paglia?

Which brings us to the verbal dust-up at the University of the Arts. Students there launched a recent petition saying Paglia “blatantly mocked survivors of sexual assault and the #MeToo movement, and in classes and interviews has mocked and degraded transgender individuals.” For that they’re demanding the school oust Paglia and replace her with a “queer person of color.”
Paglia, inconveniently, is a lesbian. Not that it’s won her many lesbian fans, mind you: “My problem is that I do not get along with lesbians at all,” she told the Independent several years ago. “They don’t like me, and I don’t like them.” But Paglia indeed is not a person of color, and that just won’t do with this cadre of leftist youths.
In regard to their issue with Paglia not genuflecting before the #MeToo altar, the students’ petition points to the following clip in which Paglia excoriates bad female behavior amid a “bourgeois culture of excuses”:

Inside Higher Ed said Paglia’s comments about transgenders in a 2017 interview likely ruffled left-leaning feathers.
“It is certainly ironic how liberals who posture as defenders of science when it comes to global warming (a sentimental myth unsupported by evidence) flee all reference to biology when it comes to gender,” she noted to the Weekly Standard. “Biology has been programmatically excluded from women’s studies and gender studies programs for almost 50 years now. Thus very few current gender studies professors and theorists, here and abroad, are intellectually or scientifically prepared to teach their subjects. The cold biological truth is that sex changes are impossible. Every single cell of the human body remains coded with one’s birth gender for life. Intersex ambiguities can occur, but they are developmental anomalies that represent a tiny proportion of all human births.”

What does the school have to say?

Sadly it appears the University of the Arts students won’t be getting Paglia ousted anytime soon, as their petition also takes a shot at school president David Yager, saying he should apologize “for his wildly ignorant and hypocritical letter.”
Inside Higher Ed said Yager’s letter — which doesn’t mention Paglia by name — was distributed as students began urging her dismissal:

Unfortunately, as a society we are living in a time of sharp divisions—of opinions, perspectives and beliefs—and that has led to decreased civility, increased anger and a “new normal” of offense given and taken. Across our nation it is all too common that opinions expressed that differ from another’s—especially those that are controversial—can spark passion and even outrage, often resulting in calls to suppress that speech.

That simply cannot be allowed to happen. I firmly believe that limiting the range of voices in society erodes our democracy. Universities, moreover, are at the heart of the revolutionary notion of free expression: promoting the free exchange of ideas is part of the core reason for their existence. That open interchange of opinions and beliefs includes all members of the UArts community: faculty, students and staff, in and out of the classroom. We are dedicated to fostering a climate conducive to respectful intellectual debate that empowers and equips our students to meet the challenges they will face in their futures.

I believe this resolve holds even greater importance at an art school. Artists over the centuries have suffered censorship, and even persecution, for the expression of their beliefs through their work. My answer is simple: not now, not at UArts.

The University of the Arts is committed to the exercise of free speech and academic freedom, to addressing difficult or controversial issues and ideas through civil discussion, with respect for those who hold opinions different from our own. Supreme Court Justice Louis Brandeis’ 1927 advice still holds true today: that the remedy for messages we disagree with or dislike is more speech and not enforced silence.

How is Paglia reacting to all of this?

Paglia told Inside Higher Ed that she considered protests against her “a publicity stunt” by those who don’t understand her ideas — and she praised Yager’s “eloquent statement affirming academic freedom [as] a landmark in contemporary education” and hoped other schools will see it as a model for how to “deal with their rampant problem of compulsory ideological conformity.”

Facebook bans British anti-immigrant groups including EDL, BNP and Britain First: Anti-White Purge Continues


[Facebook continues its anti-White purge. Nationalists are being deplatformed at an insane rate. People who support free speech must insist that social media near monopolies like Facebook, You Tube, PayPal, etc. be treated as public utilities and COMPELLED to serve all people not directly engaged in proven criminal activities. The latest Zuckerberg rampage in political censorship pure and simple. Communists of all sort, who have over 100-million corpses on their record, are, of course still welcome on this minority tyrant’s site.]

Facebook bans British anti-immigrant groups including EDL, BNP and Britain First
Facebook has banned 12 high-profile, anti-immigrant British organizations and individuals including the English Defence League, the British National Party, Britain First and Jayda Fransen.

The silicon valley company said it took the decision because it bans users who “proclaim a violent or hateful mission or are engaged in acts of hate or violence.”

“Individuals and organisations who spread hate, or attack or call for the exclusion of others on the basis of who they are, have no place on Facebook,” it said in a statement.

The following organizations and people are now prohibited from the site: The British National Party and Nick Griffin, Britain First and Paul Golding and Jayda Fransen, English Defence League and Paul Ray, Knights Templar International and Jim Dowson, National Front and Tony Martin, and Jack Renshaw.

ALSO ON RT.COMTommy Robinson banned from Facebook, Instagram over ‘hate speech’They were all outlawed under Facebook’s ‘Dangerous Individuals & Organisations policy’. They will no longer be allowed a presence on Facebook or Instagram and posts and other content which expresses praise or support for them will also be banned.

“Our work against organised hate is ongoing and we will continue to review individuals, organisations, pages, groups and content against our Community Standards,” the statement added.

The Knights Templar International said it was “horrified” by the ban, and that it was investigating legal options. “Facebook has deemed our Christian organisation as dangerous and de-platformed us despite never being charged, let alone found guilty of any crime whatsoever,” it said in a statement. “This is a development that would have made the Soviets blush.”

In February the social media giant banned EDL founder Tommy Robinson from its platforms saying the prominent anti-immigration activist repeatedly breached its policies on Hate speech.

Pinterest Bans ALIPAC With False Claims of Racism



[More techno giant social media censorship of immigration reform groups.]

For National Release | April 19, 2019

Please support our struggle against Silicon Valley censorship and attacks on civil rights by sharing this message by email and on (ALIPAC HERE) .. (FACEBOOK HERE) .. (TWITTER HERE) .. (GAB HERE)

(Raleigh, NC) After taking down ALIPAC’s folder titled “ALIPAC” last week, which contained memes opposing Amnesty bill S 874, Pinterest applied a full ban of Americans for Legal Immigration PAC’s account today after sending an email claiming:

“We have suspended your Pinterest account after finding multiple violations of our policies on hate speech, we suspended your Pinterest account. You will no longer be able to access your Pins or messages.
We don’t allow content that attacks people based on their race, ethnicity, national origin, religion, sex, gender, sexual orientation, age, disability or medical condition.
Thanks for understanding,
The Pinterest Team”

There were no memes or images that attacked any people based on race, ethnicity, national origin, sex, gender, etc. in ALIPAC’s Pinterest account.ALIPAC is a racially inclusive national organization with strict rules against racism, where many of the group’s top volunteers and donors are black and Hispanic.

All memes and images contained in ALIPAC’s now banned Pinterest account were posted (AND CAN BE REVIEWED) on ALIPAC’s Facebook account (View Here) and Twitter Account (View Here). Both Facebook and Twitter have very strict rules against racist and hateful content and have not banned or removed any of ALIPAC’s Pinterest hosted memes except for one about Molly Tibbetts, which Facebook apologized for removing and claimed to restore. (Review Washington Times Article)

“We have dispatched a certified letter to Pinterest CEO Ben Silbermann asking him to correct this wrongful censorship and deceptive claims by Pinterest employees and restore our Pinterest folders and account,” said William Gheen, President of ALIPAC. “It is clear that someone at Pinterest disagrees with our politics and is using fake claims of racism and hate to censor us, influence the outcome of legislation and elections, and violate our civil rights!”

ALIPAC has been fighting a national battle against Silicon Valley corporation censorship, which violates the civil rights of American citizens and maintains a list of more than 94 conservative activists and groups being targeted by Facebook, Twittter, PayPal, Google, and now Pinterest. (View List)

Last year, ALIPAC’s 12 page report to Congress on Silicon Valley censorship (View) was entered into the Congressional Record by Iowa Congressman Steve King.

All of the memes ALIPAC uploaded to Pinterest are still visible in ALIPAC’s Announcements and Alerts section (View Here) going back more than 5 years.

Here are the latest memes ALIPAC uploaded to Pinterest since the ALIPAC folder was censored last week.


Hamilton’s “New Vision” United Church enables slander

Hamilton’s “New Vision” United Church enables slander.


Hamilton Against Fascism (did Mussolini get reincarnated?) held a meeting at a Hamilton United Church about “hate groups in Hamilton”. On a poster promoting this meeting were pictures of two real individuals at a Yellow Vest protest. One, former Mayor candidate Paul Fromm, is holding the flag. Neither man has ever been charged with or convicted of “hate”. The poster LIES! These sleazy antifa enabled by a church — yes, the one with the LGBT rainbow flag outside — are spreading fake news and slander!

Image may contain: one or more people

Taube: Why the ruling against Your Ward News hurts free speech in Canada

Taube: Why the ruling against Your Ward News hurts free speech in Canada

Your Ward News winter 2017
The cover of Your Ward News’ winter 2017 edition.

Freedom of speech has always been on shaky ground in Canada. While many people claim to support this important right, they often smother it with stringent conditions and restrictions that makes speech anything but free.

In fact, a recent Ontario court ruling produced one of the most damaging blows to free speech ever seen in this country.

On Jan. 24, Judge Richard Blouin ruled that James Sears and Leroy St. Germaine – the editor-in-chief and publisher, respectively, of the controversial free newspaper Your Ward News (YWN) – were guilty of promoting hatred against Jews and women. Although the two men claimed their publication was nothing more than a satirical endeavour, the judge disagreed. “YWN repeatedly and consistently dehumanized Jews and women,” Bouin argued, and the paper’s proprietors “were fully aware of the unrelenting promotion of hate.”

The people who had been pushing for Sears and St. Germaine to be prosecuted, which included Liberal strategists Warren and Lisa Kinsella and Canada Anti-Hate Network chair Bernie Farber, were understandably elated. Farber, in fact, said this was the “kind of verdict that Canadians are going to rejoice in.”

No, they won’t – and they shouldn’t.

To be clear, I agree that Your Ward News is an awful publication. I’ve read it twice and I found the things written about the Kinsellas and others offensive at best.

My main concern, however, is the serious blow to free speech in Canada caused by using the Criminal Code to prosecute real or perceived hate speech.


As I’ve written before, free speech is the defence of ideas that are either objective or objectionable. We must be willing to support views that appear right to us, and tolerate views that seem wrong. This doesn’t mean we’re required to agree with different points of view, but we must always defend a person’s right to make their views heard in a non-violent manner.

Hate speech has always followed the same principle, long before the removal of Sec. 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act – which, in my view, was something to cheer about if you truly support free speech.

People living in a liberal democracy are free to hate, whether we like it or not. The laws of our land cannot, should not and must not forbid any individual or group from feeling differently than, or even loathing, another individual or group.

This doesn’t mean we have to agree with other people’s views. We have every right to object to them, but we have to accept that they have the right to speak their minds.

Hence, people are allowed to hold the most vile and repulsive beliefs about any religious, racial or gender group in Canada and beyond. And yes, this includes Jews and women.

The one notable exception is when hate speech evolves from offensive words and personal beliefs, to the act of physical violence. It’s one thing to hate a person or group, but quite another to wish them bodily harm.

This fine line played a role in the first case against Sears and St. Germaine in December. It was based on a passage in the Summer 2017 issue of YWN, which read, in part, “there was the chance that some hothead who cares deeply about me and my family would lose it and do something illegal, like bludgeon the Kinsella’s to death.”

Judge Dan Moore ruled against the Kinsellas because the “plain and ordinary meaning of the words” didn’t constitute a death threat. With respect to the theory of reasonable doubt, Moore correctly said that, “Having considered all of the evidence I am unable to find that the threat to kill interpretation … is even the most likely interpretation, let alone the only reasonable interpretation.”

Hence, the recent court case against Sears and St. Germaine proved a salient point: critiques of hate speech are just as wrong-headed as critiques of free speech. This doesn’t a constitute victory, ladies and gentlemen. Rather, it’s an enormous loss to our personal rights and freedoms.

The Growing Opposition To Factual Knowledge

The Growing Opposition To Factual Knowledge

News From Information Clearing House

I just heard from Tom Feeley:

“I have been unable to determine why the website has been suspended, I have sent lots of, emails, telephone calls and faxes and have not received any response.

“The really frustrating thing is that I am locked out of the C panel and am unable to access files I need in order to migrate to another company’s servers.

“It’s frustrating and infuriating that a company would treat a customer of 18 year  in such away, without warning.

“Thankfully, ICH supporters with tech abilities are assisting me and I hope that by Monday everything will be back to normal.”

The Neoconservative Th…Dr. Paul Craig RobertsBest Price: $8.90Buy New $15.31(as of 09:45 EDT – Details)It is curious that the host of Information Clearing House has not responded to Tom Feeley. Legally it would seem that the host of the website could tell the owner of the website that the host company had decided to cease hosting the website. But the host should not be able to effectively steal the ICH content by preventing Tom Feeley’s access to his website’s material.

Moreover, ethically, the host company should provide time for ICH to transfer to a new host.

If this is an action by the host, Tom should tell us who is the host so that everyone can protest and boycott that company. Indeed, the host might be subject to legal action.

It is possible that the host is not responsible and does not know the explanation. ICH’s disappearance could be the work of an immature and narcissist hacker amusing himself by causing trouble for others. It could be the work of the CIA, NSA, or Israel Lobby, or some Identity Politics freak. It could be a glitch of the digital world—just wait until there are self-driving cars. You can’t trust the digital world any more than you can trust CNN, MSNBC, NPR, the New York Times, Washington Post, Washington or London.

We can take for granted that there will be determined attacks on all truth-tellers as they challenge the controlled explanations that those who rule use to hide their real agendas. Not long ago all of the interviews on my site disappeared. Fortunately, it was possible to recover them and provide additional backup.

The cost both personal and financial of providing alternative explanations to the controlled ones is rising. If readers don’t support the sites that are willing to take on the challenges and risks of trying to ascertain and tell the truth, truth will disappear.

Truth might disappear anyway. Consider that Julian Assange has been framed by Washington, which is determined to destroy WikiLeaks for telling the truth, and essentially imprisoned for many years in the Ecuadoran embassy in London. The presstitute media, instead of defending the constitutional right and responsibility of journalists to hold governments accountable, instead worked hand in hand with tyrants to destroy Julian Assange. Yet there are still large numbers of insouciant fools who rely on these presstitutes for their information.

In addition to the growing censorship, I have noticed among younger generations the disappearance of the very concept of objective truth. They see truth as the mere expression of some identity interest. There are racial truths, gender truths, sexual preference truths, and apparently also age truths. The younger ages, or many of them, cannot tell the difference between an explanation and a justification. If you explain something to them, they think you are defending it, or endorsing it, and that it is your belief. In other words, communication on the basis of facts and logical explanation becomes impossible.The Tyranny of Good In…Paul Craig Roberts, La…Best Price: $4.87Buy New $5.00(as of 04:05 EDT – Details)

I think much of the Western world has sunk into this mindframe, which might also be the case in the rest of the world.

This deterioration in the ability to think and reason is even occurring within science itself. In economics, for example, critics of neoliberal economics and globalism are ignored and their arguments left unanswered. In studies of intelligence, there can be no reference to its genetic basis. Outside science, science itself is said to be a white male construct that serves white supremacy.

In effect, education has become a brainwashing operation that is focused on discrediting “whiteness creations” such as Western civilization and science. White heterosexual males are becoming objects of hatred. They are routinely discriminated against in university admissions and employment, in corporate employment and promotions, even in the military where, according to reports, promotions of white males are more or less on hold while race and gender balance is obtained.

Defense of “whiteness” is impermissible. It is proof that one is a “white supremicist.” Illogical double standards are everywhere obvious. Only whites can be guilty of “hate speech” and “hate crimes.” Yet white people can be called every name in the book and accused of all evil in the world. White DNA has been declared to be “abominable.” As a student newspaper in Texas put it, the world will be liberated when white people die off. Indeed, white people “shouldn’t exist.”

Try saying that about a “preferred minority” and see what happens.

The conclusion is that denunciation has taken the place of rational discussion and fact-based argument. So how does truth emerge? I haven’t a lot of confidence that the concept of objective truth will survive the older generations.



The Canadian Red Ensign



On the fourth Sunday in Lent we were given a sermon on the “love thy enemy” passage in the Sermon on the Mount. While it is probably not entirely within the spirit of that passage to engage in schadenfreude over one’s enemies’ misfortunes, I find it impossible to resist doing so since this era of triumphant liberalism afford few opportunities for such to a man of the right.

The Liberal Party of Canada has, over the years, made itself odious to all sorts of Canadians but most consistently to two distinct groups who despise them for very different reasons. The old Tories of the kind frequently but erroneously called “Red,” (1) i.e., the ones who prize Canada’s British and Loyalist history, traditions, and heritage, her constitutional monarchy, Westminster parliamentary system of government, and Common Law, her ongoing ties to the British Commonwealth and who associate all of this with an older, more organic, more rooted, vision of society than modern, individualistic, commercialism see the Liberals, quite correctly, as a party of rootless, modernizers who can conceive of value in no terms other than those of a price tag and whose goal is to sell out the Dominion and everything for which she once stood to Yankee capitalism for a quick buck. On the other hand, the rugged, rural, inhabitants of the prairie provinces of the Canadian West whom the Liberals and their academic and media fellow travelers dismiss with “redneck” and other, worse, epithets, have long loathed the Grits as being a party of totalitarian socialists who a) tax them to death, b) ignore, or worse, aggravate, their economic difficulties, and c) display the same arrogant contempt towards them that the Obama/Clinton Democrats display towards middle and working class red state Americans. Both of these negative views of the Liberals are entirely valid. (2) Someone like myself, who has belonged to both groups simultaneously for all of his life – a Redneck Tory, would be one way of putting it, I suppose – has particularly good reason to look upon the Liberal Party with utter abhorrence.

The Liberal Party has always been bad but it has sunk to new depths of depravity under the current leadership of Captain Airhead who, more than any of his predecessors, has brought shame and disgrace upon the office of Her Majesty’s First Minister in this Dominion. Will Ferguson divided Canada’s Prime Ministers into two categories, “Boneheads” and “Bastards”, but Captain Airhead has the distinction of being both. Smug, arrogant, self-righteous and preening, all of his public statements and actions, before and after taking office, have been calculated to project, with the cooperation of a fawning media, a carefully crafted image of himself. Since that image was that of the opposite of, at first, his predecessor Stephen Harper, then later of American President Donald Trump, it has all along resembled a bad caricature of the worst sort of loony leftist. He began his term by trying to import the migrant crisis that has been threatening to inundate Europe and create a Camp of the Saints scenario for half of a decade, creating a miniature version of America’s southern border crisis on the 49th Parallel, and at the end of his term, signed an insane and evil United Nations accord on migration which in effect, amounted to an agreement to surrender the Dominion’s essential right to maintain and police her own borders. Any and all criticism of this, or, for that matter, any of his other policies, was met with accusations of “racism”. He used the federal summer jobs funding program to coerce employers into agreeing with abortion on demand, having previously evicted pro-lifers from the Liberal Party, and otherwise attempted to shove his “woke” notions down all Canadians throats by legislation, or at any rate Parliamentary motions, condemning “Islamophobia” and protecting the new found “right” of individuals to choose or even make up their own gender identity. Jumping on board the bandwagon of an environmentalist movement that had long ago lost sight of its original, legitimate, goal – the conservation and preservation for future generations of natural resources and aesthetics – and gone to seed on apocalyptic, end-of-the-world, alarmism, he sabotaged and destroyed Canada’s energy industry and then, just this year, pulled the world’s most tasteless April Fool’s prank, by slapping down a carbon tax that will accomplish nothing but a needless rise in the cost of living, which hurts the poor and the working class the most. All the while his extravagance with the public purse has made his father, previously noted for his record deficits, look like a model of budgetary austerity in comparison. Speaking of money, he had the audacity to take the image of our first – and greatest – Prime Minister, the man who spearheaded the Confederation project and led the Dominion for most of its first two decades, fighting tooth and nail to get the railroad built and prevent the country from splitting up and falling into the avaricious hands of the republic to our south, off of our ten dollar bill and replace it with that of a woman who achieved fame, decades after the fact thanks to the Liberals’ desperate sifting of Canadian history for an equivalent of the figures in America’s Civil Rights Movement, for sitting down in a theatre.

It has been with much joy and pleasure, therefore, that I have been watching Captain Airhead’s image and popularity implode over the past couple of months. If there has been a cloud amidst all the silver lining of the SNC-Lavalin Affair it is that it took an ordinary, run-of-the-mill, corruption scandal to bring about the collapse of his reputation after all the evils mentioned in the preceding paragraph failed to do so. Perhaps the best way to look at that is to regard it as a case of the straw finally breaking the humpy back of the camel. To briefly summarize the scandal, a large corporation that has been a significant contributor to Liberal Party funds and which is based in the home province of the Prime Minister has been under prosecution for bribing a foreign government and last year our government snuck a bill in with the budget that allows for slap-on-the-wrist treatment of white collar crimes of this nature. When Jody Wilson-Raybould was shifted out of her Cabinet position of Minister of Justice and Attorney General in January of this year, rumours began to circulate that this was because she had refused to give in to pressure from the Prime Minister’s Office to apply the new rules retroactively to SNC Lavalin. As Jay Currie observed, the real scandal in all of this ought to have been the revelation that the government snuck legislation in to give their friends a break. Instead, what everyone jumped on was the compromise of an independent judiciary by inappropriate political interference in a prosecution. To put the same matter in Canadian rather than Yankee terms, as our press should have been doing all along although they have probably long ago forgotten what little they ever knew of Canadian civics, the rulings of the courts of the Queen-on-the-bench are not to be decided and dictated for political reasons by the ministers of the Queen-in-Council. Whether we speak Canadian or American it is a rotten and corrupt thing to do – and the Prime Minister’s being guilty of it would not have come as news to anyone still capable of remembering that we were not always at war with Eastasia. What, after all, did his inappropriate tweets following the Gerald Stanley jury acquittal last year constitute if not an unashamed and public display of such interference? Indeed, this was a far worse instance of such interference and one in which Jody Wilson-Raybould was equally guilty for it had all the appearance of promising changes to the jury selection process that would compromise such ancient principles as the right of the accused to presumption of innocence and the right of the accused – not the victim – to a trial of his peers and put in the place of the justice based on such principles, a primitive form of blood-based-vengeance, as if the Oresteia were being played out in reverse. It was at this point that Captain Airhead and the then-Justice Minister should both have received a summons to Rideau Hall and been told that Her Majesty no longer requires their services. Of course this didn’t happen and for that we ought to burn an effigy of William Lyon Mackenzie King annually for it was that, longest sitting Grit premier, who subverted the Westminster system and undermined the accountability of the Prime Minister’s Office turning it into a virtual dictatorship whenever there is a majority government..

As the SNC-Lavalin scandal developed, Captain Airhead’s team tried desperately to salvage their leader’s reputation, but their every effort, beginning with the self-immolation of Seymour Butts – my apologies to Matt Groening and his creative staff for appropriating what was originally a joke of theirs but I refuse to sully my own Christian name by admitting that it is shared by this man – was like adding fuel to the fire. Now, the very people who for the past four years swooned at the very mention of Captain Airhead’s name, are falling over themselves in their efforts to get as far away from him as possible. The scandal having broken on the eve of the next Dominion election things have gotten so bad for the Airhead Grits that they can think of nothing else to do than recycle the lame tactics that failed to win Hilary Clinton the last American presidential election by telling us that Andrew Scheer is courting the “far right” and, most hilariously since it has come a week after Robert Mueller announced that he could find no evidence that the Trump team had colluded with Russia, warning us about Russian interference in the upcoming election.

There is a lesson in this for Captain “Because it is 2015” Airhead if he is capable of learning it. Those who ride to the top on the crest of the wave of fashion, will crash and crash hard, when the tide goes out.Taylor Swift may very well have been right and she and whoever she was singing to at the time will “never go out of style”, but Justin, baby, you just ain’t her.

(1) This is due mainly to the socialist sympathies of George Grant and Eugene Forsey. While Grant attempted to argue that “socialism” was “conservative” his argument depended entirely upon a clever redefinition of socialism and he, like Forsey, acknowledged that this positive view of socialism was not that of the Tories as a group.

(2) This is true despite the fact that one view sees the Grits as being capitalist while the other sees them as being socialist. Capitalism and socialism are but two sides to the same coin which is the economy of the Modern Age. The true reactionary seeks wisdom, economic and otherwise, in the older traditions that predated the Modern Age. George Grant was a man who sought to do just that and this is reflected in his admirable criticism of capitalism but it was lamentable, pun intended, that he chose to stay within the limits of Modern thinking in using the term “socialism” for the opposite of where capitalism had gone wrong. Friedrich Hayek, on the other hand, was a man who made no effort whatsoever to think outside of the Modern box, and while he produced an otherwise admirable critique of socialism, could see it in no other terms than a return to pre-Modern feudalism, which it was not.

Freedom of Speech for Teachers in the U.S.? — Not if You’re a White Nationalist!

Freedom of Speech for Teachers in the U.S.? — Not if You’re a White Nationalist!

Florida Middle School Teacher Who Hosted White Supremacist Podcast Resigns

(JTA) — A Florida middle school teacher who hosted a white supremacist podcast and shared anti-Semitic and Islamophobic content on social media has resigned.

Dayanna Volitich, a teacher at Crystal River Middle School, in the western part of the state, was removed from her classroom early last month when the Citrus County School District began investigating the podcast she hosted under a pseudonym.

The probe started after the Huffington Post reported that using the name Tiana Dalichov, the teacher bragged about secretly injecting her beliefs into the classroom. She reportedly bashed diversity, said Muslims should be eradicated “from the face of the Earth” and praised the work of Kevin MacDonald, a retired psychology professor who holds anti-Semitic views. MacDonald has said Jews are genetically programmed to destroy Western societies, according to the Southern Poverty Law Center.

Assistant Superintendent Mike Mullen said on Monday that the district received Volitich’s resignation, CNN reported. The resignation is not final until the letter is accepted by the school board. Mullen said approval of the resignation will be on the agenda at the April 10 school board meeting.

Volitich has claimed that her statements during the podcast, called “Unapologetic,” were “political satire and exaggeration.”

“None of the statements released about my being a white nationalist or white supremacist have any truth to them, nor are my political beliefs injected into my teaching of social studies curriculum,” she said in a statement released last month.

This story “Florida Teacher With White Supremacist Podcast Resigns” was written by JTA.

Read more:

ANATOMY OF THE FAKE “NEWS” MEDIA SMEAR — Paul Fromm Accused of Hate Speech after Posting NZ Shooter’s Manifesto YOUTUBE.COM Paul Fromm Accused of Hate Speech after Posting NZ Shooter’s Manifesto Brian Ruhe’s guest is Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression

ANATOMY OF THE FAKE “NEWS” MEDIA SMEAR — Paul Fromm Accused of Hate Speech after Posting NZ Shooter’s Manifesto
Brian Ruhe’s guest is Paul Fromm, Director of the Canadian Association for Free Expression