“Last week when I was on the Hill mingling with some MPs from both the Liberal and the Tory parties, I asked an MP for an opinion on the freedom of speech/ Ezra Levant and Mark Steyn human rights complaints. This particular MP was appalled by it. I asked this individual for a public comment. After a few moments thought, the MP decided not to.
“Then this person mused–alas, I did not have a notebook or my recorder out so I can’t recall the exact words–that some MPs might be afraid to speak out on this issue, afraid their families might be targeted.”
Stop taking up the webspace, JohnnyDingo… nothing
you post is of any import, so don’t post it twice.
Actually, you’re only comic relief anyway…
I find this MP’s excuse interesting, because the issue at stake is our traditional freedom of expression and of the press. The issue goes far beyond and is not limited to the Islamists. This is not to dismiss the serious threat from the Islamists living among us, but let us not forget that they are only the most recent ones who have used the HRCs to squash freedom of expression when it does not agree with their agenda.
ET and Joe Molnar are correct – being a Reform/Alliance/Conservative member and openly supporting the Reform/Alliance/Conservative Party in Puffin?Dipper territory is an invitation to economic starvation.
I worked for the dept of hwys in 1979 in B.C. It was provincial election year and the union had signs saying “Vote Dipper – If the Dippers win we get a raise, if the SC win we go on strike” in the staff room. I put up a ‘Vote Social Credit’ sign and got ‘laid off’ two days later. I was a lowly flag girl. I moved to Alta and got a job (but I did vote – SC – before I left); the SC won that election so my Dad phoned the new Min of Hwys and told him that I had been fired for voting for him. Shortly after my Dad’s phone call the Dept of hyws local head honcho called me and offered me a better job – I could even CHOOSE my own job he said…I laughed in his stupid ear I was so disgusted..that’s how things are done in the gov’t folks – this guy was a Dipper and he had no use for me! Why would I want to work with a flock pf pipples that would sabotage anything I did?
Later, here in the Yukon, I worked in a school in which the Principle was the wife of the Reform Candidate. We both supported her husband in the election and we both lost our jobs after the election. I was an EI and I got top grades from my peers, after that I could not even get hired to substitute teach ( I had YEARS of experience as a sub and they were crying for help) They call you a ‘loose cannon’ and you are done – my last episode with gov’t people was a witch hunt (by a secret investigator) for a fabricated employer when I had to collect UI for a few weeks because I ruptured my Achilles tendon at work and WCB would not recognize it as an injury because they couldn’t see any damage on an x-ray.
It goes on and on…I think that those M.P.s are worried for good reason.
multirec, I remember that islam guy wanting to cut of the PM’s head. I think the higher ups, running the islam show here in Canada would have scolded him for that. Islam needs the left to believe they are just a misunderstood death cult.
I know though that islam believes if they can just get a liberal government in that sharia law, and all the twisted ideaogly that comes along with it, will be a cake walk.
They know a liberal government means slack immigration laws, and every terrorist and their brother will be welcome in with open arms. They know that if the liberals ever get in power again, they will give them anything they want to keep that power. It is the liberal way. It is never what is good for the Canadian people, it is what is good for the liberal party.
They really have no qalms in telling the followers of islam here in Canada that
a vote for liberals, is a vote for islam.
crap. i have been yapping about islam for years. no one listens, no one cares. islam is a disease, muslims are the host. you have to destroy the host to kill the disease.
Ringo: “It ain’t a vote getter. It’s radioactive, and there’s no way he’s getting a majority by telling Canadians to gut the Human Rights Commissions. ”
The man has a point, the problem with the HRC is the whole “dear mom and apple pie” language around. After all, who is against human rights and protecting the liddle guy, the poor immigrant being discriminated against?
It’s only once you get into what they really spend most of their time and MONEY doing that you realize what a horror these things are. Even THEN, going for the jugular on these things is really politically dangerous.
Start cutting off the financial & legal oxygen to the HRC’s and suddenly the CBC will be filled with stories about how was helped and now the EEEEVVVVVIL CPC is cutting of money, and sure there are some problems, but most of the work they do is good work with great intentions. Come the next election the Liberal Party and the CBC’s acolytes will be playing that tune in every immigrant community with all the suitable editing and innuendo, and mainstream talking points will be “CPC’s against Human Rights!”
Harper and co. do not want to touch this with a barge pole.
Most Canadians just don’t get it, despite all the brave talk about people having to wake up, do something, not be bullied anymore, etc…
People are empowered to speak truth to lies and power only when they have the power of their own convictions and are not intimidated by bullies. The only people I know who have the power of their convictions and speak out no matter what the cost are those with spiritual convictions and principles, and that’s because the One they follow has led the way with His constant encouragement, “Be not afraid,” despite His horrible death. The saying “Those who stand for nothing will fall for anything” has some merit.
A reminder of what the recently-elected Czech President Vaclav Klaus said to the electorate BEFORE he was elected (h/t another post at SDA):
“If you do not want to respect our thousands-of-years-old civilization, its Christian values and emphasis on the traditional family and respect for each individual life, do not vote for me.
“If you want to live in a future shaped by fashionable trends [read: multiculturalism, political correctness, and not wanting to offend anyone with your convictions], when smoking will be banned and drugs tolerated, when marriage will be dispensed with as an institution and only (same sex) couples will go the town hall for registration… that is not my programme.”
Vaclav Klaus gets it. Lech Walesa and the Polish people got it. The Pope gets it.
There’s a COST to freedom, and part of that cost is the very real threat to reputation, life, and limb. There is many a time when I have lost friends, been shunned, been lied about, been rejected, because I have spoken out about the kinds of things this thread is about. I remind myself, when I’m about to begin whining “poor me,” that I haven’t been crucified or gunned down–yet.
Spiritual convictions most often result in the courage needed to stand up to bullying and threats, knowing that we are being upheld by a higher standard than the low/no standards we are fighting—and that it’s worth the stand. Think of the future of our children if we allow the bullies and thugs to take over. Our problem, here in the West, is that we don’t seem to have any leaders with convictions similar to those of Vaclav Klaus or Lech Walesa—both of whom have lived with the tyranny of thugs and tyrants, something we, in Canada, are just beginning to get a taste of.
Unfortunately, you just don’t wake up one morning and make a decision to “have” spiritual faith, insight, or conviction. It’s a gift that needs to be introduced and nurtured, usually from childhood. Sadly, we in the West have largely shunned and ridiculed the gift of our foundational Judeo-Christian faith, especially since the swinging ‘60s (“I’m OK, You’re OK”), and are now in the anomalous and unenviable position of being overrun by a culture which happens to have very strong faith convictions—which will trump our faithlessness and its commensurate moral and ethical weakness and lie-down-why-don’t-you-walk-all-over-us multiculturalism.
Ironically, “multiculturalism” was a very clever ploy on the part of atheists in Canada—ably aided and abetted by Jesuit-trained, Communist sympathizing, Pierre Elliott Trudeau and his Librano Party–to rid the public square (schools, universities, the media, even Christian churches such as the United Church of Canada and the increasingly apostate Anglican Church of Canada) of Judeo-Christian convictions and principles. Multiculturalism became the buzzword in these circles to mean “every culture BUT the Judeo-Christian one.”
It’s worked well. Most Canadians see Christianity as being “the bad guy,” the cause of all of the past wrongs of history, without, of course, knowing any history, because that’s another thing “multiculturalism” did away with: knowledge of our historical roots, especially our British roots.
So, we who don’t get it, who have little to no understanding from whence has come our past courage to stand against monolithic, determined, and dangerous enemies, whose sole purpose it has been to annihilate us and foist their tyrannical ideologies upon our democratic freedoms, have walked right into the trap.
To insist that we can do anything about our bondage to tyrannical bullies, who seem to be overrunning our country, without the moral and ethical fortitude which is the fruit of our, until-now, foundational Judeo-Christian faith, is foolish talk. I’m sorry that many will not want to hear this. Like John the Baptist, consider this a voice crying in the wilderness. But do remember: that just because no one wants to hear the truth doesn’t mean that the truth doesn’t exist or that it isn’t as clear as the nose on our faces.
johnny ringo – don’t deviate from the question.
You declared that the majority of Canadians were opposed to changes to the HRC. I asked you for proof. So far, you’ve tried every tactic in the book (deviation, ignorance, supposition, counter-attack) but haven’t provided any data base for your conclusion.
Again, what’s your proof? You simply cannot conclude, logically or empirically, that Harper only acts as a mechanical reaction to polls; that any polls were done on the HRC; and that the majority don’t want HRC change; and that change will not come.
Yes, the HRC, as rhetoric, is a disastrous topic to talk superficially about. That’s because its rhetoric is entirely smooth, earnest, love and care about the ‘underprivileged’. As pointed out above, it isn’t until you get below the rhetoric and actually see what this Smoothie has decayed into – that you see how horrific it is.
But, most Canadians don’t get past the surface rhetoric. Most stop at the title: Human Rights. Hmmm. Sounds good – why would anyone be against it..they must be a neo-con fascist knuckle-dragging inhuman….
Most Canadians have absolutely no knowledge of the nature of the cases the HRC has judged; how it has fined someone for writing a letter to the editor against homosexuality, how it has fined a Christian group for not wanting to rent their hall to a lesbian wedding; how half of their cases are brought by an ex-HRC employee, not on his own behalf…
How the complainant pays nothing and how the defendant pays all costs; how the HRC has spoken against the Charter..
Most Canadians have never read Section 13.1 Most Canadians don’t stop to think that ‘likely to result in…’ removes all empirical actual proof from a situation and moves The Crime to one of the imaginary.
So – it is completely understandable, that given this Cloak of Respectability, which requires time, thought and careful attention to unwrap, Harper doesn’t want MPs to stumble over the unwrapping. Leave that to the courts and the lawyers, eg, Ezra.
batb, I couldn’t agree more. And I think the undermining of our fine, Judeo-Christian heritage has everything to do with a point ET has just made: with no sure or deep foundation on which to discern and make decisions, most Canadians fall for hollow rhetoric. “Human Rights” Commissions? ‘Sounds good to me!
Tha majority of Canadians, unfortunately, seems altogether blase about FACTS. In fact, try to tell a person in trall to the Spirit of the Age–“No judgments, please, we’re tolerant”–what’s really going on and it’s “Shoot the messenger time”.
That we’ve gone from the “Greatest Generation” to a society of unprincipled, cowardly wimps in 60 short years is a tragedy–and we’re only beginning to witness the damage.
The thundering silence–except from lookout:thanks!–to my suggestion that a faith deficit in the West is, in large part, responsible for the shellacking we in the West are taking at the hands of extremist, fascist, tyrannical Islamists IN OUR OWN COUNTRIES to which they have come to escape the capricious human rights violations in their countries of origin, speaks volumes about why we’re in the dilemma we’re in.
Don’t take my word for it, that without reliance on our Judeo-Christian heritage and the inherent inner strength it has provided millions of Christians and Jews over the millennia, with which to counter, condemn, and conquer tyrannical and evil regimes, we’re done like a dinner.
Listen to Vaclav Klaus, Lech Welesa, Pope John Paul II, and Benedict XVI (NOT the present Archbishop of Canterbury), individuals who know what it is like to live under a tyrranical dictatorship–unlike us, here in Canada, who can spout cheap platitudes about “human rights” without the least idea that the concept of rights for others resides in the teachings of Judeo-Christianity.
The discussion of the role of religion in the public square must be acknowledged, allowed, and debated, otherwise how are we any better as a country than the Communist regimes that outlawed Church and clergy? We can see what happened when they did. Whatever the shortcomings and sins of the Church, life was far better when citizens were free to worship at Church and Synagogue than when they were forbidden to do so, arrested for doing so, and incarcerated and sometimes killed for doing so.
Comments gratefully accepted. Step up to the plate, SDAers! Or, don’t say that no one told you when Christians begin to be fired, jailed, killed for our faith. We’ve already been muzzled, the first step to being enslaved.
Is this acceptable in Canada?
BATB,
What you point out is the truth, of course. However, history has and is being revised to fit another agenda.
The ignorance or outright rejection of historical fact is fertile ground for Islamist deflection tactics when their ideology is being examined and debated. Pretty much every comment thread, even on this blog, on the topic of Islam is riddled with false and irrelevant comparisons and equivalence arguments. Despite the fact that the violent historical Christian attrocities as ‘proof’ argument is not relevant to today and is not and never has been foundational to Christianity, as proven in the NT and Christ’s life example – the ‘feeling informed’ ignorati marches on.
The entire western problem is the current definition of religion. We in the west respect religion and accept most of them as being more or less a private matter and that they all mean passive fellowship and love. This POV is based on Judeo/Christian principles.
Islam has enjoined itself to the west by falsely presenting itself as being one of the ‘three great Abrahamic faiths,’ and other such nonsense and lies. However, without knowledge and scrutiny, most people accept Islam as just that and move on.
Obviously, this definition does not reflect Islam in the slightest. Yet they will continue to use this veil and western ignorance to their benefit and to our cultural doom.
been around the block – of course you are spot on as to the reason which has been a long time in the making. It is the same in Europe and the UK. Once people lose their moral compass they will fall for anything. Evil becomes good and good becomes evil. This is also the main reason why Europeans and many Canadians so dislike the Americans, who on a whole have retained more of their cultural and religious heritage.
BATB,
I’m thinking you could take silence for consensus.
I personally am making sure that my son inherits land and a business so that he will never have to be in servitude to anyone. I am deeply concerned about the future of Canada. Will we recognize her in 20 years?
I am also extremely dubious about the benefits of paying for a university education…I’d hate to see a smart, clear thinking child brainwashed into cheering for Suzuki types calling for the imprisonment of those who disagree with his ideology. HRC’s are the pets of the same crowd.
We need a referendum on HRC’s and probably immigration/assimilation policies as well. The pols need voters to back them up; they really can’t go it alone on this issue. As so many comments have pointed out…they’d be trashed by the MSM.
Stand for nothing…fall for anything.
Thanks for your comments, irwin daisy,
Alain, and Polly.
As for your comment, id: “We in the west respect religion and accept most of them as being more or less a private matter and that they all mean passive fellowship and love. This POV is based on Judeo/Christian principles” is, I think, meant by you to be a positive statement.
I would simply point out, however, that Judeo-Christian beliefs/principles have never adopted the POV that religion is simply “a private matter” (otherwise, why proselytize?) or that religious beliefs “all mean passive fellowship and love.” (Christians have always put themselves right in the middle of violence and mayhem to try and make a difference and spend a lot of time and energy not being passive in order to effect the public good: Mother Theresa, Martin Luther King, Jr., Corrie Ten Boom, Dietrich Bonhoeffer, Fr. Maximillian Kolbe, etc.)
These POVs are, perhaps, what the West has perverted Judeo-Christian principles to mean, but practising Jews and Christians would not tend to agree that all faiths are equivalent or that they are private matters not meant to be taken into consideration in the public square.
Rather, we see that religion cannot be divorced from politics, education, civic matters, or day to day commerce. We have, historically, resisted the onslaught of militant Islam, all too aware of the slaughter and mayhem that result when extremist Muslim crusaders–who, after all, have always regarded those of us who don’t practise their brand of faith as infidels who can be lied to and killed–invade territory they want for themselves.
Quiescence on the part of those of both the Jewish and Judeo-Christian faiths (liberal, secular Jews and deconstructionist Christians in such churches as the United and Anglican Churches of Canada), coupled with a massive case of historical amnesia–something encouraged by the lib-left social engineers in our so-called “educational” systems, aided and abetted by unscrupulous politicians and corrupted members of the MSM–have resulted in a woefully ignorant electorate, who are ripe for Dhimmitude if they don’t soon snap out of their torpor.
Polly, as for taking silence for consensus, I could only accept such a consensus if it was informed. The problem is, the so-called consensus of the Canadian electorate is a consensus of ignorance and an unwillingness to stare facts in the face and admit their existence.
The attitude, even here at SDA, when it comes to the positive role faith has played in our society from the founding of our country, but which is now being deeply and badly eroded in the name of “tolerance,” “diversity,” “political correctness,” and “multiculuralism,” is that religion is “bad” and is “irrelevant” to what has happened vis a vis the threat Islamist fascism poses to our rights and freedoms and how it is we are most effectivelty to fight it.
Sadly, it seems that the horse is already out of the barn–and, if no one will admit his disappearance or acknowledge that this is a problem if we are going to get him back, then it seems we are doomed to press forward blindly and ignorantly.
This saddens me. It also maddens me, because if we are to be honest about the benefits of religious faith to the founding of the democratic principles and values that we all enjoy in Canada and to the very real benefits of religion to everyone, everyday, in Canada (charitable givings, soup kitchens, shelters for the homeless and pregnant and distressed women, clothing depots, food banks, and the list goes on and on) we would not be able to continually deny the goodness of the practice of the Judeo-Christian faith or continually promote the charade that all religions are equivalent and equally irrelevant.
Judeo-Christian values and principles have built democracies all over the world to whom others, most often non-Christians, have been flocking for decades. There must be a reason why all the immigration is from THERE, where there are no such democratic freedoms, to HERE, where there are. Just the most rudimentary thought about this flow of immigration reveals some plain truths about Christianity and how it stacks up against the practice of Islam throughout the world.
Our morale needs building, our ability to clearly see needs work, our being en-couraged is a must if we are to be able to counter the extremist Islamist fascist elements in our midst. Christianity is an antedote to Muslim fascism and always has been. How can we be so ignorant as to ignore this reality?
BATB,
To be clear, I was referring to the current, very Liberal definition.
Certainly a number of Liberal Churches, such as the United Church and to an extent, the Anglican Church are no longer relevant – they fail to recognize their foundation and purpose and as a result they can no longer discern, or inform against evil.
Shire Network News
By Ezra Levant on February 18, 2008 11:52 AM |
Here’s my interview. I mentioned that Shirlene McGovern, the “human rights officer” who interrogated me, has resigned from my case. The human rights commission advised my lawyer that McGovern quit because of the public backlash against the commission — and against her in particular. In other words, she didn’t like being called a censor in the blogosphere.
I’m not sympathetic. I believe that any government bureaucrat who makes a living interrogating citizens about their political beliefs ought to be held in public contempt. McGovern truly doesn’t get it — she thinks what she does for a living is perfectly bland, just like her.
As I wrote in the Globe last month, at my interrogation, McGovern wanted to make small talk and shake my hand. I upset her by not being complicit in my own prosecution.
In the future, I suggest that, if asked at cocktail parties, McGovern tell people she has a less disreputable job — say, tax collector, or parking ticket issuer.
This is what denormalization means. Human rights commissions are bullies, even if their officer of the day is a spacey, middle-aged drone. Surely McGovern can find a less destructive career elsewhere in government or — heaven forbid, in the private sector.
UPDATE: Here’s the kind of coverage that drove Shirlene to quit.
http://ezralevant.com
batb
I don’t want to write off the Canadian electorate as ignorant. Just because my neighbor doesn’t weight in here doesn’t mean she/he’s ignorant.
Most of the people I talk to have a good grasp on the issues at hand.
They just don’t have time to, nor interest in, participating in forums.
A referendum might be a better format.
I would like to add something more while standing by my above comments and those of BATB.
There is an excellent book by Dr. Lyle H. Rossiter, Jr., an acclaimed and veteran psychiatrist, called “The Liberal Mind – The Psychological Causes of Political Madness”. Followings are a few excerpts from him.
“Like spoiled, angry children, they rebel against the normal responsibilities of adulthood and demand that a parental government meet their needs from cradle to grave.”
“A social scientist who understands human nature will not dismiss the vital roles of free choice, voluntary co-operation and moral integrity – as liberals do. A political leader who understands human nature will not ignore individual differences in talent, drive, personal appeal and work ethic, and then try to impose economic and social equality on the population – as liberals do. And a legislator who understands human nature will not create an environment of rules which over-regulates and over-taxes the nation’s citizens, corrupts their character and reduces them to wards of the state – as liberals do.”
“The roots of liberalism – and its associated madness – can be clearly identified by understanding how children develop from infancy to adulthood and how distorted development produces the irrational beliefs of the liberal mind. When the modern liberal mind whines about imaginary victims, rages against imaginary villains and seeks above all else to run the lives of persons competent to run their own lives, the neurosis of the liberal mind becomes painfully obvious.”
Considering that we have about 3 generations raised in this environment, I wonder if Canada can be saved. At present I see no major political party which is not infected with this same sickness.
I hear you, Polly, but I agree with batb.
With due respect, you may not WANT to write off the Canadian electorate as ignorant—a fine, magnanimous sentiment—but what proof do you have that they aren’t? I’ve recently described my woes here with very intelligent, invincibly ignorant friends (and ex-friends), who don’t want to know the facts.
Check out the latest poll which puts the Liberals and the Conservatives neck in neck, despite the appalling record of the Liberals and the despicable plots of the Liberal-ass-covering MSM (about which most Canadians, as usual, are unaware). It seems that pulling the wool over Canadians’ eyes is working splendidly. Also, considering the minority status of the Conservatives and that the other four parties—Liberal, NDP, Bloc, and Green—are all left of centre to worse than that, Canadians have demonstrated that they are willing to entrust their future to thugs, appeasers, separatists and wingnuts.
I rest my case!
Alain, I fully concur. At about the 30 year mark in my teaching career, a new word entered my vocabulary for my students: “toddler”. These nine and ten year olds were not behaving in the way I expected they would. They were behaving like self-centred, petulant, irresponsible, well, toddlers! We discussed this idea and they actually agreed with me that they were not exercising reasonable self-control. But the toddler behaviour continued apace. (I believe we need a new designation on school forms, concerning student anomalies: B.P., for Bad Parenting: it’s epidemic.)
Then I noticed that many of the adults were not behaving like adults either. When, over the P.A. system one day, the school secretary announced—just before the lunch bell—“Will the driver of the SUV blocking the entrance to the parking lot, please move the vehicle?” I asked my kids what they thought of such inconsiderate behaviour. They were quite scathing in their criticism. It’s then that the term “adult toddler” entered my lexicon.
There’s a connection, I believe, between this and the invincible ignorance and gullibility of a critical mass of the Canadian electorate. We’re in for tough times, and, Alain, like you, I have my doubts about whether Canada can be saved. As we collectively turn into a sow’s ear, the proverbial silk purse recedes further and further into the mists of time . . .
“Considering that we have about 3 generations raised in this environment, I wonder if Canada can be saved. At present I see no major political party which is not infected with this same sickness.”
Alain, you are a testament to the fact that after 3 generations ignorant and indeed, evil ideas can be rejected. However, I think the problem is more mundane. It’s about the group, how the group feels and moral exhibitionism to show you are championing the group. In the collective – facts, and rational thinking are not valid, or welcome.
Gottfried Keller: “Ethic manhood is something that neither state nor society can impart.”
…-
One of the triumphs of Keller’s art is the ever new form in which humanity presents itself. And this is the glory of his social democracy, that it recognizes the inviolable right of individuality, since it founds state and society upon the achievement of individual worth. Ethic manhood is something that neither state nor society can impart. It lies in the power of the individual to make or unmake his life, and he alone can solve the secret of his personality. Easier it is for him to do so amid surroundings that open his heart to the great glory of life, but still he alone can do so. That is Keller’s doctrine.”
Gottfried Keller (1819–1890). The Banner of the Upright Seven.
http://209.10.134.179/315/2/1001.html
Canadians for the most part are comfortable with our lives. Yes or no?
Polly,
Is a hypnotized chicken “comfortable”? Yes or no?
en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Chicken_hypnosis
The average Canadian won’t lift a finger to do anything about our culture or way of life until his or her particular way of life is threatened. We have got to be the laziest apathetic sheep of a nation in the world until you try to directly take the nice things away.
When average Joe starts to get sand kicked in his face every day by some desert rat, well maybe then he’ll wake up, unfortunately too late.
Polly: “Canadians for the most part are comfortable with our lives. Yes or no?”
Well, yeah, if you consider that most Canadians when given the choice between a case of beer and a video on Friday night or an information meeting about the future of our country and what to do with recalcitrant immigrants who are threatening our up-to-now pleasant and democratic way of life, will choose the beer and video scenario nearly every time.
It’s called complacency: I’m OK, and who cares if anyone else is OK? I see it every day in my drive to work. Lugs and thugs who inch you out of your rightful spot, speedsters running red lights, pedestrians and cyclists who pay no attention to green or red lights: I wanna cross, I’ll do it NOW, red light be damned.
So, I guess you could say, Polly, that “Canadians…are comfortable with our lives” if ignorance is bliss, as the saying goes. ‘Wonder how happy we’ll be when we discover that most of us were fiddling while Rome burned, another saying.
“Canadians diddled and appeased while Canada got burka-ed.”
Lovely. But, hey, we’re comfortable!
I quite agree with batb, in line with my earlier post: rick and ural too. Canadians are a complacent lot about the most important things, but, mess with their comforts and all hell breaks loose.
E.g., Remember the uprising—a lot of people actually phoned and protested—when Rogers tried to rip them off. As I recall, without requesting a certain package, Rogers “gave” it to its subscribers for a trial period. The catch was that, unless the customer cancelled the program a month or so down the line, Rogers would then start charging. People, rightly, were furious and let Rogers know.
But, re the running—into the ground—of this country, after decades of misrule by the mafia-like Liberals, who’ve, literally, STOLEN tens of millions of public funds—OUR money—most Canadians yawn. Even today, how many know, or much care, about the HRC abuses of Canadians’ fundamental rights? We’re paying dearly, and will continue to, for our lackadaisical attitude. Sheeple, for sure . . . like lambs to the slaughter.
Ringo,
You miss what Harper is up against. Harper won’t speak up because he’s afraid of the media. And he has reason to. It isn’t that the public is for HRC’s but that the public doesn’t know jack sh*t about what they are. The only thing they know is that they’re “for” human rights. Who can be against human rights? Right? After all, no one would violate human rights while claiming to be fighting FOR human rights. That would be Orwellian. Now who would do that?
He knows damn well that if he takes a position on this he’ll be branded a Nazi by the lying propagandists in the media in less than 15 seconds. Hell, if the media did it to a liberal (whom they love,) what do you think the headlines will be if Harper opens his mouth?
The FACTS favour abolition of section 13.
Clearly you believe, in your ignorance, that the elimination of section 13 opens the doors to the clan parading down main street in hoods shouting “kill the Jews” and “hang the black people.” Well, gotta bit of intel for you: criminal code laws against inciting violence will still be valid. Laws against hate crimes will still be valid. The difference is that the constitutional protections will also be in force. The rule of law and due process will also be in force. HRC violate people’s rights – their fundamental human rights. Their right to free speech, their right to freedom of the press, their right to freedom of association, their right to due process, their rights under the constitution. Period.
Only a leftard would fail to support due process and the rule of law. On every other issue you defer to the constitution as if it was the fricken 10 commandments. I guess, just like bad Catholics, you pick and chose which you enforce…