There was a recent home invasion in Calgary at the residence of a family that had made a HRC complaint against an Islam leader. This was given little coverage. Also,in Calgary,the next night a home was firebombed with 6 people inside. I am just speculating here,but the people living there were a middle east family.Are these incidents all related? Are the names of people filing complaints made public? Are we being muzzled by fear and political correctness?

Attacks upon critics is nothing new in Canada. Ask anyone who put up a Conservative or Reform election sign in Toronto. Go talk to some of the leftist election workers and listen to them brag about egging windows, slashing tires, and pitching dog shit at people.

What you see on the internet is merely a reflection of the methods of the leftists on the street. Yes, these people are concerned for the safety of their families. They have good grounds to be.

Canada is finished - at least the Canada I remember.... and I blame liberalism - it's like a cancer....

Targeted for being conservative? In Canada? Damn right!

Ask Mike Harris. Ask any Reformer throughout Ontario. And the precious thing is, the leftoid jerkoffs also target the families as well.

Coward moonbats, threating children.

Real heroes!

Fenris Badwolf, you’re right.

For example, I’ve heard teachers in Toronto respond to a canvass knock on their door asking for support for a Conservative candidate, they will say “I’m a teacher”.
I then say , tongue in cheek “then I guess I’ll mark you down as a supporter”. Their jaw drops … it’s great fun.

Most teachers aren’t supporters but a few are. I know some that once they retire they will let it be known they will vote Conservative. But you can tell, they are still very nervous about upsetting the union.

In a matter of this importance,how important is protecting a source? If our mp's are being intimidated into silence,how about the rest of us on the street? What hope do we have? Name him and let the chips fall where they may.

There is a lot of merit to these fears. Unfortunately people with conservative principles are automatically given short shrift by the media.

Why not start fighting back? Liberals are bullies as are Muslims. The only way to deal with a bully is to kick the shit out of him one way or another.

The backlash is growing, but not fast enough. Kate and Kathy a the great Ezra Levant are leading the charge, but it will take much more.

Find out what you can do now. Look for or start organizations that will work to limiting the growth is Islam in Canada and elsewhere.

Let these Muslim shit-heads know that our culture rules here and that's not going to change because it's in contradiction to their religion. They can go home if they don't want to assimilate.

"Assimilation builds a strong nation". John West 2008

I am worried about Ezra Levant. He has made life really tough on some very filthy people to whom violence and deceit is a way of life.

I hope he has a gun and I hope he knows how to use it. It would be a shame to lose a man like that to these vermin.

Mr Awan, articling student in the Ontario Ministry of Justice. maybe the Sharia is already being prepared for ontarians.

http://deborahgyapong.blogspot.com/2008/02/jason-kenney-and-mr-awan.html

nothing will happen until they insist on building mosques in Rosedale.

Well, "my family might be targeted" might be sincere, but I suspect it might be a cover for not wanting to alienate important 3rd world voting blocks which have been shamelessly imported into Canada by the Liberals since the late 60s.

Ya, know like the cliche "I'm retiring to spend more time with my family".

Strange this reverence for family from folks who'd like to replace family with the warm embrace of expert bureaucrats.

If you'll excuse my cynicism.

Canada's MP's are committed to serving the "party" not the people. Why risk loosing a good job over an issue that really doesn't affect them personally? What would they do for a living after that? There are not that many openings for "Greeters" at Wal-Marts any more.

"some MPs might be afraid to speak out on this issue, afraid their families might be targeted."

Uh huh. Like MPs can't get carry permits.

I'm with MND, spare me the histrionics.

TS Eliot had it right:

"This is the way the world ends
Not with a bang, with a whimper"

I don't hate muslims either, but islam is a cancer eating away at our society, our principles, our prosperity and our history.

This is not racism - it is survival!

This also partially explains the time-wasting obsession with nickey nouse things like a 15 yr old $300k deal, between two sleazy characters of ill repute.

So the MPs don't have to deal with the real issues of today.

Fear also helps explain the 'Liberal lite' sentencing of violent criminals by the justice system, which is seriously contaminated by the Liberal party du Canada.

Anyhoo, it's a very interesting set of priorities by the kids in the sandbox called Ottawa.

Phantom - I think the issue isn't as simple as either you or me no dhimmi suggest.

You think that all it takes is for the MP to 'carry a gun' to protect his family. Yes; but what if he's in Ottawa and they are in Calgary?

me no dhimmi - I see your point about 'diversion' of reasons, but I think that violence from those sections targeted is real.

As has been pointed out, during elections, Conservative signs regularly are taken down, destroyed etc.

The Islamic world in Canada still operates. in certain sectors, in the 'tribal' mode, which means that anyone who isn't onside, is Other, is an Enemy. This militancy is found in Montreal, Toronto, Calgary.

After all, Tarek Fatah, who has been outspoken in against Sharia Law, who supports Freedom of Speech, has had death threats against him and his family. Same with Irshad Manji.

Coupled with this, is our multiculturalism, which has deliberately isolated immigrants coming to Canada, and set them up as 'safe'. Safe to BECOME militant, safe to hate others, safe to preach and talk only to and among themselves, safe to boil over in their self-written outline of 'What is Real, safe..from the cooling effects of the speech of Others.

Back in their former countries, their self-talk might be challenged by REALITY, the reality of other people, the reality of interaction with others. Not here. We keep them safe from having to assimilate, from having to talk and justify their beliefs.

Back in their former countries, their govts might reject and censor their hate-talk. Not here.

But here in Canada, we actually enable them to Hate Others. We protect them from the criticism and questions of others. We coddle them by saying that if any speech offends or upsets them, we'll define it as 'hate speech' and forbid it.

We protect them from assimilation and from collaborating with others to develop a shared Canadian identity. If they want to wear a turban on their motorcycle, while everyone else is fined for not wearing a helmet - we let them do what they want. If they want to bring a dagger to school, while anyone else would be suspended from school - we allow it. If they insist on special exams because...etc, etc...

Western countries, with their multiculturalism, have effectively set up isolate mini-states within their territories. These ministates are, since we protect them from assimilation and self-examination of themselves - are more rigid, more fanatical - than the ones in the Middle East.

These ministates, we are finding, set up their own laws; the police are afraid to go in; the social services can't help the women enslaved by these tribal beliefs.

So- we have a lot of work to do. First, we have to insist on freedom of speech. Second, we have to constantly point out the dangers of multiculturalism. Third, we have to ourselves, do a lot of the work. It can't be up to the Conservative govt- which is hampered in ways that we are not.

Canada is a socialist country. Over 60% of our elected parliament is socialist. Almost 80% and more of our non-elected govt is socialist - that includes our activist Supreme Court, our activist Senate, our civil service. And their Unions.

If you think that the 170 odd elected Conservatives can overturn the above morass, just by vote and desire - you are delusional. We, the people, have to take action.

When we have politicians afraid to comment on an issue because their families might be targeted we have to wonder if we aren't already a Banana Republic. Also, ask ourselves how we've sat by and allowed it to happen.

We are the ones who elect the governments who allow such immigration. Those governments choose immigrants and situate them in large voting blocks of cities like vote rich Toronto and use scare tactics to insure they vote for them.

Those immigrants are now deciding the government of this country.

OK. Let me get this straight: an MP is asked for a public quote by a "reporter" who has neither a tape recorder or a notebook. The MP is smart enough not to open his mouth, for fear of being misquoted.

And now, somehow, you've worked yourselves into a frenzy of "politicians afraid to comment on an issue because their families might be targeted"?

Wow. I can't for a moment imagine why the MP didn't open his mouth: "MP Joe Blow confirms that Muslim menace is upon us! Arm or flee!!"

J Ringo's last post should be entitled :"Why Johnny Ringo Can't Read".

Ringo/Dingo, this story wasn't headlining Muslims but it's a sure bet radicals of the religion of Islam would be a danger.
If you can't grasp that, continue wearing those rose colored glasses, ignore the scourge of the 21st century.

ET: You shouldn't be surprised if I tell you I agree with every single word and punctuation mark in your post. For sure, the threat is real; it's just that I am extremely cynical about the excessive caution of MPs.
Politicans basically find out where the people are going and "lead" them there, so your "we the people must take action" rings true.

OTOH, you will have noticed that even when the leftie papers like the Toronto Star and the Globe decried the action against Levant the politicians lacked the courage to take on section 13 of the HRA which seemed a low-risk political initiative to me.

And politicians could take all kinds of generic action like elimiating the family re-unification basis for immigration, ending instant welfare for new immigrants and drastically limiting 3rd world immigration of people who not only have no intention of assimilating but who consider the notion racism, without specifically mentioning muslims. Not in my wildest fantasies can I envision official policy ending Muslim immigration -- but I can envision new policies which might tackle the magnets! But I'm sure you'll agree that they demur out of fear of losing votes, not lives or limbs. I gather that Muslim voting blocks are now real deciders in a great many constituencies. Now imagine how serious this will become if we fail to drastically lower 3rd world benefit-seeking immigraton which so out-breeds us (if you'll excuse the crudeness of that expression).

And as to Canada being 60% socialist my milieu (Vancouver) seems pretty close to 100%. I've long felt, in fact, that there's no real conservative/libertarian constituency in Canada. so I don't know where "the people" would come from.

In the final analysis, though, I don't see any changes as long as Canadians feel pretty comfortable economically and as long as the decline is slow and gradual, and therefore imperceptible.

ET -"Canada is a socialist country. Over 60% of our elected parliament is socialist. Almost 80% and more of our non-elected govt is socialist - that includes our activist Supreme Court, ouractivist Senate, our civil service. And their Unions."

ET is absolutely correct!

And like John West , I agree the internet bloggers are making an effort to speak out in Canada.

Canadian schools from the elementary, through the public, secondary and university levels are fully unionized and now the LIbs like Ken Dryden and Taliban Jack Layton's ND's want to get the JK's for the final push, for total indoctrination, exactly the way the Germans and the Russians did in the thirties and forties.

The aiders and abettors and pushers of politically correct left Liberals socialist mush continue to be Canadian mainstream media, which have brought and conditioned Canadians to this point of socialist delusion.

Canadian corporate MSM has morphed into a torpid cumffy state of socialist existence.

Canada needs a conservative voice in MSM to turn the tide along with the internet.

Of course people are afraid. Saying the wrong thing gets you killed, like Theo Van Gogh, or attacked like Hirsi Ali. It is dangerous to say certain things about Islam. I posted Kurt Westerlaand's cartoon is support after the Danish police arrested his alleged murder plotters. But I honestly hesitated for fear that someone might seek to do me harm for doing it. I don't know which is scarier.

Phantom,

I don't know where you get your information about permits to carry. Under current legislation, not even a licence to keep a handgun at home for protection would be more available to an MP than to other Canadians.

An MP absolutely couldn't get an "employment related" permit to carry and, even if that was possible, there's no way that he/she would be allowed to bring a firearm into the parliament buildings. Not even uniformed police officers can do that.

When I was in Ottawa, there was a black joke among MPs that, if an armed attacker ever appeared on the premises, the safest thing to do would be to get close to the Prime Minister since his plainclothes chaps with wires sticking out of their ears were presumed to be armed and capable.

Sounds like most college campuses, dissident voices on the right can't speak out for fear of being targeted either, add dissident scientists that have a different opinion on Global Warming.

If Ezra Levant has proved anything it is that it isn't that hard to take these fools down, both the Muslim and lefty bullies, if you have the courage. Both entities just aren't that smart.

I have no sympathy for any Canadian MP that cowers in the face of basic free speech issues. They were elected to uphold the basic rights of the people they represent.

The internet is a political weapon that was never there before. A half million eyeballs have viewed Ezra's videos if I'm correct. At one point it was the fifth most viewed video on You Tube. The sniveling lefties never counted on that unpleasant developement. The press was forced to follow rather than the other way around. I bet most MP's or their staff have viewed it. The silence and incapacitation overwhelming most MP's is because dull witted politicians are frozen like deer in headlights when faced with risk and original thinking.

Islam - the religion of peace. No way.
Islam - religion of pieces. Bingo.

Growing up in the 50s and60s inrural ont we were all poor but it was a paridise now since trudough things ,while no one is poor and i am doing very well

things are not well the left has run us into the ground lets take it back no matter what it c osts better poor and proud

Let's not confuse issues here. Most MPs don't want to touch this issue because it's toxic. The Canadian public is on the opposite side of this issue from you. Obviously, Harper knows this, and he's issued a fatwa on speaking out on it. So, for sure, you ought to be pissed about that, if this is an issue that you care about.

But you're seriously deluded if you think people are afraid to speak out against HRCs due to some kind of threat to themselves of their families.

Maybe in your wildest, most paranoid fantasies, Ezra and the mystery MP who's afraid to speak out are facing a threat from all the eeeevill liberal fascists out there...but here in the real world, that's not quite the case.

I hate to break it to you, but Jack Bauer's not heading up here anytime soon.

back in the 60's there was a somewhat famous mayor who packed a piece in her handbag at all times. wonder why ?

johnny ringo - would you provide some factual evidence that "The Canadian public is on the opposite side of this issue from you".

The Canadian public, in their letters to the editor, their online polls, their blog posts as well as the articles and editorials in the MSM - show strong support for the elimination of the HRAct and particularly, Section 13.1.

So, could you provide some data? Thanks in advance.

KShaidle ,

Exactly! A rare find, yet I expect there are numbers of people who may have been threatened with a quiet, heavy breathing phone call stating. . .
* * WE know where your kids go to school. * *

There should be a number for reporting such calls so phone records can be checked by those in the know.

YES! Liberal appointees and extended family ARE still running immigration.

Page A5 of the National Post has two alarming items about the spread of **British Disease** here in Canada.

[1] Said Namouh, who makes bomb instruction videos *Caliphate Voice Channel*, a branch of al Qaeda*s * Global Islamic Media Front *, [GIMF]. This in Mt. Maurencie area, north east of Montreal Quebec.

[2] Salman Hossain, writes on a Toronto forum, Canadian soldiers training here are legitimate targets to be killed. ** Now it is possible and LEGITIMATE **, he writes in one post.

** When do I get to shoot a few Jews down . . . etc **

RCMP told Hossain he is under investigation for incitement of terrorism.

Hello RCMP? That IS incitement! What the hell are you waiting for? Back to Bangladesh where he came from!... Now! = TG

Those MPs should more afraid of irate Canadians than some Islmao-screamers.

All rational people should become absolutely informed on the Islamic ideology through the trilogy.

Factual criticism and exposure of the ideology is one of the most important and effective weapons in this war. The 'religion' veil must be lifted and all equivalence arguments crushed.

Islam is not morally equivalent, or comparable to any religion in the world, other than perhaps Scientology. It's adherents must be made aware that much of the Quran, Hadith and Sira, including Mohammad's life example are absolutely unacceptable in that it incites raciism, misogyny, hatred and violence. That Islam is in direct opposition to reason, to our culture and Universal Human Rights. And that political Islam and Shariah are seditious.

If our MP's are afraid to speak out about it...

Then they are being intimidated.

If they are being intimidated, then someone or some group is commiting the criminal offence of Intimidating Parliament.

We may not always agree with what they do BUT IT IS OUR PARLIAMENT AND OUR SYSTEM. IT MUST BE PROTECTED FOR US TO DEAL WITH IN A CIVILIZED MANNER.

Time to slam the door closed. This IS NOT acceptable.

Lee, I have no hard information on MPs getting carry permits. If I did it would be all over the place and everybody would have it.

However, their is such a thing as a federal carry permit, and people do get them. Just a matter of knowing the right guy and having the right credentials.MPs meet both those criteria, hence my assumption. I could be wrong, but given the hanky panky of the Liberals with the RCMP the last 14 years, what are the chances? Smile, handshake, couple favors, presto!

ET, I was perhaps slightly unclear. I meant carry permit for MP -and spouse-. The RCMP has a budget for "executive protection", and again, people do get it. If an MP, saaaaay maybe from Mississauga received a series of credible death threats following some statement they made, the cynic in me doubts their family would be left to sink or swim.

These guys all stick together, same as doctors do, same as lawyers do, same as cops, firemen and union thugs. A threat to one is a threat to all.

Call me cynical, but an MP fearing for his family if he opens his mouth? My BS meter is hitting the pin.

Now, I suppose its possible they think the RCMP protection teams are a bunch of bumbling fools, or the MP in question is a lily livered yellow bellied sap sucker, THAT I can believe...

Here we go with the female journalists and their unverifiable self serving anecdotes, *sigh*. Nice to see them on my side for once, I guess.

Nomdeblog @ 2:16 P.M. -- "But you can tell, [Toronto teachers] are still very nervous about upsetting the union."

Still nothing about unions intimidating workers from L. "Sib" beria.

Phantom,

I'm quite knowlegeable about gun laws in general, and I used to be an MP (2 terms). I assure you that the chance of an MP (much less a family member!) getting a carry permit would be about as good as that of Osama bin Laden. We received RCMP instructions on what to watch for as potential threats and how to avoid making ourselves vulnerable. It was understood that anyone receiving verifiable serious threat would be given police protection. Beyond that we, like any other Canadian, had to take our chances and assume that, if the worst happened, there would be retribution and the RCMP would eventually get the bad guys, post mortem. How comforting.

ET - look no farther than Stephen Harper's decision to back away from the HRC issue.

Consider that in fiscal 2006/07, the Conservatives spent more money on polls than any previous Liberal government - $31 million. It's here, in the Kate and Kathy Chronicle:

http://www.nationalpost.com/news/canada/story.html?id=142342

I think it's safe to assume that Harper, strategic genius that he is, has found poll results indicating that Canadians favour the HRCs. I mean, the PMO did issue talking points that ensured the government was in no way moving to dismantling or even tinkering with them.

I'd humbly submit that this is a little more concrete than "Some MP I spoke to said he's in mortal danger if he speaks out on HRCs - but I can't tell you who he is, and I didn't write it down or record it."

Lee, I bow to your superior knowledge. That's more frightening than the buddy-buddy system I cynically assumed was in place.

"I think it's safe to assume that Harper, strategic genius that he is, has found poll results indicating that Canadians favour the HRCs."

I think it's safe to assume that the PM is hoisting the Senate on its' own petard for the benefit of his base - even though poll results show Canadians don't want Senate reform.

The Mp's are always under threat, they know that going in. Anyone in the public eye is. Par for the course, so to speak. Islam in Canada is more interested in controlling what their flock say and do, and anyone in that flock knows, that there is a good chance they can end up dead speaking up against it.

Islam is not going to go after any Canadian politician, just because it knows that will be the end of fundraising for terrorist and terrorist harbouring, something they depend on Canada for. Islam needs the sympathy and stupidity of the left to succeed, and there are lots of lefties out there. Lefties don't care if islam kills its own, or brutalizes its females, they consider that an islamic cultural norm. Something to celebrate in their mosaic of multi-culturaism. I think even the lefties would get upset if islam starting taking out politicians here in Canada.

Right at the moment, islam knows there are more of us than them, and that we will kick thier asses, all the way back to the caves whence they came.

I respectfully disagree Honey Pot, remember the ones who wanted to behead PMSH?
They'll go after anyone who doesn't conform.

Lee,
They better wake up in Canada, last fall I spent some time at the Regina General Emergency Area. My NYC antenna (unusual activity) went up when I noticed that Security keep having to unlock the entrance door to their security room.
No bullets you think!

no, ringo, your argument isn't valid.

You are trying to correlate two things - without any evidence that they are linked.

1) You state that the CPC spent a lot of money in 2006/07 on polls. You have absolutely no knowledge of the questions or content of these polls. None.

2)You state that Canadians don't want any change to the HRC. I asked you for data to support this - because in the blogs, MSM and news, there was a LOT of anger against the HRCs. Therefore, I wanted to know where you came up with your claim.

All you've come up with, is a false correlation that:
- the CPC does polls
- Harper doesn't want his MPs to talk about the issue when campaigning.
Therefore, the CPC did a poll and found Canadians didn't want HRC change.

Utterly fallacious.

Sorry, you CANNOT offer this as any kind of proof that Canadians don't want HRC change. The reason is because you don't know what was polled. And no, you can't fall back into the fallacious net of 'it's safe to assume'. It isn't safe to assume. That's called 'An appeal to ignorance' and it's a fallacy.

There was a LOT of anger against the HRCs on the blogs, in emails to MPs, and expressed in the MSM, when the MSM finally got moving on it.

Oh, and jwk - polls show that Canadians DO want Senate reform. Either reform it or kill it.

Might I suggest that the anger on blogs and communicated via emails to MPs and newspapers really doesn't amount to a whole lot. Come on, ET. Think about it. Steve "The Master Tactician" Harper wouldn't switch from boxers to briefs without commissioning a poll. Why do you think he doesn't want his MPs to talk about the issue when campaigning? Let's put it this way: if a majority of Canadians felt the way you do about the HRCs, do you think the Conservatives would be backing away from it?

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. Don't believe me? Then tell me, given this huge campaign of emails, letters, and MSM coverage you point to, where was the groundswell of public support? Don't tell me about the campaign, such as it was - tell me about the results.

I know, I know: here in the echo chamber, it's easy to think you're enacting a sea change of public opinion. But there's little reason to assume, as you do, that Canadians are looking at the HRCs the same way you do. If they did, Harper would be on it. But they aren't, so he's dropped it.

Might I suggest that the anger on blogs and communicated via emails to MPs and newspapers really doesn't amount to a whole lot. Come on, ET. Think about it. Steve "The Master Tactician" Harper wouldn't switch from boxers to briefs without commissioning a poll. Why do you think he doesn't want his MPs to talk about the issue when campaigning? Let's put it this way: if a majority of Canadians felt the way you do about the HRCs, do you think the Conservatives would be backing away from it?

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. Don't believe me? Then tell me, given this huge campaign of emails, letters, and MSM coverage you point to, where was the groundswell of public support that followed it? Don't tell me about the campaign, such as it was - tell me about the results.

I know, I know: here in the echo chamber, it's easy to think you're enacting a sea change of public opinion. But there's little reason to assume, as you do, that Canadians are looking at the HRCs the same way you do. If they did, Harper would be on it. But they aren't, so he's dropped it.

During the October Crisis of 1970, members of the federal cabinet were issued snub nosed .38 special revolvers and shown how to use them. The one who was the best shot didn't return his.

From 1945 to almost the end of the 20th Century Canadian freedom and democracy was defended by one million .303 Lee Enfield rifles in the hands of ordinary citizens who knew how to use them. They had defeated Nazi Germany and Imperial Japan. To their credit, it didn't go bad on their watch but on ours.

Islamofacism won't win here today, probably not tomorrow either, but the day after tomorrow it could be a cakewalk for them. They might get slowed down by the Indian Posse and the Manitoba Warriors in Wpg. the only ones left armed. Remember Mark Steyn's warning Euro-Arabia will be under their control by then. Once their numbers reach 5% of our total population what will a nation of unarmed senior citizens be able to do to stop them?

"Is this the nation carved out of the wildernes by independant men and women of uncommon valor?" (asked the guest philosopher a few years ago)

JR.

time will tell on the hrc. hopefully, a compromise will be reached where the hrc is defanged and declawed. a compromise whereby the supporters of thought police will not need to resort to a regime of pharmaceuticals when hrc's just get back to landlord/tenacy spates. i'd like that very much, thank you.

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...