Meet The Companies Who Are Hastening Tyranny

In consult with the fascistic European Union and their hell bent craziness, Facebook, Microsoft, Twitter (luckily I don't purchase products or subscribe for and to any of those assholes) and Google have unfortunately joined their ranks against freedom of speech.

For those of us who respect all who have died for liberty and do our best to vigilantly defend it, we truly are alone.

This will not end well.

Have a look:

    1. Each Member State shall take the measures necessary to
    ensure that the following intentional conduct is punishable:
  • (a) publicly inciting to violence or hatred directed against a
    group of persons or a member of such a group defined
    by reference to race, colour, religion, descent or national
    or ethnic origin;
    (b) the commission of an act referred to in point (a) by public
    dissemination or distribution of tracts, pictures or other
    (c) publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivialising crimes of
    genocide, crimes against humanity and war crimes as
    defined in Articles 6, 7 and 8 of the Statute of the International
    Criminal Court, directed against a group of persons
    or a member of such a group defined by reference to race,
    colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin when
    the conduct is carried out in a manner likely to incite to
    violence or hatred against such a group or a member of
    such a group;
    (d) publicly condoning, denying or grossly trivialising the
    crimes defined in Article 6 of the Charter of the International
    Military Tribunal appended to the London
    Agreement of 8 August 1945, directed against a group of
    persons or a member of such a group defined by reference
    to race, colour, religion, descent or national or ethnic origin
    when the conduct is carried out in a manner likely to incite
    to violence or hatred against such a group or a member of
    such a group.

    I don't care where you lie on the ideological divide. This is not good.

    Not good. At all.

Quote Of The Day

The internet is a place for free speech, not hate speech," said Vera Jourova, the EU commissioner responsible for justice, consumers and gender equality.


You hear me, Vera dear? I can call you an asshole for being the anti-free speech moron that you are FREE OF ANY PUNITIVE MEASURES EXACTED BY THE STATE.

Then again, this is the EU we're talking about. An over-hyped, over-praised, technocratic society that's lost its fricken mind. They gave up long ago.


Economic Flexibility And Freedom = Prosperity = Duh

Scandinavia (or Nordic nations including Finland) are often cited by progressives as proof socialism or some variation thereof can work.

So how is it a region renowned for its high taxes and welfare consistently rank ahead of countries like Canada and the birth place of liberty as a legitimate cornerstone within a nation-state the United States?


They practice economic liberty; principles libertarians and conservatives espouse. Not the ones pumped up by liberals and progressives.

From Euopean Students for Liberty:

"...there exists a generalized misperception about the functioning of the Scandinavian economies. They are usually regarded as highly interventionist countries with hyper-regulated economies and very progressive taxation systems in which the upper classes sustain the Welfare State by paying their so-called fair share. This widely-extended view is fundamentally wrong for two main reasons. Firstly, far from being socialistic, the economic recipes that have led Denmark or Sweden to have sustainable Welfare States are those usually identified with the free market: deregulated economies and flexible labor markets. Secondly, the burdensome taxation system in the Scandinavian countries is rather regressive; hence, the fiscal burden is essentially borne by low and middle classes."

Has Google Lost Its Mind?

I have to be careful what I say on this blog since its owned by Google who send Googlebots to sweep it.

But still.

They deserve every ounce of criticism and mockery for doodling Yuri Kochiyama.

Who is this broad?

A Marxist nut case.

I mean, totally.

A black supremacist Marxist who admired Osama bin Laden and a staunch supporter of the Maoist Peruvian guerrilla group Shining Path; a murderous group which killed over 30,000 civilians.

What else is knew with leftists? They love death and Che t-shirts.

I really hope this is just the decision of the doodle department; though the ignorance is somewhat disappointing if not shocking.

Know what Google needs? A strong, viable competitor. 


Joke Of The Day

"Look old man you know you can't talk like this. Just think, a few years ago you would have been shot for saying these things.' The old man trudges home. His wife seeing him empty-handed says 'Run out of meat again have they?' He says: 'It's worse than that, they've run out of bullets."

Communism is good.

Anti-Smoking Campaign: Another Example Of Why Citizens Need To Be Vigilant With Its Freedoms

Well, that was one fun slippery slope, huh?

It's now illegal to smoke in your own car if there are children present.

Of course, the first instinct that may spring to mind is, as it was for my wife, 'I'm fine with that because why should other people be uncomfortable?'

There's so much wrong with that and points how deep paternalism under the guise of protecting us runs.

Mencken once said something along the lines of that the hardest part about freedom is to defend unpopular people who say unpopular things.

Indeed, we see how unhinged we've become from language laws in Quebec to climate change cultists demanding skeptics be imprisoned to college students shrieking for 'trigger warnings'. It seems, everywhere we turn the big fat punitive thumb of the state or thoughtless, weak-minded individuals want to curb freedom of speech and expression, or worse, silence it.

And make no mistake about it. There is a war on freedom of speech. If you don't see it, you're not observing hard enough.

The key here is to understand what 'you're fine with' does to other people. As Bastiat argued, it's important to examine the unseen or unintended consequences of one's actions or policies. Only then will you *see* the impact and from there to discern if it's faulty (which is usually the case because activist public policy is often based on faulty, illiberal premises). In other words, look at the results; something we do not do very well. The *idea* - or if you prefer - the good intentions of the idea prevails over the actual performance and result.

Back in the 1980s, it was argued embarking on a smoking crusade would inevitably end up as an assault on people's civil liberties in the private sphere. The reaction, for the most part, was 'you're paranoid'.

Who's paranoid now again?

Still not armed with an actual empirical study that concludes smoking causes cancer (as well as the absurd second and third hand smoke kills bull shit), we've all but destroyed the rights of a group of people who choose to smoke. We all make choices that another may not make for we are our own moral agents.

It's none of one's business how another person runs their own private life. I have no idea how it came to be accepted that it does. This is the soft-underbelly of tyranny in a democracy.

The anti-smoking campaign is filled with deceptions, hypocrisy and good old fashioned paternalism. The deception is the language used (and let's be frank, it is indeed a foul habit) to frighten people. The hypocrisy is the government's addiction (do not excuse the pun)  to the tax revenues (as they are with alcohol and gambling which destroy more lives than smoking ever could), and the paternalism is rooted in the assumption the someone else knows better and will demand through the coerced power of the law they act on your behalf in your *best interests*. Or more cynically in this case, 'for the children'.

The vapid notion that we have a *right* to intervene because they will *clog* up the health system is retarded. First of all, the system by its own design all but ensures it will be clogged. Second, everyone is forced to pay taxes on universal health including smokers. If they paid into it, then they're free to use it; to the extent they're *free* in such a rigid system.

Never mind that whenever a product is introduced into the market that has proven to be beneficial for people who want to kick the smoking habit, the government is there to make it illegal and drive it into the black market. 

That you *believe* this is the *right* thing to do is not a reason to form policy around it.  My wife said, 'Okay, so there's no conclusive proof but do you deny it makes lungs black?' This is how deep the zealotry runs. I pointed out people drink soft drinks that *could* lead to diabetes in cases where people are vulnerable to it. Should we ban it? While not a perfect analogy it was just to illustrate in how many directions this line of thinking can go. This hit hard because she loves Pepsi.

In fact, we can make an non-exhaustive list of foods and drinks potentially harmful to us. But here's the rub. We all are made up of different genetic make ups. One size fits all where consumption is concerned is asking to unleash unintended consequences. People will always find something sinister in something. Always.

Take climate change. Notice how climate change pimps ironically use the same sort of apocalyptic language we see in the Bible. They're probably unaware of it because they've dressed up their crusade in banal phrases like 'the science is settled' nonsense.

This is the part where I contend people are full of shit. But I digress.

Again, this is the evil side of the 'common good' fallacy. I'm of the opinion the common good is useless if you have no individual freedom.

Ask anyone and they will usually tell you they believe in liberty. But there really is an easy check list to determine if one really is. If you believe in 'balancing' free speech (including hate speech laws designed by government) you have abandoned the right to say you are. The second you accept policies and laws that infringe on the right on another person, you have decided to ignore your liberty impulsed. This is the part of the 'non-aggression principle' libertarians vigorously stand by. It's a powerful concept and one that takes internal understanding you can't save everyone and that you must accept people's decisions for they alone know what's best for them - right or wrong.

On yet another somewhat lame attempt to detract from this, is the use of 'what about seat belt laws?' as if they caught you in a trap - or the so-called 'you can't shout fire in a theater' line whenever the subject of freedom of speech arises. The latter is especially galling given it's perhaps the most misunderstood legal quip where the First Amendment is concerned. In fact, I hear it so often it made me wonder if anyone actually read the case that gave birth to it.

From The Atlantic:

"...But those who quote Holmes might want to actually read the case where the phrase originated before using it as their main defense. If they did, they'd realize it was never binding law, and the underlying case, U.S. v. Schenck, is not only one of the most odious free speech decisions in the Court's history, but was overturned over 40 years ago.

First, it's important to note U.S. v. Schenck had nothing to do with fires or theaters or false statements. Instead, the Court was deciding whether Charles Schenck, the Secretary of the Socialist Party of America, could be convicted under the Espionage Act for writing and distributing a pamphlet that expressed his opposition to the draft during World War I...)

So yes there is some consistency to the extent that people who use it as proof you can't say anything you want are aligned with the wrong side of what constitutes free speech as an absolute. Again, you can't balance speech. It's impossible. If you support it, you're misguided, misinformed and in the tyranny camp. Hate speech, moreover, is an invented term that is useless, meaningless, dangerous and fascistic. If you're a person who earns their stripes and bones in this area, you're doing your part to destroy liberty.

Or as TA puts it:

"Today, despite the "crowded theater" quote's legal irrelevance, advocates of censorship have not stopped trotting it out as thefinal word on the lawful limits of the First Amendment. As Rottman wrote, for this reason, it's "worse than useless in defining the boundaries of constitutional speech. When used metaphorically, it can be deployed against any unpopular speech." Worse, its advocates are tacitly endorsing one of the broadest censorship decisions ever brought down by the Court. It is quite simply, as Ken White calls it, "the most famous and pervasive lazy cheat in American dialogue about free speech." 

Read more on the subject from Ken Pope.

There's not doubt, in my view, libertarians are completely correct. Not only does it presume a basic and realistic understanding of virtues and vices in human nature, but it's a optimistic one to the extent humans can and should be trusted to run their own lives free of bureaucratic intervention.

The bottom line is, once again, what this law will likely do is negatively and disproportionately hurt low income families who are more likely to smoke. What's next? A war on Pepsi and chips?

Oh, T.C.! Now you're being paranoid!

Am I now?

The Americans have a saying.  Life, liberty in the pursuit of happiness.
A key component of this cherished concept is the idea of live and let live.

We live. But apparently we have to live vicariously through what other people deem to be appropriate 'happiness.' It's all so very, er, communistic. We seem to live to bust up and restrict other people's choices. 'Ooo, smoking is soooo icky and soooo not good for you! Ban it!'

Try and say, 'coffee has been *shown* to not be healthy. Maybe we need to restrict consumption' to such people and politicians.

Just pay attention to how they will ignore you.


Letting other people live is a problem for busy bodies and this is an essential part of being free.


What Am I Missing?

Gotta keep this brief. On the run today - and most of this month. I think I have something like 60 stories backed up.


The recent budget broke all sorts of promises to various Canadians as we all know. Yet, I saw on a news ticker a couple of breathtaking quotes from Trudeau:

He said Canadians "depend on the Liberals to keep promises."

Well, maybe his fans do but I don't. But as noted in past posts, they broke a couple already.

Also this gem. The party 'reconnected' with Canadians during the campaign. Yeah. It's called being tired of Harper.

Is this guy and the party he clumsily leads for real?


Climate Change Is Bull Shit

There. I said it. I feel liberated already!

And Obama's stance is bull shit. In the long-run, the climate change cult will have been proven wrong. As they usually are mostly because they're manipulative jackasses with an agenda.

It's settled!

"The Virgin Islands attorney general has withdrawn a controversial subpoena against a prominent libertarian D.C. think tank, after being accused of bullying the group as part of a broader probe into whether ExxonMobil misled the public about global warming. 

Attorney General Claude Walker had issued the subpoena, demanding the Competitive Enterprise Institute hand over 10 years' worth of its communications related to climate change, in April.

CEI fired back with a lawsuit of its own, seeking to fine Walker for what the group called a breach of their First Amendment rights."

Bill Nye - that smug idiot - has a sadz.

Think of it for a second. Skeptics have been painstakingly producing facts on the issue of climate change quietly exposing the lies heaped on people regarding the faux-issue of our times. Yet, they're the ones being threatened with subpoenas? 


Europe Has Officially Crossed The Rubicon Into Tyranny

This article is 15 years-old and should serve as a reminder at how slowly government erodes liberty:

"The ruling stated that the commission could restrict dissent in order to "protect the rights of others" and punish individuals who "damaged the institution's image and reputation". The case has wider implications for free speech that could extend to EU citizens who do not work for the Brussels bureaucracy."


What a god damned mess Europe is. Not the the UK is in any better shape on that front, but they need to stay out of the EU. This is madness.

And this time, when things go down the inevitable shitter, I'll be damned if North America should send soldiers over because it will have all been self-induced insanity that caused their war.


Like The Conservative Ad Said: Trudeau Is Just Not Ready

Here's my take on the kerfuffle in Parliament in point form:

1 - Why did Trudeau leave his seat? Probably because he saw his assisted suicide bill dying and was frustrated by what the NDP and Conservatives were doing.

2- The defense of the Prime Minister is lame. I've read anywhere from he was 'saving democracy' (hey, why not?) to it was 'much ado about nothing'. Or we can go the false equivalence route as CTV's Barry Wilson did in his Postscript. I really don't care about those places. I mean, is he really comparing Canada to Kenya and the Ukraine? Why not, say, a comparable Western democracy? Right, doesn't fit the narrative.

What I do care about is the at the end of the day the Liberals made all sorts of fluffy noises about bringing dignity back to Parliament thus leading people to make ridiculous eye-rolling empty phrases like 'My Canada is back'.

What I care about is he lacks judgment. A person that makes this many apologies (dating back to before the election) deserves to have his judgment questioned.

What I care about was his body language that's been completely overlooked. Notice how arrogance and impetuousness got the better of him.

What I care about is the fact Harper never acted in so a poor a manner and had he done so, my God, the media and people's reactions would have been apoplectic. And we all know it.
3- Let's get to the nuts and bolts of it. On Democracy. What the NDP and Conservatives were doing is NOT anti-democratic but the very essence of it. They were using legitimate procedural options to demand debate on the bill.  The Liberals on the other hand had 4 closures to try and ram the bill through without debate. So, it looks like Trudeau was frustrated at the prospect of his bill dying. Sounds like the Liberals "assisted" in creating this incident. They sure have a funny interpretation of Canada.

Apologists for Trudeau have claimed the Tories and NDP were 'obstructing democracy'. Nonsense.  Parliamentary politics is meant to be 'oppositional' and it's the oppositions job to OPPOSE. Not compromise per se.

Nor is it "toxic".  The Rat Pack v. Mulroney, Pierre Trudeau's confrontational and authoritarian style, Dief the Chief versus Pearson - we've seen this before.

Aside from that, I detect a little level of full of shitness from liberals on this. When Harper was in power, they demanded he govern according to the '66% who didn't vote for him' and were outraged at every decision he took to preserve his government or pass bills. Yet, they cheer on the Liberal party of Canada in ramming a bill without debate. Suddenly, 66% of the people don't matter anymore.

Funny that.

4 - As noted above, in the end, this points to judgment. There's a certain misplaced cockiness that leaves me somewhat uncomfortable.

Never mind, that just five months in this is probably one of the most tumultuous and amateurish starts to leadership I've witnessed. The lies have been quite impressive. He's already failed on making Parliament more 'civil', already has a scandal with the Saudi arms deal, he lied to numerous groups in the budget and is giving every indication he can be just as 'authoritarian' as his predecessor was.

Looks like the PM is learning on the job and it shows. Maybe he needs to tone down his vainglory selfies. For if he keeps this up, there may even be a vote of non-confidence in the future.


Canada Officially Derailed; Trudeau's Temper On Display

Well, with the Liberals going on full retard mode where freedom of speech and expression are concerned with retarded hate speech laws - and quite frankly, it's not surprising given who is at the helm of this country at the moment - here's Ezra Levant before the HRC.

Notice the women's body language. Does that scream totalitarianism or what? Rolling of the eyes, crossed arms, the look of boredom. This is what inhabits the HRC cave.

Expecting professionalism I guess is just not in the cards for these commies.

Quite the pathetic display that a journalist has to go *defend* himself before such a bull shit kangaroo court.

Canada is so smug in its delusions about being a 'caring' society, it doesn't see just how backwards it has become where civil rights are concerned. 

Know how easy it is? Some asshole can take offense to something I wrote on a blog - or any blog for that matter - and the HRC can agree to listen to the case.


It's okay though. Canada is back and in good hands with Le Dauphin.

I mean, check out this confident exhibition of Parliamentary control and leadership!

Gee, imagine if Harper did that.

Like the HRC deadbeat above, notice the body language. Ooo, the misplaced sense of leadership driven by smug arrogance.

This is who the Canadians entrusted their nation to?

I can't think of a government in recent years that's gone so off the rails in just a few short months like the Liberal party of Canada has.

It has not been an impressive first half year. At all.

There's so much the CBC's Neil MacDonald can do to keep acting as the cologne to their BO.

Anyway. I'd like to say, I told you so. When a person has to apologize as many times as he has, you know they're not ready for prime time.

At some point we have to accept his impetuous and temperamental behavior is the rule rather than the exception.


Kill Bill 59

Stephanie Vallee. You're wrong. I agree with the Parti Quebecois. This is not a path we must go on. Nor do I care much that other provinces have similar laws. I happen to think they're out to lunch.

There's no legitimate way to define "hate" speech.

You just have free speech. Period.

I can easily, given my language here, find myself before a Human Rights Commission by how the state defines "hate".

We're not headed in the right direction with this.

At all.

Does Andrew Cuomo Know He's In A Monty Python Scene?

This thing about North Carolina is nutty to the end of time. Watching self-serving celebrities and politicians so well-versed in the art of lies, deception and hypocrisy lose their middling minds over the state's transgender laws is something to behold.

As noted before, celebrities already lost the credibility battle given some of them have no problem performing in the Middle-East; a modern bastion of enlightened civil rights for all people. Not to mention uber-politically correct California and its zany moronic laws have something similar on the books.

Alas, much easier to push around a small state like NC, right?

It's what bullies do. They pick a weaker opponent to push whatever it is they want.

It's no different when government gets involved. I find it grotesque that Andrew Cuomo would restrict travel for 'non-essential' things to North Carolina because in his own myopic, bullying, New York arrogance, his values (and I use the term ever so loosely) must be imposed through punitive measures against the people of NY to make a point about an issue that's none of his state's god damned business.

“In New York, we believe that all people – regardless of their gender identity or sexual orientation – deserve the same rights and protections under the law,” said Governor Cuomo. “From Stonewall to marriage equality, our state has been a beacon of hope and equality for the LGBT community, and we will not stand idly by as misguided legislation replicates the discrimination of the past. As long as there is a law in North Carolina that creates the grounds for discrimination against LGBT people, I am barring non-essential state travel to that state.”

Check the steam coming out his ass and ears. Keeping wagging that finger, Andy.

Cuomo is probably better off keeping focus on Albany and making a mess of his own state.

It's funny how dipshits like these people fight to for liberty by restricting that rights of others. 

It's very much like in Quebec where in order to *promote* French, they restrict through punitive measures English.

I want you to think long and hard who are the intellectually and morally depraved here.

Now you find me a two-minute clip that captures the leitmotif of our times better than this.


Fuck The Tribunals - They're A Threat To Freedom

We're at a point in society now where comedians have to face Human Rights Tribunals merely for making jokes that offend.

We're not heading in the right direction.

"...Dozens of Quebec comedians protested against censorship Sunday night at the Gala des Oliviers.
The annual award show honours the best of Quebec comedic talent, but comedians were not happy with a decision to censor a piece by comedians Mike Ward and Guy Nantel.

Comics arriving at the show walked the red carpet wearing masks emblazoned with a red 'X'.

Again. You either have free speech and expression or you don't.



It's so bad Darryl Hall chimed in with his opinion on the uber-stupidity that's 'cultural appropriation.


Note To Madame Helene David


I went to Dairy Queen today and there were NO FRENCH DESCRIPTORS!

I wanted to slap everyone's ice-cream out of their hands in case they were being duped! 'Mange pas ca, chalice!'


I mean, the Quebec media, its pundits and politicians (all so well versed in the art of business and economics) have told us it is!

Over to you Helene. How will you save the French language from this obscenity!



Disclaimer: Sarcasm.

Stop Bill 64

Quebec is proposing its own long-gun registry for some reason. And once again it's not based in any solid reasoning except for applying the precautionary principal.

How rare are multiple deaths by long-guns? We have to stretch back over 25 years Polytechnique massacre at the hands of Marc Lepin. Yet, we still insist to do something. The fact we haven't seen an event of this type only proves it was an outlier event.

Yet, we still hear about it as if it's a good reason to infringe on the civil liberties of people.

In a province and in a country that has low homicide rates, I wonder why the need for it. I fall into the category of people who feel this will simply penalize law-abiding citizens.

Never mind the disaster that was the long-gun registry at the Federal level that was rebuked by the Auditor-General. And this being Quebec, I don't expect it to be any better.

"With a comically unbelievable price tag of $17 million to set up Quebec’s new gun registry and another $5 million per year to run it, reasonable people are left wondering if Couillard discovered some magic elixir to keep the cost way, way down. After all, the CBC reported that the old national long-gun registry cost Canadians over $2 billion and over 25 per cent of Canada’s firearm owners live in “la belle province.”

Like I said. It's Quebec. They won't keep costs down. It's amazing really. No matter how many example of waste we have we still insist on tomfoolery. My Lord, just look at Quebec daycare and the financial mess it became.

Allow me a quick thought on daycare. We've come full circle. It's looking like more and more subsidized daycare is running its course while CPE's are probably not going to dominate the landscape anymore.

This is the part where Barack Obama and Bernie Sanders - who push for universal daycare and pre-k services - should shut up (yes, shut their left-wing utopian nonsense) a second and listen to someone who actually knows about this business.

Prior to 1995, Quebec had a normal daycare industry. Then the PQ stepped in (to help the working poor which of course didn't really happen according to plan. What does whenever the government ever intervenes in a private industry that didn't need its two-cents?) and subsidized daycare with the probable plan to kill off private daycare in the long-run. Of course, a funny thing happened on the way to the Rainbow and Unicorn room. Cost over runs were out of control.

Rather than admit a mistake or try and properly fix it (to the extent the government can fix anything) they even did their best to warn people about the 'inferior services' offered in the private sector. Which of course, was and still is a flat out lie. It's amazing how far they're willing to go to potentially harm private businesses run by Quebecers to push their own misguided agenda and schemes. Apparently, those families that depend on their business or a private service 'didn't count' when push came to shove.

So the Mme. Marois and the PQ get a big middle finger (the Italian salute as it were) for directly insulting me and people like me.

Now public sector workers are fighting 'austerity' measures in daycare. But the fact is they got something they should never have gotten in the first place. This is not austerity. This is bringing sanity back to the books.

And so here we are, slowly reverting back to the North American norm and mean. Quebecers will just have to adjust and accept we're not anymore special than anyone on the continent. We certainly didn't have the wealth or cash flow to justify it and with our debt levels, cutting subsidies in daycare was a no-brainer.

Progressive policies have to stop or else we'll end up like Europe down the road. And no, it's not a model to emulate.

Which brings me back to the gun-registry.

There's no justification for it and the Couillard government - showing itself to be utterly banal - is on cue to become yet another stake in the heart of Quebec waste and corruption with this nonsense.

Quebec has far more bigger problems to tackle. 


Canada's Shame: Selling Arms To Saudis Just Business

Listening to pundits on the radio talk about the export permits surrounding selling tanks to Saudi Arabia, I was astonished to hear them talk about this with indifference and defend the export permit two explanations excuses were given. 

First up was conservative Geoff Norquay saying along the lines, 'hey, it's the way things are and if we start picking and choosing who are bad countries we'd have no clients and then we'd be looking at ourselves in the mirror!'

Work that strawman Norquay. Work it real good. Whip it.

For fuck sakes, all we're saying is don't sell to regimes that have been known to use weapons on their own people. It's quite a simple line to draw and no one would fault us for doing it.

Later he conceded where money and jobs pit against human rights, the former wins.

The very same reasons Canadians criticize the big bad Americans for.

What were you saying about mirrors, Jeff?

The other was from Jonathan Goldbloom representing the - scowls - the Liberals.

His take? Israel didn't make a stink about it.


What's your point?

The Liberals often criticized Harper for not espousing Canadian values enough abroad and now we're supposed to overlook the rhetoric set forth by this government where human rights are concerned?

I thought Canada was...back?

I couldn't care less what Israel thinks because it has nothing to do with them. It has everything to do with the integrity of this government. Match up our rhetoric on human rights with damn action or else piss off. I wouldn't be all worked up about it had the Liberals not played the holier than thou Vaudevile act prior to this. However, they did and they deserve to be reamed for it.

Finally, it's been asserted there's no proof Saudi Arabia has used Canadian arms on its own citizens.


We know this is a country that routinely imprisons and executes people. It's not a stretch to assume one day one of our arms will be used to kill innocent people.

Yes, that means you and me have blood on our hands. Don't accept or be fooled by such tomfoolery. This is a deal that should not have been signed.

I don't think selling to the Saudi Arabians would have hurt us all that much. At least we'd have our dignity. Moreover, we wouldn't have to snicker and laugh the next time Trudeau pulls one of his drama humanist shtick.

I guess being part of the left-wing liberal tent means never needing to put your money where your mouth is. The Liberals are nakedly proving it's easier to sprout niceties about human rights and *values* from afar or as opposition.

Never mind that Stephane 'Where's my balls?' Dion and his party led by the PM basically flat out lied to the Canadian public.

Not bad. Just four months in and the government has already broken not one but two promises. First up was the budget; specifically with small business where promises made but were shamelessly ignored and now this. Man, that's cynicism.

The other thing the Liberals are working on is a Parliamentary hearing on electoral reform where they will look to - I presume -  rig reforms in their favor. This was better suited for a non-partisan Royal Commission. By taking the Parliamentary route the Liberals are just tempting being charged with lack of credibility down the road.

The amateur hour will run for three more years and nine months in Parliament.

So much for that wholesome bit about Canadian values, eh?


U.S. Campuses Out Of Control

"Assistant Director of Inclusion and Student Engagement".

How's that for a job title? If this sends shivers down your spine, it should.

If this hasn't convinced you a thick veil of darkness has descended upon campuses nothing will.

This is straight out of 1984.

How profoundly ignorant of history (which makes them dangerous in my eyes given, you know, they work in an institution of higher education) are Ms. Rowlett, Berry and Prange? A trio of dingbats who seem to be more interested in the tomfoolery of their titles than actual intellectualism.

Courtesy of the geniuses from Millikin University.

“Millikin University is committed to fostering a community of inclusiveness that respects difference amongst all students,” she wrote in the letter, a copy of which was provided to Campus Reform by a fraternity member who wishes to remain anonymous. “It is my hope that the men of [Tau Kappa Epsilon] utilize this as an educational opportunity to explore the concept of intent vs. impact with regard to cultural appropriation.”

Oh fuck off already with this tripe. This cultural appropriation nonsense is an evil that needs to be eradicated. I have but one question for Rowlett: Does she eat pizza and pasta? If yes, she's *culturally appropriating* Italian culture. This alone should give pause or act as a slap to the face jolting someone out of their faux-intellectual misery.

The government, experts in making a mess of life, had its role to play helping to unleash unintended consequences students are facing by their cowardly deans and other middle-earth trolls guarding over them. Idiotic things like Title IX have been used as a tool to suppress and hurt people.

Obama, who would have been wise to keep out of this nonsense, had his hand to play in all this sick madness of unintended consequences.

People have been taking to pen about how Obama is the 'greatest President in their lifetime' and that he's 'changed the paradigm.'

To the former, we can but snicker but to the latter. I'm afraid he has.

And for the worse I reckon.


What we need here is a full frontal rebellion.


1984 In A Chart

I'd like to thank the University of Oregon for putting '1984' into a chart.

"...An annual report on the activities of University of Oregon’s Bias Response Team provides a frightening yet fascinating glimpse into the practices of these organizations, which are common on college campuses. Students, faculty, and staff who feel threatened, harassed, intimidated, triggered, microaggressed, offended, ignored, under-valued, or objectified because of their race, gender, gender identity, sexuality, disability status, mental health, religion, political affiliation, or size are encouraged to contact the BRT." 

Very disturbing.

What the heck is happening on college campuses in the United States?

This. This is not good.


Semi-Enlightened Simpletons

Religulous was all I needed to know about Maher's philosophical depth.

A fart in the wind.

I think McInnes brings up a good point by how liberals frame the narrative.

The same thing can apply to climate change.

Needs More Descriptors

I have a question for Helene David.

Perusing and putzing around the mall the other day, I noticed 'Star Wars' t-shirts being sold.

I wonder if this should come with 'French descriptors' given, you know, it's an American film en anglais.

This is a scary situation for consumers who may feel disrespected.

Might I suggest 'Le filme' discreetly below 'Star Wars'?

It makes 'good business sense', no?

What you say, Mme. David?


Wednesday Night Music


Now that's HISTORY!

British Columbia: Banana Republic

Just to show I'm an equal opportunist to mocking stupidity, here's a little story out of B.C.

"A man who was unable to get a high chair for his baby at two different Earls restaurant locations in Vancouver will have his complaint heard by the B.C. Human Rights Tribunal.
In a ruling delivered Wednesday, tribunal chair Bernd Walter opted not to dismiss the complaint lodged by Phillip Ryan as Earls had requested.

Ryan’s complaint stems from a February 2015 visit to the chain’s Hornby Street location. When he was told no high chairs were available, his family left. Ryan, who is alleging discrimination on the basis of family status, said he encountered the same issue when visiting a different Earls location three weeks later, and this time opted to dine there with the child in his lap.

In response, Earls submitted that while some of its locations do not have high chairs, Ryan was offered what the restaurant group considered “reasonable options” — booth seating where the baby could sit next to him or on his lap.

Ryan, who was attempting to have a celebratory family dinner while avoiding the cost of a babysitter during the first incident, said holding the child in his lap for the entire meal would be stressful, and that was the case when he decided to stay for the second incident."

Aw. Poor Phillip Ryan.

Big baby.

Excuse the pun.

When my wife and I wanted to go out for dinner or planned to have a party we chose places we knew could accommodate our child or called places to make they did.

We certainly never thought to make an issue of things whatever the circumstances.

Because, you know, we're not whiny narcissists or progressive nuthead who believe everything is a 'basic human right' because we "feel" it to be.

And why in the fuck is the Human Rights Tribunal - shudders - even giving this jerkoff the time of day?

The madness. It goes round and round I tell you.


Wholefoods recently hit back at a customer who lied about an alleged racist message on a cake he purchased. One can only hope corporations start to push back against this SJW insanity.

First step is to not offer Ryan anything. In fact, ban him from ever entering their establishment again.


Le Quebecois Libre Ceases Publication

It was unfortunate to learn the news of Le Quebecois Libre suspending its publication indefinitely.

It was the country's (let alone Quebec) only libertarian and classical liberal voice.

And now it's gone.

For shame because Canada is poorer for it.

What's left are conservative magazines like The Western Standard  and newspapers like The National Post who have libertarian views from time to time but really are conservative at its roots.

Welcome To Quebec: Banana Republic

Welcome to petty, parochial and punitive Quebec:

"...In 2014, stores including Wal-Mart and Best Buy won a court battle with the province over signs.
Related Stories

The OQLF wanted the companies with English trademarks like Canadian Tire to have some sort of descriptor so that people would know what they were selling.

Gasp! How do they manage?!

Yes, because by now Quebecers haven't fucking figured what Canadian Tire is and what it sells.  Talk about treating your population as if they're idiots. I mean, come on, what's next? They're gonna fumble and stumble into a Krispy Kreme thinking they sell paint? That if they go into La Bottega Pizzeria they will look for poutine? IKEA? What's that? Chalice, parle moi francais pas Suedois!

One would think how the heck they order a Big Mac, tabernak!

Two courts ruled in favour of the retailers, saying they were not violating the sign law. The province is now amending the law.

Because that's what banana republics do. They find things to piss people off with. Everyone and their lousy hockey coach agree Bill 101 (you know, that law that tramples on civil liberties if it were enacted anywhere on the continent) achieved 'balance' (well, in the context of shitty Quebec intellectualism where freedom of speech and expression are concerned) and some degree of linguistic peace, yet here are the Liberals acting like a bunch of PQ hicks.

All businesses – not just stores, but restaurants, hotels, and companies – will have to have some type of French descriptor on anywhere the English name can be seen from outside.
If the English trademark name is illuminated, the French description will also be required to be illuminated.

This is heading somewhere nefarious...
The government estimates this will cost companies anywhere from $500 to $9,000.

There it is! Punitive measures! 

Language minister Helene David said it simply makes good business sense to ensure the majority of clients feel welcomed.
There's that good ole paternalistic arrogance. I highly doubt successful businesses with global reach and brand power need preaching as to what 'makes good business sense'.

Welcomes? I hadn't fucking noticed Wal-Mart spits in the faces of Quebecers telling them to 'speak white fucking frogs.'

Idiot. Just a stupid idiotic, insulting statement.

“It's very important, because we are in Quebec and the people here in Quebec want to see something specific for their own language, so we see Supercentre Wal-Mart, they feel that they are incorrect.

Yeah well, Supercenter is how it's properly spelled. Just like it's Tim HORTON'S and not Tim Hortons. Look, if language nationalist boobheads want to mess up their own language that's their business. But they shouldn't be allowed to mock grammar rules of another language in this manner.  I mean, this people were afraid of an apostrophe. AN APOSTROPHE THREATENED THEIR LANGUAGE! So Eaton's became Eaton. 

Nothing says protecting your language by demeaning another!

It's also the place that felt that the internationally recognized word of 'Stop' had to be replaced on the most recognizable octagon on earth with the word 'Arret'. If France, the home of the French language, didn't feel the need to go that far, why did Quebec? Are they that insecure to be so banal?
The people she's referring to are the assholes who go around complaining about words like 'pasta' on menus. 

The Liberals are pandering to losers because it looks like being a loser sells.

I find it very hard to believe in 2016 the average Quebecer believes this shit is actually productive. I hope anyway.

None of this enhances or protects a language. On the contrary, it undermines and demeans it.

Then they wonder why this place continues to sink down the shitter.

They are not in Maine, they are not in the state of New York, so they feel that they are in Quebec, where the French language is the official language,” said David."

They should be so lucky. When I visit Maine, I see a bunch of stores with French names and no one bats a bloody eye. Put an English word on a sign in Quebec and apparently everyone turns into a xenophobic retard drooling mushed zucchini.

Again from the top: Quebec is unique when it comes to exerting punitive measures against freedom of expressions and speech. That's a dubious distinction that should give pause to us as a ostensibly free society.

When we finally leave this place I will party hard!


I have to pay my taxes to Quebec and then I have to watch Helene David on TV go after my language as if it threatens her language (a majority of 87% I might add)?

How does that work exactly?