Chris Vanoostveen

Attention, Warren Kinsella: Lawyer Counsels Violence!

2008-04-10T14:31:00.008-04:00

Washroom Nazi Hunter Warren Kinsella is outraged that Ezra Levant would dare "publish" a death threat against his buddy, Lucy Warman.

Note to Warren: the threat was made by an anonymous poster, and Ezra deleted it. If you're really concerned about lawyers calling for physical violence against others, you might check out this clip of... That's right! Your buddy, Lucy Warman!

Of course, Warren doesn't care about threats of violence, just so long as it's his buddies making them.

Poor Warren. He's had a rough time these last few months. I'll bet he wishes he was back in the kitchen with Lucy and the rest of the HRC gang, baking cookies.

HILARIOUS UPDATE: I have been banned from Dr. Dawg's site for being... An agent provocateur! Apparently he was not too pleased by my attempts to get him to clarify his potentially libelous comments implying that Ezra Levant knowingly approved a death threat. Anyway, I'm now an agent provocateur!

What can I say? I was just doing a Richard Warman impression. I thought he'd approve!

UPDATE UPDATE: A poster named Travis provides a neat summary of what happened over at Dr. Dawg's blog, which deserves to be re-posted here in full:

Cameron said:

"Chris, are you saying that condoning pieing is the same as condoning what any reasonable person would read as a a threat of a torture session followed by death? "

"Yes, let's be clear here, I don't think Ezra supports death threats against any one,"

So Ezra doesn't support death threats, he just condones them? That's a mighty fine hair to be splitting.

It would appear that several posters here let their dislike of Ezra Levant get the better of them and implied some rather nasty (and likely untrue) things about him. And when someone called them on it and provided a much simpler alternative interpretation (which Occam's Razor indicates we should accept), they retreated to a technical argument that no one disputes, tried to pretend they never said anything untoward and then banned the whistle blower.

Not your finest hour gentlemen.
Travis | 04.11.08 - 12:09 pm | #

No, indeed. Here's more:

Adam C, both positions made assumptions about Levant's motives. I fail to see how the assumption that Levant endorsed the comments is even remotely as reasonable as the assumption that it slipped through. In fact given that Levant removed the comment we can conclude that he does not endorse it.

Ti-Guy, interesting that you would assume I'm a conservative. It's also interesting that apparently object more to my "civility" more than my "passive-aggressiveness". I'd offer to call you names if that would make you feel better, but Dawg has already implied that he might ban me so I'll have to give that a pass.

MWW, does not the act of removing the post also speak for itself? Why don't you credit Levant for that in your analysis?

"Nobody has alleged anything here. They have merely observed what is true and can be proven."

You obviously haven't read the same comment stream I have. What can be proven is that the comment appeared on Levant's blog and was later removed.

If you want to argue that Levant was sloppy or lazy about policing his comments go ahead, there's a valid criticism there. If you want to argue that decorum indicates that he explain why he removed the comment, go to it. You won't get any objection from me.

In any case I don't see how Chris could force you to say anything just by posting comments. From my point of view he was checking to see if anyone had the balls to flat out say what they were oh so happy to imply about Levant. And the answer to that was a resounding no.

Exactly. Actually, if anything I was giving them the opportunity to back off a little and clarify their comments. It's telling that they banned me and refused to clarify anything.

A poster named Cameron keeps posting "infer vs. imply" or some such thing, as though it's okay for them to infer Ezra approved of a death threat, but not imply that he did. Of course, they did both, but I find the attempt at a distinction somehow amusing.

No, Mr. Warman, we didn't IMPLY you're responsible for the Cools post, we INFERRED that you were responsible for it. How would Lucy react? With (A) a defamation lawsuit, (B) a s. 13 complaint, (C) a pie to your face, or (D) all of the above?

"We go and kill everybody."

2008-03-28T00:20:00.003-04:00

Some welcome news for serial idiot and Kinsella sycophant Vlad Glebov; his beloved gang of 18 terrorists is getting their day in court after all.

He came by a while ago to complain that

"...those Toronto 18 that you speak off, since 2006 there still hasn't been a trial. About half of them have been released on bail, which means some of them aren't as dangerous to the public as people think. I assume you believe in "innocent before proven guilty"rule. I'd wait before they are convicted before you quote their alleged plot.

You can find out more info here:
http://toronto18.com/index.php?option=com_content&task=view&id=38&Itemid=1

Actually, if you follow his link, you find that 4 out of 18 are out on "unusually strict" bail conditions. But that's okay, basic math isn't one of Vlad's strengths.

Anyway, here's what the shockingly Islamophobic Toronto Star had to report on the case today:

The "shocking and sensational" inner workings of an alleged homegrown terror cell were unveiled yesterday in a Brampton court – and included the plotting of an attack "much greater" in scale than the London 2005 bombings that killed 52 people.

In a document made public for the first time, the Crown painted a broad picture of the expected evidence in the trial of a youth who pleaded not guilty to belonging to a terrorist group. The trial opened yesterday.

According to the allegations, the so-called Toronto 18 were attempting to secure a safe house to store weapons and practise military drills, and embarking on a mission to destroy the West – one they should be willing to die for.

Details of the alleged plot, which also included storming Parliament Hill and beheading politicians, emerged in a factum filed by the Crown that described the case against the accused as "shocking and sensational."

The document contains transcripts of wiretaps and videotapes that include one conversation in which one of the accused speaks of the group's ambitions.

"They're probably expecting what happened in London or something," he said. "... Some bombing in a subway kills 10 people and everybody gets deported. We're not doing that. ... So our thing it's, it's much, much greater on a scale ... you do it once and you make sure they can never recover again." ...

Here's a transcript of their planning:

Person 3: "What happens, what happens at the Parliament?"

Person 1: "We go and kill everybody."

No, Vlad, they're not dangerous at all. Nothing to see here. Multicultural peace and harmony.

UPDATE: Hello again Warren. I didn't realize s. 1 of the Charter says freedom of speech is an American concept that should be accorded no value in Canada. I'm just not as learned as you, I suppose!

Who Said What?

2008-03-22T19:58:00.005-04:00

A fun game for Warren to play while he's lurking around my site:

UPDATE: Welcome to everyone from SDA and thanks for the link Kate, it's much appreciated. I usually get 100 hits per month, not per hour.

UPDATE 2: I've fixed up the game so it's a little easier to read. The original file is here.

"Anti-Racist" Defends Pro-Terror Anti-Semite

2008-03-12T18:12:00.008-04:00

OK, normally I wouldn't waste my time on a bunch of Kinsella* sycophants, but since he has linked to them so enthusiastically, and since one is hilariously stupid, here it goes.

First, the fool published a list of the Canadian Islamic Congress's complaints against Mark Steyn (here), which misquoted and mischaracterized Steyn's words. The (mis)quoted statement comparing Muslim population growth to the spread of mosquitoes was, of course, not Steyn's but that of a European imam. Most of the other quotes were from Steyn's plot summary of a book by Robert Ferrigno. Of course, the CIC intended all of this to make Steyn look like a racist lunatic. And Vlad Glebov, "Commerce and Finance Specialist," swallowed it whole. Don't bother asking for an apology.

Next, Vlad came by my blog to further make a fool of himself. Confronted with a recent CBC poll which showed that 12% (+/- 4.4% 19 times out of 20, or somewhere between 50,000 and 100,000 out of 700,000) of Canadian Muslims think that a terrorist attack that included beheading the prime minister and blowing up the Parliament building would be "justified," he expounded his wisdom on polling thusly: "thats not thousands, thats about 35 people out of that survey of 500..." Further: "The typical sample size used in basic political polls that are reported on CNN are at least 1000 people... and even thats considered to be too low by analysts." When confronted with a few basic concepts from Statistics 101, he kept digging: "...CNN polls are probably done at 99% confidence and that requires about 900-1000 sample size." Of course, that's nonsense. Anyway, if you're thinking of hiring a "Commerce and Finance Specialist" from UTM in the near future, beware!

Next, Vlad returned to my site not to respond to me, but to post a link to his new post, and hey, it looks like he actually got the quotes himself this time! Anyhow, as I explain here, I responded on his site. He promptly deleted three of my links (to pages where he had previously made a fool of himself), and a question I asked about Tarek Fatah. I pointed this out, and he responded by blaming Wordpress, and accusing me of spreading conspiracy theories about him. If, uh, anyone cares, he posted a screenshot showing that Wordpress gave him a choice to "Approve" or "Edit" my post. He edited it. Just a warning for anyone thinking of posting there. Someone equally clueless responded with this: "HA HA HA! I cannot believe Chris. You think you can seriously win any argument against Vlad? ... Right now, defending Mark Steyn, is putting one self in the same league as him, possibly being identified as a “racist” also."

So, in response, I asked how they can justify putting themselves in "the same league" with Mohamed Elmasry, leader of the CIC, who is famous for saying that all Israeli adults are legitimate targets for suicide bombers. How do you think this "Say No To Hate" activist/Kinsella sycophant responded? Why, by defending Elmasry, and attacking a Jew!

UPDATE: Here's my latest post, which he doesn't seem too keen to publish (here), just in case he gets the urge to hit "Edit" again:

(1) I did not "make up crazy conspiracy theories." I wrote that you edited my post above (cutting out both links and text). You did. Do you deny doing this?

(2) I do not "blindly support" Mark Steyn. But I don't blindly go along with the hysterical criticism of him either -- much of which, by the way, is based on misquotes or mischaracterizations of what he has written. If the case against Steyn was so obvious, why did the CIC have to falsely attribute the misquitoes quote to him, and mischaracterize his plot summary of a novel as Steyn's own views/predictions? I await your apology for blindly following along and reprinting the same libel on your site.

(3) I did quote the transcript properly. I gave you what Elmasry actually said, not the spin that others added afterwards. In any case, since he clearly stated above in the transcript that all Israelis over 18 are in the army, "Yes [if they are part of the army]" means "Yes."

(4) I do not support B'nai Brith or Adam Aptowitzer in any way, and never have. The point here is that you should think twice before relying on CIC documents to smear Mark Steyn, or anyone else. That is, if you were really interested in "speaking out against hate" etc., instead of just Mark Steyn & Co.

* Washroom Nazi Hunter

UPDATE 2: Hmm... A reader from Sanibel, Florida? Hello Warren!

Client #9

2008-03-10T19:01:00.003-04:00

Hahaha

Cherniak has competition!

2008-03-09T14:44:00.006-04:00

"Please, link to me, making a complete fool of myself... I want the traffic!"

At least he's honest about it!

UPDATE: No surprise, but Vlad the Libeller (right) will delete your post if it's even remotely critical. Just a warning.

FYI, here's my post from this page, which disappeared today:

OK, let me return the favour:
http://chrisvanoostveen.blogspot.com/2008/02/warren-kinsella-makes-smearniak-look.html.

Of course, I understand it's easier for you to throw up more quotes, rather than to actually respond to the points I raised here.

Hint: you might be able to make a better argument (and avoid misquoting and mischaracterizing Steyn's work) if you actually bothered to read his book (still waiting for your apology...).

FYI, Steyn, like Daniel Pipes (and Tarek Fatah -- is he an Islamophobe too?), and many others, makes clear distinctions between moderate Muslims and Muslims like Krekar. No one, Steyn included, has argued that all Muslims are terrorists, plotting to attack us. That's a pretty silly distortion of Steyn's views.

Oh well. At least you attributed the mosquitoes quote to the right person this time!

UPDATE UPDATE: "Actually Chris, your comment was picked up as spam and never posted..." Right...

Once I reposted the comment here, it suddenly appeared on his site -- first with the links intact, and then with the embarrassing ones deleted. Here's his version of my post (at the moment):

OK, let me return the favour:

Of course, I understand it’s easier for you to throw up more quotes, rather than to actually respond to the points I raised

Hint: you might be able to make a better argument and avoid misquoting and mischaracterizing Steyn’s work if you actually bothered to read his book (still waiting for your apology…).

FYI, Steyn, like Daniel Pipes http://www.nationalpost.com/todays_paper/story.html?id=162281 Tarek Fatah, and many others, makes clear distinctions between moderate Muslims and Muslims like Krekar. No one, Steyn included, has argued that all Muslims are terrorists, plotting to attack us. That’s a pretty silly distortion of Steyn’s views.

Oh well. At least you attributed the mosquitoes quote to the right person this time!

In case you haven't noticed, the links to the embarrassing exchange here are mysteriously gone, as is that inconvenient question about Tarek Fatah.

"Moderation" indeed!

Warren Kinsella makes Smearniak look good

2008-02-29T12:41:00.004-05:00

Kinsella has just claimed that Mark Steyn said Muslims "breed like mosquitoes" (among other things).

Obviously, he has learned nothing from Jim Henley, who made the same claim a few months ago. Of course, the words are not Steyn's, but those of a prominent Scandinavian imam.

We didn't have to wait long for Henley's apology. How long will we have to wait for Kinsella's?

(P.S. Harper's magazine included the caveat that these words have been "attributed" to Steyn. Of course, if they have been falsely attributed to Steyn, it says more about the ones doing the attributing that it does about Steyn. In any case, Kinsella didn't include caveats. Time for a libel suit, maybe?)

UPDATE: Others have weighed in, here and here. Meanwhile, this guy is asking the Canadian Islamic Congress for help in proving Steyn's racism, apparently unconcerned that it is led by a man who thinks all Israeli adults are legitimate targets for suicide bombers.

Jason Cherniak makes Dan Rather look good

2008-02-27T18:33:00.006-05:00

Yet more evidence that Jason Cherniak is a fool.

Here's Jason's "evidence" against a Conservative staffer...And here's what a real facebook post looks like, from the group Dion for PM:Let's count the differences.

As Mike Brock notes, the given name and surname are in different colours in Jason's "evidence."

As he also notes, 19:32am isn't a real time, like, say, 5:07pm, which is a real time.

In the real post, above, there's a small gap between the profile picture and the name & date. In Jason's evidence, there is none.

In the real post, the name, date/time, and post are all roughly the same font size, whereas in Jason's evidence the date/time is larger.

In Jason's post, it looks like the text goes across the full screen...

His explanation of the differences?

Marcus sent me a PDF of his word document. I assumed it was a screenshot and used Microsoft photo editor to turn the PDF into a jpg (by copying and pasting a screen shot) before uploading to Blogger. So that's why the "image" was off. It was actually a cut and paste in Word.

So, somehow, this turned the surname black, but not the given name, not to mention all the other changes I listed above.

Does Jason actually expect anyone to believe this?

Take me to your Kangaroo Court

2008-02-23T17:48:00.008-05:00

A note to Boys Washroom Nazi Hunter Warren Kinsella (pictured, right), or his buddy, Richard Warman, advocate of the human right of thugs to throw pies at people.

Your political thuggery, in the form of endless and empty legal threats, and support for physical attacks against those you deem unworthy of the right to speak, is decidedly Naziesque in character.

That's all.

Some children die

2007-12-12T02:33:00.000-05:00

Here's a story you won't see on Little Mosque on the Prairie:

TORONTO -- A Mississauga, Ont., cab driver has been charged with the murder of his 16-year-old daughter, who was attacked in the family home after clashing with her strict Muslim family over whether or not to wear the hijab, the traditional Islamic head scarf for women.

I'm posting not because this is surprising from the Religion of Peace, but because this happened not far from where I live, and next to Applewood Plaza, where I often shop for groceries (and beer, and other heathen things).

Also, I'd like to point out some comments from an ESL teacher named Michelle over at Jim Henley's site on this crime:

Parents punish their children. For religious and other reasons. Some children die. Others survive and make peace with their parents.

Really, it's no big deal! Some parents strangle their kids to death for not wearing the proper religious clothes. Some kids wear the clothes, and survive. Nothing to see here.

It would be funny if it wasn't so sad.

Jason Cherniak in the Western Standard

2007-04-23T22:12:00.000-04:00

The Western Standard, in their May 7 edition, makes the following comment on Cherniak:

On April 3, Liberal blogger Jason Cherniak, an official with Dion’s leadership campaign, produced an Internet TV ad taking a quote from Stephen Harper out of context in an attempt to portray the prime minister as if he enjoyed the deaths of soldiers in Afghanistan. (It was too much even for Liberal supporters and he took it down.)

I pointed this out in a post to his site, and now this, and the Western Standard is quoted in his "Shameless Advertising" section:

"Jason Cherniak...produced an Internet TV ad" - Western Standard

Note that he doesn't take issue or dispute the facts of the Western Standard story. All he can do is poke fun at the "Internet TV ad" bit (a Google search for "liberal internet tv" turns up 3.7 million hits, but whatever).

And despite the fact that the Western Standard piece exposes him as a ridiculous hack, he can't resist "quoting" them on his site to boost his own ego. Pathetic.

Another Liblogger Goes to Jail

2007-04-23T20:43:00.000-04:00

First Shoshana Berman attacks her own child with scissors, and now Jim Curran (formerly the Liberal candidate for Niagara Falls) is charged with two counts of fraud over $5,000.

How many other criminals are on Jason Cherniak's blogroll?

Garth Turner, Political Whore

2007-03-11T22:03:00.000-04:00

Here's Garth Turner, in his November 3, 2006 webcast:

DECORUM IN THE HOUSE OF COMMONS - Dog. Bitch. Is this the language you'd expect to hear in Parliament, or in a kennel? Sadly, the House of Commons has been a model of disorderly conduct lately - not just for the name-calling, but also for the excessive partisanship, the lack of credible debate and the my-way-or-the-highway approach to politics.

Average Canadians look at this and wonder what must be in the water cooler outside the Commons. Why can't MPs just be serious about why they're there, instead of turning the business of Canada into a team sport with locker-room overtones?

Good questions. Garth might want to ask them to himself after his latest post, from March 10, 2007:

[Stephen] Harper is a political whore.

Of course, we all know who the real political whore is.

The Anti-Semitism of Stephane Dion

2007-03-05T19:32:00.000-05:00

Well, congratulations to Jason Cherniak for (once again) exposing the anti-Semitism of Robert "fuck the Jews" McClelland.

There's no doubt that anti-Semitism is a problem on the Left, from Borys "Israel is a terrorist state" Wrzesnewskyjs, who thinks Hezbollah is not a terrorist organization, to Omar Alghabra, who thinks Hamas is not a terrorist organization. Of course, both groups are dedicated to killing as many Israeli civilians as possible. Both MPs are, you may note, members of the Liberal Party, who supported Kennedy and then Dion, rather than the guy with the pro-Israeli Apartheid Jewish wife, Bob Rae.

But I'd also call attention to this comment from Ed Morgan, back in 2004, about a statement by Stephane Dion:

While Prime Minister Paul Martin and Quebec Premier Jean Charest both hit the mark eloquently in labelling the arson attack in Montreal an un-Canadian and vile act, the statement by Stéphane Dion, MP for the district in which the United Talmud Torah school is located, missed the point by a country mile.

In his comments, Mr. Dion asked the rhetorical question, "Why link all Canadian Jews with the policy of a government?" His point, as reported, is that it is unfair to target Jews in Canada since they are not unanimously in support of the actions of Ariel Sharon's government.

With due respect to the former minister of intergovernmental affairs, those Jews and others who do support the Israeli government also do not deserve to have their books burned and property vandalized. Mr. Dion's comments do not counter the problem; rather, they play into it.

Contemporary anti-Semitism in Europe and now, apparently, in Canada, feeds on the vilification of Israel. For the new breed of anti-Semite, the Shylock of yesterday has become the Sharon of today. Our politicians and public spokespersons must take care not to exhibit the same prejudice.

Here, Dion apparently thought that the only thing wrong with a fire bombing attack against the United Talmud Torah school was that some of its teachers and/or students might not be Sharon supporters.

Honestly, if that's not anti-Semitism, I'm not sure what is.

Dion's Faustian Deals

2007-02-27T20:44:00.000-05:00

Yesterday, everyone's favourite Liberal clown Jason Cherniak opined that Liberals "picked Dion because we believed that he would make the best prime minister of the group." Well, as I pointed out, Liberals picked Dion because 17.8% of them thought he would make the best prime minister of the group, and another 36.9% wanted to stop either Rae or Ignatieff from becoming leader.

But now, the truth comes out. In fact, the Liberal Party picked Dion (by only 9%...) because of a handful of disgraceful, pathetic backroom deals with ethnic Sikh, Tamil, and Muslim voting blocs at the convention to destroy Canada's anti-terror legislation:

Among veteran Liberal insiders, it is believed that the several hundred Sikh convention delegates Bains and his allies led into the Dion camp (via Gerard Kennedy) came with a price: an end to the investigative powers contained in the Anti-Terrorism Act, which was opposed for predictable reasons by various Sikh, Tamil and Muslim organizations.

Indeed, I am informed by a well-informed source that the critical deals were cut months in advance, and were driven by Bains -- and, in the case of Muslim delegates, by Arab-Canadian MP Omar Alghabra -- through Kennedy, who'd been staked out early by ethno-politicians as an empty vessel into which they could pour their parochial agendas.

These machinations should not be confined to history's footnotes: The Montreal Liberal convention was a close-fought thing, and the mass migration of hundreds of well-herded delegates along ethnic lines was likely the deciding factor. If more information comes out about unsavoury deals, Dion's image as a squeaky-clean enviro-wonk will erode, and traditional voter suspicion about sleazy Liberal ethno-politics will bubble to the surface. Given the high stakes -- we are, after all, talking about a law that could help us learn the truth about the greatest terrorist attack in Canadian history, as well as prevent even greater carnage in the future-- the issue could prove explosive.

One of the Ontario Liberal delegates that Omar Alghabra brought to Dion was Mohammed Elmasry, who has openly advocated terrorism and violence against Israelis. Alghabra refuses to condemn suicide bombings, helped incite the Concordia riots against Jews, and belongs to groups that are under investigation for terrorism. Both have campaigned against Canada's anti-terror laws for years.

As we all know now, Navdeep Bains has a personal motive to gut our anti-terror laws: his father in law, Darshan Singh Saini, a spokesman and supporter of the terrorist Babbar Khalsa Panthak, is on the RCMP's list of witnesses at investigative hearings for the criminal probe into the Air India terrorist case -- the largest terrorist act in Canada's history.

Meanwhile, the Tamils opted for Dion over Rae and Ignatieff because the latter openly refused to reverse Stephen Harper's principled decision to put the Tamil Tigers on Canada's list of officially banned terrorist groups. And apparently, Dion made no such commitment. Or perhaps, he made a different one: Vote for Citoyen Dion, and Voila! The Liberation Tigers of Tamil Eelam (LTTE) is a terrorist group no more!

Cherniak has a new question today:

I have a question for all those people, like Robin Sears, who believe that the Liberals are falling into a "trap" by endorsing the Liberal sunset clause. What is the trap? The trap of Harper isolating himself and accusing the Liberals of being "soft on terrorism"? I'm sorry, but I doubt that Canadians would fall for such a Bushism.

Mr. Cherniak, Dion is the leader of the Liberal Party because he caved into the demands of groups sympathetic to terrorists, to gut our anti-terrorism laws.

"Soft on terror"? Be happy that's all Dion is being accused of... so far.

CanaDions in CanaDenial

2007-02-19T13:01:00.000-05:00

Some green scarves here, a dog named Kyoto there -- Stephane Dion became the leader of the Liberal party based on cheap gimmicks like this. But what's the substance behind all this? Dion's first two months have been a complete disaster, from Holland's "there will be consequences" threat, to Dion's latest policy reversals.

Jason Cherniak says, don't worry, Dion just got a S.O. from a Liberal party crowd! Imagine! No problems here. Just wait till our platform!

The problem is that everyone already knows the new Liberal platform -- or at least, some major parts of it -- and, frankly, it's a disaster. I tried to post this on Jason's site, but apparently posting by non-CanaDions is not allowed today. Poor Jason.

Jason,

The fact that you think it's a great sign Dion can still get a standing ovation from a group of Liberal partisans (even without your media cheerleaders in attendance!) is proof, frankly, of just how far the Liberal Party has fallen in the last two months.

Keep your powder dry? Everyone knows your platform:

(1) Kyoto at any cost, even though Dion himself admitted during the leadership campaign that it's not possible to meet its targets after 10 years of Liberal failure on the issue.

(2) Withdrawal from Afghanistan -- from a mission that the Liberal Party committed us to.

(3) Repeal of key provisions in the Anti-Terrorism Act -- again, that the Liberal Party passed after 9/11 -- over the objections of Bob Rae, Irwin Cotler, Anne McLellan, John Manley, and many other Liberals.

The more I watch Dion, the more it becomes obvious that the "not a leader" ads were entirely correct.

Don't worry though, Young Liberals are uniting behind Dion. It's just the old ones who are upset. Rae, Cotler (and his wife), McLellan, Manley... You know, the sane ones, who aren't happy with Dion's decision to let Omar Alghabra write party policy on Canada's anti-terrorism laws (i.e., we need to get rid of them!).

Update: A blogger named Sarah responds on Jason's site with this:

Chris Vanoosten [sic],

Currently there are very few Liberal MPs that do not want the anti-terrorism measures to expire. John Manley and about 3 others I believe are working to get *twenty* Liberals on their side. That's a small minority right there.

Furthermore, constructive dialog and different opinions are to be expected within a party. It doesn't mean that the party is divided. There are no camps this time around. People who supported Ignatief or Rae last time are still for the vast majority willing to support Dion. The fact that a few MPs (four on the last count) don't want an act to expire doesn't signal that the party is divided. That's just ridiculous to think.

Well, here's my response, which Jason refuses to post (again, I'm not a CanaDion):

Sarah, it's not just 4 MPs. According to this, the mutiny's bigger than you think:

- Irwin Cotler (former Justice Minister)
- Marlene Jennings (Justice Critic)
- Stephen Owen
- Keith Martin
- Don Bell
- Roy Cullen
- John Manley
- Bob Rae
- Anne McLellan

Not to mention provincial Liberals like B.C. Solicitor-General John Les. They all think the provisions are vital, and their removal might compromise the work of the Air India inquiry.

The problem is that there has been no constructive dialog, as far as I can tell. Dion simply announced that the party's against renewing the measures.

We'll see how united the party is when the vote is taken.

Reutersville Math

2007-02-09T20:38:00.000-05:00

Stephen Harper has, the Toronto Star helpfully explains, taken a "slight lead" over the Liberals in the latest poll, 38-31. Not to worry though, it's only seven points.

This from a paper that, just three short weeks ago, cut the province of Alberta out of their poll to give the Liberals a seven point lead (35-28). But this was no mere "slight lead." This poll was "not good news for Tories."

OK. More hilarity from Reutersville, again about the "slight" 38-31 lead:

So, according to Reuters:

Conservative lead of seven points = no party a clear leader

Liberal lead of seven points = Liberals have comfortable lead.

Shoshana Berman Violates Own Publication Ban

2006-11-23T22:13:00.000-05:00

So, it appears that Shoshana Berman (aka the Scissors Lady, pictured below) is now threatening to sue Jason Cherniak & Co. for violating "a publication ban on a personal matter regarding [her] son." This personal matter, of course, involves Shoshana assaulting him with scissors and telling him she wishes she'd had him aborted, according to the Guelph Mercury.

Altavistagoogle has posted Jason's e-mail on his site:

From: "Jason Cherniak"
To: "liblogs"
Subject: Notice re: Complaint by Shoshana Berman
Date: Thu, 23 Nov 2006 18:03:57 -0500

Dear Libloggers,

A former member of Liblogs, Shoshana Berman, recently told me that there is "a publication ban on a personal matter regarding [her] son". I have not yet been provided with a copy of this order. Although I do not know whetherher claim is legitimate, I feel that it is only fair for me to warn of you this claim.

Ms. Berman has threatened to take legal action against Liblogs, me personally and any blogger who contravenes the court order by publishing information relating to her assault trial. I reject any suggestion that Liblogs has any legal liability in this matter at all, but I will protectthe good name of the corporation if necessary.

Ms. Berman has also contacted individual members with complaints. I do not know at this time whether her complaints have any legal legitimacy. You will have to use your own judgement - and hire a lawyer if you feel it necessary - if you receive such a notice. I do not believe that Liblogs hasany legal responsibilities in this regard. To be safe, though, I ask each member not to search for and post copies of any articles that are out there, including any articles already printed by the Guelph Examiner, since the Liblogs aggregator would automatically link to the post on Liblogs. I am really sorry to bother you with this, but I don't think it would beright for me to not inform the membership of this situation.

Jason R. Cherniak
President

Now, as someone who knows a thing or two about publication bans, I'll just say this. They're meant to protect victims, who are often children. They're meant to protect witnesses. They're not meant to protect insane bloggers who assault their children with scissors.

I'll also say this. This publication ban (assuming it exists and is not just a product of Ms. Scissorhands' imaginations) applies to her as well. In other words, if Jason Cherniak & Co. aren't allowed to blog about the trial, neither is Shoshana. Which makes the following post pretty interesting. In it, she identifies her son in a picture, and says he's lying so he can live in his dad's "big rich house." She also implies his dad made up the story to get a child tax credit.

Now, PNorth, as an adult why don't you read that article you are referencing again. Now I haven't really made comments on this article; but I'm feeling generous and relaxed today and i've had such a nice conversation with ONtory why not.

I have been contacted by several thoughtful, intelligent adults who read it and found the contradictions laid out in it quite startling. Also, the fact that it was even published, given that matters concerning minors are not allowed to be used for profit or gain by newspapers in Canada caused these thoughtful adults quite a bit of concern.

So a) the crown and the judge made a big mistake. b) the newpaper is an illegitmate tabloid piece of crap that exploits children for money. c) there are many contradictions in the testimony, even laid out in the tabloid piece of crap.

Read it again. Read it carefully. Think about how many other factors could be involved with a 14 year old, who wants to live with his dad in the big rich house, whose dad wants to stop paying child support and wants a child tax credit.

After you have been thoughtful about this, for even a few moments, get back to me.

Shoshana even posted a picture of her with her son -- identifying the victim in her assault trial. Here it is below (with his face cut out to protect his identity).

Obviously, Jason Cherniak isn't the one who should be worried about violating the publication ban.

The Scissors Lady

2006-10-13T23:49:00.000-04:00

Shoshana Berman, a top Liberal Party blogger (according to the Globe and Mail) and Ken Dryden supporter, is apparently starring in a new horror flick:

Here's the story, written by Scott Tracey in the Guelph Mercury, and published on April 21, 2006, on page A04:

Son feared mom, court hears
Fourteen-year-old boy was scared his mother 'might hurt me . . . if I stayed'

A Guelph mother held her teenage son in a headlock while cutting off a chunk of his hair, then grabbed the boy by the jaw before saying she wished she'd had an abortion, a court heard yesterday at the start of the woman's trial.

Sacha Fabry, 14, testified he was at his mother Shoshana Berman's home last Sept. 5. The boy said his mother asked him to come into the front room of her home so she could cut his hair, and that he refused and said he did not want his hair cut.

The diminutive boy told the court Berman reacted to this by repeatedly swearing and calling him names, including "jerk" and "bastard."

Fabry said his mother grabbed him by the arm and dragged him into the front room, where she pushed him into a chair.

The boy said his mother pulled a towel tightly around his neck, and when he complained it hurt, the woman instead grabbed him in a headlock.

Fabry said he continued to struggle and put his hands on his head in an attempt to prevent the haircutting. He said Berman pulled his hands away and quickly snipped off a large chunk of hair from the back of his head.

The soft-spoken boy said he went into his bedroom and his mother followed him, still carrying the scissors.

Fabry said his mom pushed him against the wall and then grabbed him by the jaw, lifting him onto the tips of his toes. He testified his mother said if he did not co-operate and let her continue cutting his hair she would kill him.

Fabry said Berman was "extremely angry" during the exchange, noting her face was red and he could see the veins popping out on her neck.

The boy said his mom finally went downstairs, calling out behind her, "I wish I had an abortion."

None of the allegations has been proven in court.

Berman, who has pleaded not guilty to assault with a weapon and has not yet presented her defence evidence, shook her head during much of her son's testimony.

Fabry said he packed a few things and left the house, walking to a nearby pay phone where he called his father, Peter.

Berman and Peter Fabry are divorced and until these allegations had joint custody of their son.

Sacha Fabry said his dad told him to go to the police station, where he met his son a short time later.

The boy said his stepfather was outside the home cutting wood at the time of the alleged assault.

He said he did not tell the man what happened inside because in the past he would get blamed when his mother was angry at him.

Berman is representing herself, but Douglas appointed local defence lawyer Joe Fera to cross-examine Sacha Fabry to prevent the woman from questioning her own son.

Under cross-examination, Fabry conceded there were differences between his statement to police and his evidence in court, including the nature of the profanity his mother is alleged to have used.

Fabry explained he was not comfortable telling police the precise words Berman used, so withheld some of them when giving his statement.

While at one point on the videotaped statement Fabry said he was not concerned his mother would hurt him, he insisted yesterday he was "scared that she might hurt me . . . if I stayed," which is why he left the house.

The trial will continue Oct. 30.

Berman objected to the lengthy adjournment "for the sake of my son," but Douglas explained this is the first available court date when there is sufficient time to hear the rest of the evidence.

Assistant Crown attorney Judith MacDonald said she has two more Crown witnesses, while Berman said she will be calling four or five defence witnesses including herself.

stracey@guelphmercury.com

But you know what's really scary? Thanks to this blogger, we now know that Shoshana Berman is in Good Standing with the Ontario College of Teachers. (Her registration number, fyi, is 283690.)

Update: Chris B. notes that she has finally admitted that she's the Shoshana Berman from Guelph with the criminal record (the events described above, plus an earlier incident in 1997 involving disturbing the peace, assault, and trespassing).

Anyway, she plans to attend the Liberal Convention in Montreal. So, as a public service, I feel obliged to warn Liberals planning to attend to watch out for this woman:

The Secret of Liblogs

2006-09-21T17:32:00.000-04:00

Cherniak once again refused to post some very sensible comments, in response to his gloating over the fact that there are now more Libloggers than Blogging Tories.

Here is Chris Bryden's response:

Congratulations Jason, but did you ever consider that maybe the Blogging Tories have fewer members because they would never accept a blogger who (a) assaulted her own 14-year-old son with scissors and told him she wishes she'd had an abortion, (b) assaulted other people at a Holiday Inn in 1998, then lied about being a teacher, and lied about the police threatening her, (c) kissed Scott Brison and then called herself a fag hag, and later called Mackenzie King's girlfriend a fag hag, (d) said Mao didn't kill anyone and people liked being sent to his "farms," (e) says Mozart liked to eat feces.... and, so on.

You get the idea, it's the quality, not the quantity, of your members that counts Jason. And, with respect, some of your Libloggers are totally insane.

Cherniak Hypocrisy Example #8,549

2006-07-19T19:52:00.000-04:00

On July 14, "Lebanon is the aggressor" and "Israel is justified in what it is doing."

And then, Harper sides firmly with Israel.

And now, on July 19 -- five days later -- this:

"I certainly have a personal opinion about who is responsible, but I do not see how that matters to anybody ... the most important thing that Canada can do is take actions to help end this conflict ... I propose that we offer ourselves up as honest brokers ... By taking one side for no obvious reason beyond domestic politics, Stephen Harper has guaranteed that he can do nothing to help end the current war. Instead, he can only snipe from the sidelines as Canadians continue to risk their lives after being abandoned in Lebanon for a week. Mr Harper is clearly out of his league in International Affairs. I call on Stephen Harper to get his act together."

Which reminds me of this. Back in February, Cherniak called on Harper to support the mission in Afghanistan, and show leadership by going to visit the troops. Of course, Harper did exactly that. He even held a vote to extend the mission, as Liberal, Bloc, and NDP MPs demanded. How did Cherniak respond? "What arrogance!"

Pathetic.

UPDATE: Kudos to Chris Bryden for destroying Cherniak's latest post, in which he slams Harper for failing to be an "honest broker."

Chris notes this report in the Globe:

Canada's days as simply an honest broker between the world's big powers is over, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Friday.

“The role of traditional mediator that Canada has played consistently between great powers is not the foreign policy that I would envisage,” he told a meeting of B.C. civic leaders.

"The only way that we're going to have a peace economy is if Canada has a very active, very aggressive foreign policy,” Mr. Harper said.

Canada's strong values must be reflected in its foreign policy, he said.

But wait! These are not Harper's words. They were spoken by Jason's hero Paul Martin last September.

Ken Dryden's Blog Buzz

2006-07-16T17:52:00.000-04:00

Amazingly, Liberal Leadership Candidate Ken Dryden has highlighted the support of Shoshana Berman on his "Blog Buzz" website.

Let's quickly review Shoshana's history. In November 1997, she was arrested for disturbing the peace outside a Holiday Inn in Guelph that was hosting a fundraiser for David Johnson. She lied about her identity (falsely claiming to be a teacher) and falsely accused the police of threatening to take away her son (see Mark Bellis, Toronto Star, April 11, 1998, A11).

Earlier this year, she attended a Liberal party in Toronto on March 23, and then wrote:

"...I'm a fag hag. I love gay men. I even kissed Scott Brison last night, twice. He was the only man I kissed all night. He said I looked great. O.K. there's a bit of a difference between a fag hag and a fruit fly, but that's a little above your head. I'm just a fruit fly. Fag Hags want to convert gay men. I don't. Shitting on people and pissing on people is ok, as long as it's done in private. It's no one's god damn business. Get over it. It happens all the time. Your conservative and intolerant view of it isn't going to stop it or make it go away. I'm sure you're o.k. with all kinds of things being done to women that I might personally find offensive, but it's their choice, not mine. Ask a dominatrix how many staight business men like to be dressed up as babies shit their pants and be changed. You can look that up in google under shit fetish as well, or a university level text book on human sexuality."

Here are some of her other comments...

About Mozart:

"Mozart was a coprophilliac. That means he got off on his lovers shit. He liked to play in it and even eat it. BUT HE WAS MOZART!!"

About Mackenzie King:

"Oh yeah, William Lyon MacKenzie King ... I'd place bets on him being gay, as he never married. THough some say he had a girlfriend, she was probably just a fag hag and a smokescreen. He was also completely nuts."

About Mao:

"AS far as I'm aware the cultural revolutuon resulted in almost no deaths. Being sent to a farm was also much prefered to beinmg sent to a gulag in Siberia ... 70 million deaths, no. Humiliation was the order of the day in the cultural revolution, especially for artists or oficials in the party."

Ken Dryden, do you really welcome the support of people like this?

Omar Alghabra: Pro-Hamas, Pro-Terror

2006-07-11T22:09:00.000-04:00

While he was President of the Canadian Arab Federation in 2004, Liberal Public Safety Critic Omar Alghabra asked the Ontario Press Council to "investigate" CanWest media, including the National Post, for calling Hamas a "terrorist" group:

"CanWest, one of the largest media conglomerates in Canada, is failing its responsibility towards all Canadians, not just Arabs and Muslims," [Alghabra] said. "The media has moral and ethical obligations to report the facts when it comes to news reporting, not the opinions of their editors."

CanWest, for its part, wrote that using words like "militant" and "insurgent" are "euphemisms ... that betray a bias, insofar as they obfuscate and sanitize what Hamas, al-Qaeda and other groups are all about."

Here's what they're all about. On August 31, 2004, less than a month before Alghabra made his complaint, two Hamas suicide bombers blew themselves up on Israeli buses, killing 16 civilians (including a 3-year-old child) and injuring over 100 others. Here is one of the victims, hanging from one of the destroyed buses:

In response, Hamas supporters celebrated in the streets:

Here's another picture of Hamas terrorists from earlier in 2004, standing in front of a table with the body parts of some of their victims:

They refused to return the body parts unless Israel released Hamas "fighters" from prison.

This, according to Omar Alghabra, is not a terrorist group. But don't worry, he actually does oppose real terrorist groups, like, I guess, Israel. And the OPP, RCMP, and CSIS.

Amazingly, during the 2006 election campaign, Alghabra refused to condemn suicide bombings. He also stated that "I don’t believe Hamas wants elimination of Israel" even though their Charter states they want ... the elimination of Israel.

The Liberal Party, and the people of Mississauga, have really picked a winner here.

Shoshana Berman in the Globe

2006-07-11T00:22:00.001-04:00

The Globe has published an article on bloggers in the Liberal leadership campaign. What caught my eye was this:

Shoshana Berman's site (here), posted a picture of Mr. Brison, with cartoon mustache added, next to a picture of annoying cartoon character Ned Flanders of The Simpsons, and asked: "Separated at birth?"

For those who don't know who Shoshana Berman is, here's a brief history.

In 1997, she assaulted people at a Guelph hotel that was hosting a fundraiser for David Johnson. She also lied about her identity (claiming that she was a teacher), and falsely accused the police of threatening to take away her son. Here's how Mark Bellis reported it, in the Toronto Star, on April 11, 1998, on page A11:

... The women were arrested for disturbing the peace outside a Tory fundraiser, which was being picketed by teachers' unions protesting Education Minister Dave Johnson's visit. ...

Shoshana Berman, who was arrested but not strip-searched, said she was intimidated by police, saying they told her they would call the local Children's Aid Society to take away her 6-year-old son, who was with her.

Guelph Police Services Board chair Jane Armstrong said she was completely satisfied with Bradburn's report and that police acted appropriately throughout the operation.

CTT, who was there, recalls the event:

... Shoshana Berman,

What a coincidence! I think I recognize you from when you were arrested at a violent protest at a Ontario PC fundraiser with former Education Minister Dave Johnson in Guelph in Nov. 1997, and charged with trespassing under the OTPA.

I remember you made all kinds of bogus claims that were easily refuted. You claimed to be a teacher, for example, but this was false. You claimed police tried to intimidate you by calling Children's Aid to take away your son, who was with you at the time. This was, obviously, a malicious lie.

If you want my advice, everyone, ignore Shoshana. She's a constant liar, and very sad, angry person. ...

The complaints were investigated and police were completely exonerated by the Guelph Police Services Board.

We were actually hoping for criminal charges (obstruction of justice for resisting arrest), but in the end, the protesters were so pathetic, I think it would have just been a waste of time.

Having said that, we had around 150 police there. I feel sorry for the poor travellers who had to endure the chaos at the hotel.

They arrested 15 or so people, but as I recall, Shoshana was the only one they actually charged out of the hundreds of people there. They released everyone else after Minister Johnson left.

Shoshana then protested that "Maybe Shoshana Berman isn't my real name." To which CTT replied:

Yeah, it is. Sorry, but I recognize you.

This protest, you might recall, was just following the teacher's strike. The police acted on their own, based on reports there would be thousands of protesters, some violent. I should note they were there not just to protect Minister Johnson and some PC supporters, but ordinary people at the Holiday Inn who didn't appreciate being attacked and spat on by some wacko who assumed they were there for the event.

Now, with such a strong background, it's no wonder the Liberal Party has been offering her "press credentials" for their recent events. Here's what Shoshana had to say after the King Edward Accord party on March 23:

"...I'm a fag hag. I love gay men. I even kissed Scott Brison last night, twice. He was the only man I kissed all night. He said I looked great. O.K. there's a bit of a difference between a fag hag and a fruit fly, but that's a little above your head. I'm just a fruit fly. Fag Hags want to convert gay men. I don't. Shitting on people and pissing on people is ok, as long as it's done in private. It's no one's god damn business. Get over it. It happens all the time. Your conservative and intolerant view of it isn't going to stop it or make it go away. I'm sure you're o.k. with all kinds of things being done to women that I might personally find offensive, but it's their choice, not mine. Ask a dominatrix how many staight business men like to be dressed up as babies shit their pants and be changed. You can look that up in google under shit fetish as well, or a university level text book on human sexuality."

This is now a top Liberal blogger, according to the Globe.

Of course, don't try to quote her, because if you do she'll attack you for "bashing" her.

Anyway, here are some of her other opinions:

"Mozart was a coprophilliac. That means he got off on his lovers shit. He liked to play in it and even eat it. BUT HE WAS MOZART!!"

"Oh yeah, William Lyon MacKenzie King ... I'd place bets on him being gay, as he never married. THough some say he had a girlfriend, she was probably just a fag hag and a smokescreen. He was also completely nuts."

"e-mail me. I'll give you my teacher's college registration number. You can file a complaint see how far you get. Try looking up shit eating fetish instead. It comes up on google, under that you will find the technical term."

"I'm a professional in the life sciences. I've taken courses in human biology, sexuality and psychology. If biology teachers shouldn't discuss these things chris then who should, with out having their professional status threatened or questioned. Should doctors be able to talk about this? Should Phychologists and Psychiatrists be able to talk about this? Should relationship councilors be able to talk about this? Should this be discussed in University in human sexuality courses, or should we just discuss the missionary position and call it a day."

"I will not be demeaned or threatened by you into being quiet. You are intolerant Chris [Bryden] even of clinical terminology and a biologically relevent explaination for your concerns. You can think whatever you like, but you can't impose it on anyone else. Do what you like with your body. Leave mine alone."

With those ideas, and with that criminal record, it's no wonder Shoshana Berman is now a top Liberal blogger.

UPDATE: To his credit, at least one Liberal blogger has taken issue with Shoshana. He points out a few more enlightened comments from S.B. on Mao's Cultural Revolution:

"AS far as I'm aware the cultural revolutuon resulted in almost no deaths. Being sent to a farm was also much prefered to beinmg sent to a gulag in Siberia ... 70 million deaths, no. Humiliation was the order of the day in the cultural revolution, especially for artists or oficials in the party."

Is this what she means by humiliation?

Back in the real world, of course, 70 million is a fairly good estimate of the number of people killed under Mao through torture, famine, forced labor, purges, assassinations, ethnic massacres and class genocide. Except if you're in China, of course, where the government punishes those who dare to speak the truth about Mao.

UPDATE 2: For another horrifying story about Shoshana, you might want to read this.

Islamist MP calls Jason Cherniak

2006-07-05T18:58:00.000-04:00

So, it looks like Jason Cherniak has just gotten off the phone with Islamist MP Omar Alghabra. It sounds like Alghabra was upset Cherniak was talking about him on Michael Coren's show:

"I just got off the phone with Omar Alghabra. He had heard that I was saying things about him on the Michael Coren show. Apparently he had not seen it, so it bothers me that people have been spreading rumours about me."

Or, maybe he found this.

Anyway, Cherniak's argument on Michael Coren was that Muslims won't vote for Conservatives because some conservative bloggers wrote "vitriolic" comments about Alghabra on Jason's blog (I assume that includes me).

As Chris Bryden points out, what we're concerned about is this:

"Alghabra, former head of the Canadian Arab Federation, told the Jewish Tribune that he has 'always spoken out against extremism and violence against civilians.' But when asked whether he would specifically denounce suicide bombers, he would not comment, claiming that he was being 'trapped.'"

It would be nice if our MPs could denounce suicide bombers. After all, Alghabra had no trouble at all denouncing the RCMP, CSIS, OPP, and Bill C-7, the Public Safety Act to impede terrorist activities. Perhaps that's because he's a member of the the Islamic Society of North America, which is being investigated itself for ties to terrorism.

"...what about Hamas, who, according to an Agence-France dispatch, with files from Reuters, in the Dec. 29 National Post, 'is committed to Israel’s destruction?' Alghabra replied: 'I don’t believe that Hamas wants the elimination of Israel.'"

According to the New York Times, that's exactly what they want. They even say so in their Charter: "In [its] charter, Hamas ... calls for the elimination of Israel and Jews from Islamic holy land and portrays the Jews as evil..."

Mr. Cherniak, of course, doesn't care about this. For him, these concerns just prove that Conservatives are racist, and "not exactly open to the Muslim community." For the record, I'm not open to anyone who defends terrorists, whether they're Muslim or not.

UPDATE: The Arabian Knight has just responded to Cherniak better than I ever could.

Liberal Leadership Candidates

2006-06-17T16:19:00.000-04:00

As a public service for all the Liberals out there who are deciding who to pick to lead their party, I've put together a list of all 12 candidates and their main qualifications for leader:

Michael Ignatieff

Trained in the use of the AK-47
Has lived abroad for last 20 years
Does not take Ukraine seriously
Was for war in Iraq before he was against it
Expert on ethics of torture

Bob Rae

Nearly bankrupted Ontario as NDP premier
Sold GO Transit to company in Caribbean to avoid paying Canadian taxes
Liberal member since early 2006

Ken Dryden

Thinks he and other "experts" should be responsible for children, not parents
Thinks parents would rather spend money on beer and popcorn (or ice cream and chocolate) than on their children

Scott Brison

Leaked confidential IT info to his buddy at CIBC
Told constituents to "kiss my ass"
Taking French lessons

Stephane Dion

Missed Kyoto targets by over 30% while Liberal Environment Minister
Denies there is a fiscal imbalance

Gerard Kennedy

Failed candidate for Ontario Liberal Leadership in 1996
Member of McGuinty "Fiberal" Government in Ontario
Collected provincial salary while campaigning for federal Liberal leadership

Joe Volpe

Skilled at fundraising from children, including $27,000 from children as young as 11
Compared Conservative Party to Ku Klux Klan

Carolyn Bennett

Says children will grow up to be criminals unless they're sent to nationalized Liberal day care centres. "It's a good job they're putting more money for prisons because we're going to need them..."

Hedy Fry

Has a sixth sense: she sees burning crosses where no one else does

Maurizio Bevilacqua

Who?

Martha Hall Findlay

Pushed aside in Newmarket to make room for Belinda Stronach

Ashley MacIsaac

Fiddler
Thinks SARS was pretty funny
Likes to urinate on his 16-year-old boyfriend

A question for Alghabra

2006-06-06T22:41:00.000-04:00

Yesterday, Liberal Public Safety Critic Omar Alghabra asked Prime Minister Harper to "work with" the Canadian Arab Federation and CAIR Canada and to "have a serious discussion with them to identify the causes and minimize the effects of radicalization."

Perhaps when he's back in his riding, he might consider stopping by the Al-Rahman Islamic Centre for Islamic Education, where several of the terrorists apparently got together to plan their attacks on the Parliament Buildings, Peace Tower, CN Tower, CSIS building, and random civilians in the streets. Maybe he could ask them himself.

Apparently they planned to take MPs hostage and behead them, including Prime Minister Harper (who by the way dealt with the situation as well as anyone could today). Anyone who is clueless about the causes of such extremism and the way to deal with it doesn't belong in our government.

UPDATE: And by the way, does Alghabra still oppose the Public Safety Act?

UPDATE II: And another thing, does Jack Layton still oppose it? Will he finally stop bitching about Prime Minister Harper's new (more secure) SUVs?

Cherniak on Arrogance

2006-05-18T19:54:00.001-04:00

I don't really have time for this, but I can't resist noting a great example of the usual two-faced buffoonery at Jason Cherniak's site. Compare his two posts below:

HARPER MUST SUPPORT AFGHANISTAN [February 24, 2006]

"From the very beginning, I have supported the attack on Afghanistan ... we hear that Harper's cabinet is torn over whether the Prime Minister should visit our troops in Afghanistan. That is disgraceful. There are many complaints that one can make about 12 years of Liberal government. However, since 2001 there is one foreign policy that the Liberals pushed forward 100%. It was a policy of strong support and military leadership in Afghanistan. It was a policy that gave us an important job on the world stage that proved our military abilities. There can be no suggestion that the Liberals ever shirked their responsibilities in this regard. If Harper reverses the trend, it will be a sign of a serious problem that goes beyond partisan politics."

Of course, Harper did go to Afghanistan. No one can deny he has shown strong leadership on Afghanistan. Yet when the opposition parties demanded a debate on the mission, he agreed to a debate. When they all demanded a vote, he gave them a vote. And what does Cherniak have to say?

CHERNIAK: WHAT ARROGANCE! [May 18, 2006]

"Out of nowhere, he asked Parliament for its approval to extend a military mission for 2 years. What will the mission be for those two years? How much will it cost? How many troops will we need to send? How will this affect our other commitments?"

In less than three months...

Cherniak-Propaganda.ca

2006-04-26T11:35:00.000-04:00

Cherniak on Politics: propaganda.gov.ca

Now that Jason has decided to delete comments that he cannot respond to, I will simply post them here. In response to his post above, here's what I wrote, for those who missed it:

Jason, I'm disgusted. But not by Harper's web site. I'm disgusted by this:

Gov Gen's husbands embarrassing film is a parting Liberal gift to Canadians
It was filmed only last year. It provides a podium to a confessed assassin and Islamist thug living in Iran to rant about "American state terrorism" and to claim "George Bush is killing people every day" -- and it is premiering at a time when Canadian soldiers are fighting Islamist militants in Afghanistan.

... and by this:

Liberals cut cheque for Chretien pal's legal fees hours before election defeat
In their final hours, Paul Martin's Liberals secretly cut a $40,000 cheque to cover the costs of a longtime Liberal's challenge of the AdScam report.

Maybe Jason will comment on an actual news story one day, rather than calling Harper "inhuman" because of his flag policy, which everyone except Cherniak thinks is a good idea.

The Memory Hole

2006-03-26T17:52:00.000-05:00

As predicted, Jason Cherniak has deleted all of the comments from his page. But no worries.

As I promised to do, I have reposted them below. Sorry, but none of the links work and the formatting is gone.

At 3:12 PM, Lester said...
SHOSHANA NOW HAS A GOOD RECOUNT OF WHAT I WITNESSED: http://shoshanab.blogspot.com/
DON'T LET YOUR CANDIDATES GO OUT IF THEY CAN'T SHUT UP!

At 4:12 PM, Alberta Liberal said...
I think it's hugely symbolic that Cherniak and Kinsella have decided to be friends (of sorts). As the blogging poster boys for the Liberal Civil war thier truce means a lot. Kudos to both of you - you do us Liberals proud.

At 4:22 PM, NBT said...
You mean all this time all you assholes had to do was have dinner together? Wow. Thanks for flushing the party down the drain with a civil war that, in the end, begged only for surf and turf followed by creme brulet.

At 4:30 PM, A BCer in Toronto said...
You mean there was surf and turf? Damm, I knew I should have hit the buffet line!

At 4:59 PM, Cerberus said...
Steak and lobster is expensive. Seems BCer and I were willing to kiss and make-up with just the No-Name product cheese and stale crackers.

Good post, Jason. It really was a good event. Bodes well for the party.

Ted
Cerberus

At 5:21 PM, Ogilvie said...
It's not really Ken Dryden's French that worries me, it's what he says in English. "Moms and dads who don't send their children to institutionalized day care are like parents who treat their children at home rather than send them to the doctor." (I'm paraphrasing) I'd like to hear him explain away that remark.

At 5:49 PM, Chris said...
Jason,

I wonder why you were so happy to meet with a liberal blogger who literally thinks pissing on people and eating shit is A-OK, and has said so on your page.

Those are some nice Liberal values, Jason.

At 5:54 PM, Chris said...
Oh, and that Ashley MacIsaac would be a great leader, because besides, Mackenzie King's wife was just a "fag hag."

What do you think people are supposed to think when you Liberals welcome and accept people like this?

At 6:04 PM, Anonymous said...
The Liberal Party is back .... in opposition. And you're going to be there for a very long time, particularly if you keep talking like b.s. over there.

At 6:58 PM, Anonymous said...
Fag hag?

That's some liberal compassion right there

At 7:25 PM, s.b. said...
Mackenzie King was never married Chris, his close female friend Jean Pattison however, was. Nice fact checking there Chris

Oh anonymous, I'm a fag hag. I love gay men. I even kissed Scott Brison last night, twice. He was the only man I kissed all night. He said I looked great.

O.K. there's a bit of a difference between a fag hag and a fruit fly, but that's a little above your head. I'm just a fruit fly. Fag Hags want to convert gay men. I don't.

Shitting on people and pissing on people is ok, as long as it's done in private. It's no one's god damn business. Get over it. It happens all the time. Your conservative and intolerant view of it isn't going to stop it or make it go away.

I'm sure you're o.k. with all kinds of things being done to women that I might personally find offensive, but it's their choice, not mine.

Ask a dominatrix how many staight business men like to be dressed up as babies shit their pants and be changed. You can look that up in google under shit fetish as well, or a university level text book on human sexuality.

And I didn't say Ashley MacIsaac would be a great Prime Minister. I said we've had crazier Prime Ministers. aka WLMK.

At 7:30 PM, Anonymous said...
Anyone notice how Jason posts an attempt at serious analysis on Canadian federalism, and it immediately turns into a debate on shit fetishes?

The Liberal Party is back indeed!

At 7:35 PM, Chris said...
Quite right, s.b. King wasn't married. Sorry, that was an innocent mistake.

It's also a mistake to go out and say:

- Mozart liked to eat shit
- Mackenzie King was gay

on the basis of no evidence at all.

Post your evidence, if you have any. And by the way, wild rants by wacko bloggers like you don't count.

At 7:38 PM, Chris Vanoostveen said...
Wow.

As I wrote before, I remember when Brison switched parties, he said he'd rather not be in a party where everyone sits around and debates whether to privatize sidewalks.

I wonder how comfortable he is now.

At 8:16 PM, Anonymous said...
Duno whats so controversial

Anyone who reads Cherniaks blog so often obviously has a shit fetish

At 8:25 PM, s.b. said...
Chris read the posts, I said, "may even have liked to eat" for Mozart and "if you ask me" for WLMK. Why don't you get your comments straight.

And it is appropriate to discuss social conservatism on a blog about the leadership race.

People's social interactions in their own homes or at their own doctors offices, or in their chosen professions a.k.a. sex trade work should not be policed. One person's morality should not be impossed on others. Canadians do and should have the right to do what they want with their own bodies.

I'm in favour of legalizing all consentual crime. That includes drugs, sex trade work, fetishes, sex parties (thank you supreme court of canada, bawdy houses, and shopping on Sunday. The police have other things to worry about like domestic assault, child abuse and exploitation and the slave trade in humans.

I want people like you Chris to stay the hell out of my personal life.

It used to be divorce and oral sex were illegal too. How about we go back to that o.k. Chris. Then you can marry a really uptight and judgemental women who doesn't give head and be happy for the rest of your life.

Oral sex still is illegal in some U.S. jurisdictions but it's really only used against gay men. Why don't you go live there. They might also let you teach creationism in Science class instead of evoluton. What the heck you don't even need a science degree to do that, just a little fire and brimstone. That's what children need to be taught in Science class right, intolerance, hatred, misinformation, and religious indocrination.

I will not be demeaned or threatened by you into being quiet. You are intolerant Chris even of clinical terminology and a biologically relevent explaination for your concerns. You can think whatever you like, but you can't impose it on anyone else. Do what you like with your body. Leave mine alone.

I'll be looking for that opinion in a leadership candidate. And the Liberal party does need to distinguish itself from the Conservatives on these issues. I am blunt, to say the least. There are others who are more diplomatic. We need to know what we stand for and stand up for it, even when it makes some people uncomfortable.

At 8:27 PM, Ashleigh said...
JC, I hope your mom doesn't read your blog

At 8:38 PM, Chris said...
"Chris read the posts, I said, "may even have liked to eat" for Mozart and "if you ask me" for WLMK. Why don't you get your comments straight."

s.b.,

I read your posts. Read them yourself. Here's what you said: "Mozart was a coprophilliac. That means he got off on his lovers shit. He liked to play in it and even eat it." That's here. I don't see "may even" or any other qualification there.

Here's what you said on MK: "THough some say he had a girlfriend, she was probably just a fag hag and a smokescreen. He was also completely nuts." Alright, you said "probably." Whatever. I do know what your reaction would be if a Conservative went around calling people "fag hags," probably or not.

"Oral sex still is illegal in some U.S. jurisdictions but it's really only used against gay men. Why don't you go live there."

More Liberal tolerance! "Go live in the US!!"

"I will not be demeaned or threatened by you into being quiet. You are intolerant Chris even of clinical terminology and a biologically relevent explaination for your concerns. You can think whatever you like, but you can't impose it on anyone else. Do what you like with your body. Leave mine alone."

I don't want anything to do with your body. All I said was eating shit and pissing on people IS SICK. If you want to do it, do it. I don't think it should be illegal either, BUT IT's SICK. It's something I don't think the PM should be doing, thank you very much. Sorry I can't express this in the "correct clinical terminology" like such a learned teacher as yourself.

"I'll be looking for that opinion in a leadership candidate. And the Liberal party does need to distinguish itself from the Conservatives on these issues. I am blunt, to say the least. There are others who are more diplomatic. We need to know what we stand for and stand up for it, even when it makes some people uncomfortable."

I hope you go out and tell people exactly what you think. Unfortunately, the Liberal Party (even Cherniak) isn't as totally stupid as you. I guess I can be blunt too.

At 8:44 PM, Chris said...
By the way, please, send me your teacher's college registration no., as you offered to do here.

At 9:04 PM, Denis said...
s.b., as a wise man once said, the worst thing that may happen to a good cause is not to be skilfully attacked, but to be defended ineptly.

Sorry, but with someone like you leading the Liberals, people like Vic Toews would be Attorney General forever. Tolerance is what makes us great, but it has limits (for 99% of the population anyway).

At 9:08 PM, Anonymous said...
If I want to join the Liberal party, do I have to pay any initial fees? Or perhaps any monthly membership fees?

At 9:13 PM, Anonymous said...
$7.99 per minute baby

At 9:22 PM, Anonymous said...
+ 7% GST

At 10:22 PM, Anonymous said...
Jesus Christ, where did the Liberal Party go back to, Marquis de Sade's castle?

At 10:53 PM, Anonymous said...
I would very much enjoy seeing bloggers permitted questions at Liberal leadership functions.

Please take that question to the Leadersihp candidates:

"Canidate X, if you were Prime Minister, would you support the right for people to enjoy shit either sexually or simply for amusement in the privacy of their home?"

At 11:13 PM, Chris said...
s.b., maybe you can ask that the next time you kiss Scott Brison.

I'm still waiting for your teacher registration number. topher_bryden@hotmail.com

At 12:03 AM, Roby said...
Boy I'm glad I've not been eating the last few times I've came here and read this site. What the frig?!?!

The slaggin on here has gotten real hardcore lately. This is how you Libs plan to tke it to the people?

I realize it's just bloggers and political wonks that comment, but cripes... any uninformed reader coming here for the first time reading the Liberals are back would be very suprised.

Jason you need to get a hold of your site's commeters before it's credibility goes down on the backs of this stuff. My 2c..

At 12:10 AM, Anonymous said...
Jason, I know you might not want to answer this, but how did this woman get into the party?

Did your Chris MacLeod give her press credentials too? Because, from what I've read, you should stay far, far away from her.

If I was the Post I'd be writing an article on this: Brison gets kiss at political event from insane supporter, says Mackenzie King's girlfriend was a "fag hag". Honestly.

At 12:14 AM, Dennis said...
Mr. Cherniak, I can just picture you sitting behind your monitor, hands out stretched, jaw moving up and down in impotent silence as you contemplate what this particular topic has degenerated to.

Do you know what is the most amusing thing? That people in your Party, perhaps even very highly placed people, are reading the title of this thread "The Liberal Party Is Back" and when they get to the end, are probably saying "WTF?!"

But go ahead, pat yourself on the back and tell everyone that "the Liberals are back". With this kind of hilarity being indicative, its no wonder so many Conservatives will and are calling the Liberal bluff to try and force another election so soon.

As a matter of fact, we seriously hope you try. But you better get a leader first - that is if you can find anyone of substance that won't mind being led to the altar like a lamb ready for the slaughter.

At 12:15 AM, Anonymous said...
"I also have to brag about the fact that I had my dinner with Campbell Clark, Susan Delacourt and Rick Mercer (among other notables)."

Why do you have to brag about that? (Was it a Mozart meal?)

At 12:21 AM, Anonymous said...
"Why do you have to brag about that? (Was it a Mozart meal?)"

Hmmm, not sure, I guess it depends what drink is included. ;-)

At 12:23 AM, Chris Vanoostveen said...
s.h.'s blog incidentally is pointed out in the first comment on this page. I imagine it won't be so popular after today.

I could comment on Jason's post. But all that I'll say is that I feel sorry for Jason Cherniak. Really, really sorry.

Scott Brison, if you're reading this by some chance, I'd stay away from Shoshana from now on if I were you. If you're still thinking of being PM, that is.

At 12:24 AM, Anonymous said...
Ashley MacIsaac was there too. Did he piss on anyone?

At 12:31 AM, Dennis said...
S.b. said: "You can look that up in google under shit fetish as well, or a university level text book on human sexuality".
-------------
Now why would anyone want to use their computer to search for and read about a sick fetish like that? Who in their right mind?!

Is THAT what is being taught in university text books these days concerning human sexuality; that its somehow merely a sexual preference to sling turds at each other as if we were monkeys!?

Well, I always knew that universities were bations for liberals, but if that is what passes for liberalism these days, I'm proud not to call myself one.

At 12:36 AM, Chris said...
Where are all the liberals? Other than s.b., you've been remarkably silent.

Surely you don't all approve of this talk. I think I know Jason doesn't.

At 12:41 AM, Anonymous said...
"Comments beneath posts are the responsibility of the commenters and do not necessarily reflect the opinions of Jason Cherniak. Jason takes no responsibility for the truth or accuracy of any comments. If you believe that any information is incorrect or defamatory, please notify Jason immediately and he will attempt to rectify any errors".
---------------
Anyone else hearing the crickets chirping and seeing the tumbleweeds rolling by?

At 12:43 AM, Chris said...
By the way s.b., I still don't have your teacher registration number, as you promised. So, in addition to all this mindless moral relativism, I guess you break your promises too. You really are the perfect liberal.

At 12:47 AM, Chris Vanoostveen said...
Sorry anon at 12:41, Jason can't drop this one down the memory hole. We've saved everything.

Why is it so hard for you to just come out and say this stuff is sick? That maybe, big tents are good, but some things are better left outside?

At 1:09 AM, Denis said...
Chris/Chris/Dennis,

This isn't Jason's fault. He's been very clear what he thinks about this from the very beginning, and so have I. I'm sure you'll hear all about it in the morning, after Jason's had a chance to spend time with his mom/friends and gets some sleep. Jesus, it's Friday night!

Obviously, comments like s.b.'s are not the way back to a majority. Aside from maybe s.b., I don't think anyone's ever said that. I don't know what the big deal is, this is one person here.

- Denis with one n

At 1:17 AM, Chris said...
Sorry, it's not just one person.

Brian Dell, David Imrie, NBT, etc. where have you gone?

At 1:26 AM, Denis said...
uh, to sleep?

At 1:39 AM, Anonymous said...
Sorry to change the subject, but:

"As you look at what the Conservative government stands for, it's the engagement of the individual, the empowerment of everyone, and the taking on of personal responsibility, not just waiting for the government to do anything."

Who said that?

Justin Trudeau

That's how "back" the Liberal Party is.

At 2:44 AM, Jason Townsend said...
Fun with context. I don't know much about J. Trudeau, but the context was:

Trudeau, who is not a member of the Liberal party but calls himself both a small- and big-L liberal, emphasizes that Katimavik is a non-partisan organization. "As you look at what the Conservative government stands for, it's the engagement of the individual, the empowerment of everyone, and the taking on of personal responsibility, not just waiting for the government to do anything," he says. "That's what this program's all about: Sending young people out there to take on the world and make a difference.

In other words, his program fits in with the (purported, misguided, contradictionary, etc etc) theoretical ideals of the Conservative government. It was a pretty lousy choice of words, but it looks to me like he painting his organization as non-party. You've kind of left him hanging in the breeze with that context snip.

At 2:56 AM, Anonymous said...
Oh my. I was going to say that this is some f---ed up shit here, but then s.b. might try to eat it.

But I will point one thing out:

s.b.: "Oh anonymous, I'm a fag hag. I love gay men. I even kissed Scott Brison last night, twice. He was the only man I kissed all night. He said I looked great. O.K. there's a bit of a difference between a fag hag and a fruit fly, but that's a little above your head. I'm just a fruit fly. Fag Hags want to convert gay men. I don't."

s.b., if I may say so, it looks like you are rather confused. If there is a fag hag/fruit fly dichotomy in place, how can you be both a fag hag (as you say at the beginning) and a fruit fly (as you say at the end)?

If Mackenzie King's girlfriend was a fag hag, I assume she wasn't trying to convert him from gayness. So that would mean fag hags are of the passive variety, and fruit flies are the active ones. So if you're a fruit fly, you must actually be trying to convert Scott Brison.

And you know, I wonder why you would try to do that. He is engaged, you know, so that really shows a lack of respect I think for his personal lifestyle. You should stick to piss and shit and S&M or whatever you're into and leave Scott Brison alone.

At 3:00 AM, Anonymous said...
"In other words, his program fits in with the (purported, misguided, contradictionary, etc etc) theoretical ideals of the Conservative government."

hahaa

That's not what he said. He praised conservative ideals. "Sending young people out there to take on the world and make a difference."

At 6:32 AM, Sean L said...
You know, if you look at the times of these posts, you will see that as the night wore on, the vast majority people who actually have a life and give a flying F about this country (rather than turning it into some sort of right wing paradise) were off doing normal human things like sleeping and socilizing with friends and family. It was friday night for Christ sake, what are you doing up at 3:00 am slagging people that cannot defend themselves to make you feel better about your lot in life?

Anonymous et right wing dolt al, STFU. You are being asses. This is Jason's blog, not your personal latrine. This is the kind of crap that made Comments Please shut down.

Thats it, I'm turning on comments at my blog. Feel free to come on over and I'll feel free to retort to your childish opinions till the cows come home. Oh, looky out my window at 6:30 am, I see cattle.

At 9:31 AM, s.b. said...
Chris, anonymous et.al. too many to keep track of who's who. I go to bed early. I'm old.

There is only one point in all of this. What consenting Canadians do in private is private. It is not the police's business, it is not the government's business. It is not your business. One's private life is not a part of a political campaign. That's one of the ways we are different from the US. You are not judge and jury. You are not the moral authority.

From a twelve year old's perspective all sex and all bodily functions are gross. Once we have hormones and fully developed frontal lobes, we overcome these 12 year old opinions.

I do make statements about the most extreme of these actions to prove a point. It allows more diplomatic people to put forward the ideas and seem moderate. I know exactly what I am doing with my commentary and blog, at all times.

For now though , let me put it another way for you Chris.

I washed my son's cloth diapers by hand for over two years, putting my hand into a toilet full of his faeces about four times a day. Was this gross? I didn't notice. I love him. Mothers clean their children's shit and vomit up all the time. It's called love.

People who care for the elderly do the same. I have seen an elderly man clean up his wife's shit and bathe her every day because he loves her.

Get it! We're not twelve year olds. Biologically, hormones that determine love are not that far away from those that determine sexual desire. Each of us desires and obtains pleasure in different ways. Some more normal, some more extreme or unusual.

The only ones that should be policed or moralized or have any government or social involvement or commentary whatsoever, are those that do not involve consent. Children cannot consent, animals cannot consent, passed out drunk women cannot consent, women who have not said 'yes' have not consented. Women who are forced or sold into marriage cannot consent. Women who live in fear of their partners cannot consent.

You miss the point entirely when you attack me. Although it is obviously a product of your discomfort with the idea that someone else's sexual response may be different than your own.

It may also come from repression of your own sexual desire for whatever, and your need to prove that all sexual "deviance" is sick. Thereby, reinforcing your own 'normal' sexual behaviour.

Chris et. al., there is no 'normal' sexual behaviour except consent. There is no standard way to love someone. Each individual is unique. That's just the way it is. You can't stop it or change it. You can think someone else's sexual response is gross, but this is a juvenile opinion. The same one a twelve year old has.

Conservatives do wish to impose controls on women's bodies and our reproductive functions. They also wish to impose controls on who someone can love and share their life with aka equal marriage. In the US. they still ban certain sexual acts, they can and do turn homosexuals away at the border. In other more extremely conservative countries, women have to be covered because men are so threatened by their bodies or their sexuality.

It is all the same issue. Repression of sexuality ALWAYS coincides politically and socially with the repressionn of women. ALWAYS!!

It is a leadership issue because there are women from Pakistan seeking political assylum in Canada for being victims of rape. There are men form the middle east seeking political assylum for being gay.

It is a leadership issue because there are forces in the US influencing Canada who are actively trying to turn back the clock on hard won social and biological freedoms for women and gays.

Read my blog "What are you afraid of" I know who I am. I know what I do. I agitate to create dissonance and reset the equilibrium in the direction I choose. Consenance is a difficult thing to shake. I believe I have shaken you and the entire concept being discussed. I believe I have done what I set out to accomplish.

Cherniak invited these comments on to his blog by bringing it up. Maybe he knows what he's doing too.

FYI Chris, I told you to e-mail me. I'm still waiting.

At 10:01 AM, eastern capitalist said...
Sorry for the language, but fuck off about Ashley MacIsaac. Who gives a damn about his sexual lifestyle.

If people want to know what is sick, ifs fucking idoits hammering on about Ashley MacIsaac. Get a life. Take about the post Jason made.

At 10:15 AM, The Cyber Menace said...
"The Liberal party is back." What a laughable title.

I'll chalk it up to after-event exuberance and glee, let's hope.

Just as an afterthought, Cherniak was complaining about the media the other day. If they had written such a silly headline after such a a mildly significant event, somebody would have lost a job over it. Amateur hour, to be sure.

At 10:31 AM, s.b. said...
Jason's post is about the Liberal Party being back.

Some of the bodies are back. But what is the Liberal party about?

Reactionary, extremist religious ideology is the most politically mobilized force on the planet today. It is being used and manipulated to gain power by those who are 'conservative'. This political force crosses all religious and regional boundaries.

How will the Liberals adress this? How will they re-engage the electorate without the use of religion or morality or regressive thinking? I am commenting on Jason's topic. What anonymous et al. and Chris don't realize is, so are they.

The Liberal Party is back. Back from what, (infighting??? maybe other forces at work here) and for what reason? That's what I want to hear from Leadership candidates.

At 11:02 AM, s.b. said...
Anonymous et al. and Chris

http://cotegauche.blogspot.com/

Read cotegauche's site. He is very eloquent and thoughtful and is a member of the Christian religious left.

I agree with almost everything he has to say. Do you find that interesting?

At 11:24 AM, Adam Daifallah said...
You met Susan Delacourt? That must have been worth the price of admission alone.

At 12:21 PM, Anonymous said...
Just an aside to all you good Liberal boys and girls who go to bed early and socialize nicely with you family at reasonable hours and can't post late like us creepy cons: EASTERN TIME YOU FUCKIN' MORONS! I know all Liberal Party of Toronto people think that the world revolves around TO, but we in the West do exist, simply 2-3 hours behind you. To be plain, when I post at a resonable hour, say midnight, after a quiet evening with my family, just before I go to bed, Mr. Cherniak's blog records it as 3:00am. (not that I posted last night, I have a life . . .)

At 12:55 PM, Anonymous said...
Enough with this empty talk about "modern ideas". First ask yourselves "What is the proper role of the federal government" ? Harper is slowly but surely staking out his territory on this, following what's outlined in Section 91 of the BNA Act. If you disagree with where Harper gets his guidance on how the Feds are supposed to govern, then explain to the voters why Harper is wrong to follow our Constitution, and where the Libs will get their guidance from. Good luck !

At 1:00 PM, Dennis said...
Well SB, its nice to see that you think you can justify that its quite alright to bathe your lover in urine and sling turds at them as if they were monkeys, because ANYTHING goes between consenting adults, right?

However, I think you are discounting the average Joes and Janes of the Canadian electorate. How many people do you really think will be accepting of a potential Prime Minister that is publically known and proud to participate in those kind of....er.....actitivies. Surely they are not all as "enlightened" as you claim to be. Just intolerant bigots right?

At 1:03 PM, Chris said...
s.b.,

I'll keep this short: I never said your sexual activities were the government's business (unless you're having sex with your students, and you haven't seemed to have commented on that). I'm not saying this stuff should be illegal at all. I'm pro-choice even. All I'm saying is that certain things (you know what I mean) are sick.

There's no comparison between changing your baby's diapers and eating feces. Sorry, but no. That's stupid.

Anyway, sorry Jason that your blog now looks like this. But I do want to hear your opinion on s.b. Does the Liberal Party really welcome this sort of thing?

By the way s.b., why should I e-mail you? I just gave you my address, topher_bryden@hotmail.com. I don't see yours. Why not forget about e-mail and post your contact info so that people can maybe let your school know what they think of you.

At 1:15 PM, Anonymous said...
Read my blog "What are you afraid of" I know who I am. I know what I do. I agitate to create dissonance and reset the equilibrium in the direction I choose. Consenance is a difficult thing to shake. I believe I have shaken you and the entire concept being discussed. I believe I have done what I set out to accomplish.

Ha ha! What a bunch of canned, politicized, liberals talking point nonsense. What, did you grab that idiotic line out of a PoliSci 101 text or just from some black-clad loser at the coffee house.

Ha! It's didiotic nonsense like this that makes me wake up in the morning for a good laugh. You know when people start using terms like "agitate to create dissonance and reset the equilibrium in the direction I choose," that they are total idiots and you can safely ignore them from then on.

"Reset the equilibrium in the direction I choose," Ha ha ha!

At 1:20 PM, Anonymous said...
SB you haven't shaken anyone, unless making them throw up counts.

At 1:24 PM, s.b. said...
Now the moment you've all been waiting for:

Proof that Mozart was indeed a coprophiliac and incestuous come from 9 letters to his cousin Maria Anna Thekla also known as 'Basle'. These letters are described as excrement obssessed. George Vissan, Constance Mozart's second husband also wrote about his preoccupation with bodily functions below the waist, much to Constances protests as she wished to protect his image as divinely inspired.

He also wrote a song entitled "Lick out my arsehole"..."lick it till its good and clean." and set it to beautiful music. when he was 26.

An essay by Aaron Retica states "this is the sense in which, I think, the letters' coprophilia must be grounded. Mozart and his family were, by modern standards, undoubtedly tush-obsessed. (It has even been proposed, largely based on these letters and a few contemporary descriptions of his fidgetiness, that Mozart's had Tourette Syndrome.) But what is most intriguing about the Bäsle letters is the accompanying rearrangement of the world that Mozart imagines. ... "Our asses shall signal the tidings of peace." It is in this letter that he celebrates muck and mud in what amounts to a seditious little aria, "Dreck! Dreck! O Dreck!"

Two years later, Mozart even rearranges time, changing 1779 to 1709, so that the rhyme will work when he writes, "Salsbourg, 10th of May 1709er/ blow into my rear/ ——:——/ nothing could be finer/bon appetit."

He was also likened to a street urchin, obsessed with bodily functions and scatology, as even the English translations are not base enough to convey the original German. So any idea that this was just plain normal fun back then, is not true.

He was a coprophiliac. The fact that his wife Contance tried to keep it out of his biographies, speaks to its truth even more.

Blow into my rear, nothing could be finer, Bon Appetite
That's a letter to his young female cousin.

Yup that pretty much says it all.
And my teaching credentials are stil in tact.

At 1:29 PM, Anonymous said...
"You are not judge and jury. You are not the moral authority."
---------------
At least until it comes time to use my democratic right to not vote for those people.

"From a twelve year old's perspective all sex and all bodily functions are gross. Once we have hormones and fully developed
frontal lobes, we overcome these 12 year old opinions."
-------------
Sorry, there is a SLIGHT difference between getting over the sight of feces in a potty and smearing it all over our body or eating it.

"I do make statements about the most extreme of these actions to prove a point. It allows more diplomatic people to put forward the ideas and seem moderate. I know exactly what I am doing with my commentary and blog, at all times".
---------------
In other words, people are too stupid to know the difference between what is moderate and what is extreme. Its the old Liberals standard - "don't think, for we are the Liberals, we'll do you're thinking for you".

"I washed my son's cloth diapers by hand for over two years, putting my hand into a toilet full of his faeces about four times a day. Was this gross? I didn't notice. I love him. Mothers clean their children's shit and vomit up all the time. It's called love. People who care for the elderly do the same. I have seen an elderly man clean up his wife's shit and bathe her every day because he loves her."
-----------------
Again, there is more than a SLIGHT difference between the kind of love involved when wiping up your son's or grandmother's poop and the other where you joyfully smear a lover's poop over your body or eat it.

"You miss the point entirely when you attack me. Although it is obviously a product of your discomfort with the idea that someone else's sexual response may be different than your own. It may also come from repression of your own sexual desire for whatever, and your need to prove that all sexual "deviance" is sick. Thereby, reinforcing your own 'normal' sexual behaviour."
--------------
Quick, break out the psycho-babble dictionary. I need to translate the language of Arrogant Liberal Academia !

"The only ones that should be policed or moralized or have any government or social involvement or commentary whatsoever, are those that do not involve consent."
-----------------
That is just your opinion. The fact is, that people cannot just consent to anything.

"Conservatives do wish to impose controls on women's bodies and our reproductive functions".
-----------
A Liberal lie, based only on YOUR biased opinion. And if we really want to speak of reproductive rights, do men really ever have any?

"It is all the same issue. Repression of sexuality ALWAYS coincides politically and socially with the repressionn of women. ALWAYS!!"
------------
Ok, I get it, heterosexual men can never possibly be repressed sexually, right? Yet more arrogance.

"I agitate to create dissonance and reset the equilibrium in the direction I choose. I believe I have shaken you and the entire concept being discussed. I believe I have done what I set out to accomplish."
------------
YOU choose? Gotta love that Liberal arrogance. If you think you have accomplished anything here, you are sadly deluded.

"Cherniak invited these comments on to his blog by bringing it up. Maybe he knows what he's doing too".
-------------
I'm willing to wager that this kind of discussion in a topic about LPC ressurgence is NOT what he intended.

At 1:40 PM, Dennis said...
"And my teaching credentials are stil in tact."

A peice of paper doesn't prove that one is a good teacher. And even if that is true, what does that prove? That you can teach people about odious topics like this? How proud you must be.

You say that like its a good thing. I'm glad my children will NEVER be taught by you.

At 1:41 PM, Chris said...
s.b.,

You think after this your teaching credentials are intact? Are you kidding?

Mozart was not a coprophiliac. I admitted already, yeah, he wrote letters with foul language to his cousin and he wrote a song called Leck mich am Arsch (lick my ass). Benjamin Simkin wrote a book that he had Tourette Syndrome, but this was refuted by Oliver Sacks and no professional believes it's true.

Just because he told his cousin to blow in his ass it doesn't mean he likes to eat feces. Sorry s.b. There are all kinds of rumours about Mozart, obviously, and most of them are false. Have you heard the myth he was broke and unemployed when he died and was buried in an unmarked grave? Untrue. He was still working at the time and received income from Vienna, Prague, and other parts of Europe.

At 1:43 PM, Anonymous said...
"You say that like its a good thing. I'm glad my children will NEVER be taught by you."

But how do you know that, we don't know where she teaches. At least give us a rough area so we can avoid it.

At 1:48 PM, Anonymous said...
I'll give you a rough idea: It can only be Toronto. I'll be pretty surprised if she teaches anywhere else.

At 1:48 PM, Dennis said...
"But how do you know that, we don't know where she teaches. At least give us a rough area so we can avoid it."

Because I sit on the PTA and I pay VERY close attention to what my children are learning in school If ANYTHING like this would ever come up, or they were reading from books like "I Have Two Dads", I'd be switching them schools or Boards before the day was even out.

At 1:49 PM, Chris Dollis said...
Jason, email me your original "liblogs" button in the best res you have, gif if possible, if not don't sweat it. I'll see if I can make you a better (perhaps larger too) donation button.

At 1:54 PM, Anonymous said...
haha Jason

Chris D., get your donations in!

The Liberal Party is back

s.b.: Oh anonymous, I'm a fag hag. I love gay men. I even kissed Scott Brison last night, twice. He was the only man I kissed all night. He said I looked great.

Shitting on people and pissing on people is ok, as long as it's done in private. It's no one's god damn business. Get over it. It happens all the time. Your conservative and intolerant view of it isn't going to stop it or make it go away.

Ask a dominatrix how many staight business men like to be dressed up as babies shit their pants and be changed. You can look that up in google under shit fetish as well, or a university level text book on human sexuality.

At 2:05 PM, Chris said...
"Cherniak invited these comments on to his blog by bringing it up. Maybe he knows what he's doing too." - s.b.

No, he invited it by saying he met YOU at the Liberal party, and that you were given press passes. And then you invited it when you said you kissed Scott Brison and by the way, eating shit is cool and MK's gf was a fag hag.

Maybe Cherniak knew this was coming, but I seriously, seriously doubt it.

At 2:05 PM, s.b. said...
You people are hillarious. Your children are taught by lots of people like me. Lots of people who aren't sexually repressed or judgemental, lots of people who aren't homophobic or racist or mysoginistic.

There are other kinds of teachers out there too. One's that are still cruel to gay students, ones that discriminate against students of colour, ones that spew hate. One's that make females in class uncomfortable. Would you prefer those ones for your children?

By the way, how do you suppose that I'm not allowed to have an opinion as a teacher? I would love to hear the conservative platform on this. Would conservatives ban teachers from having opinions they didn't like. Would they threaten their teachers certificates if they spoke out in a non school related forum. I am not teaching a class of students right now. I am having a discussion with supposed adults about intolerance.

I do believe you have proven some points about why Conservatives should not be in power for very long. Certainly if the way Mr. Harper treats his MP's is any indication he probably would threaten teacher's licences for having an opinion he didn't like.

Oh yeah I love the assumptions, I must engage in these activities, because I defend the right to privacy and sexual freedom. That's like saying men can't be feminists or white people can't work against racism or straight people can't fight homophobia.

It's utter nonsense.

The facts about Mozart were known far and wide. He was infamous. His wife tried to repress it to ensure continued royalties from his music. Do you suppose that sort of thing would have helped her sell his music back then? It wasn't exactly Entertainment Weekly kind of stuff.

Chris e-mail me, so I can trace you and sue your ass, if your threats and defamation continue.

At 2:14 PM, Chris said...
LOL, s.b.,

Where did I threaten or defame you? Show me where.

If our children are taught by people like you, then that's really, really sad. I'm not repressed, judgmental, homophobic, racist, or mysoginistic. Sorry, s.b. My girlfriend is Chinese and I have gay friends. But I think IT'S SICK TO EAT FECES. Sorry, but that's what I think.

I don't think we should ban teachers like you, actually, but I'm sure your PTA would love to hear all about your enlightened, tolerant, liberal opinions. Why are you afraid to let them know?

And Harper can't do anything about you, don't worry, because education is a provincial jurisdiction under s. 92 of the BNAA. So, no need to have nightmares about that.

And please, e-mail me, so I can trace you, and avoid the general area. Though it won't be a big problem for me to avoid Toronto.

At 2:14 PM, Anonymous said...
Leck mich am arsch is one of the most common profanities in the german language. Saying mozart is a shit freak because he wrote a song called leck mich am arsch is like calling anyone who ever said kiss my ass and anal fetishist.

At 2:18 PM, Chris said...
And one more thing. I know Jason can't possibly approve of tearing other people down to try to make themselves feel better.

Mozart ate feces, M. King was gay, his wife was a "fag hag."

s.b., and you think other people are defaming you?

At 2:36 PM, Anonymous said...
"You people are hillarious. Your children are taught by lots of people like me. Lots of people who aren't sexually repressed or judgemental, lots of people who aren't homophobic or racist or mysoginistic."
---------------
So if a student came forward and disclosed to you that he or she liked to engage in the healthy and unrepressed act of eating and covering themselves in feces, you would be totally unconcerned about that because, well gee, your tolerant. Right.

"There are other kinds of teachers out there too. One's that are still cruel to gay students, ones that discriminate against students of colour, ones that spew hate. One's that make females in class uncomfortable. Would you prefer those ones for your children?"
---------
I want someone who treats everyone equally, discriminating against none. What I DON'T want is someone to tell my sons that its ok if they like to eat feces.

"By the way, how do you suppose that I'm not allowed to have an opinion as a teacher?"
---------
Nope, we never said you weren't allowed to have your opinion. So save the rhetoric. But if your "opinion" runs extremely counter to what I want MY children to be taught, then they wouldn't be your students for long, I can tell you that.

"I would love to hear the conservative platform on this. Would conservatives ban teachers from having opinions they didn't like. Would they threaten their teachers certificates if they spoke out in a non school related forum."
-------------
Yes, if someone did this, my wife and I would report them. Then we would switch schools so that our children can have the education that we, the parents, have a right to demand for them.

"I do believe you have proven some points about why Conservatives should not be in power for very long. Certainly if the way Mr. Harper treats his MP's is any indication he probably would threaten teacher's licences for having an opinion he didn't like."
----------
Oh, and Liberals NEVER have done any of this sort of thing. Seriously, give your head a shake.

"Oh yeah I love the assumptions, I must engage in these activities, because I defend the right to privacy and sexual freedom."
---------
You call yourself a teacher? You better brush on reading comprehension, because no one here has even come close to suggesting that you do.

I would love to hear the conservative platform on this. Would conservatives ban teachers from having opinions they didn't like. Would they threaten their teachers certificates if they spoke out in a non school related forum. I am not teaching a class of students right now. I am having a discussion with supposed adults about intolerance.

At 4:07 PM, Anonymous said...
Jason, I suggest you have s.b. organize your next event. Have her do one in each province, as you say. This will help move the Liberal Party forward.

At 5:22 PM, Anonymous said...
Jason, are you going to comment on any of this?

s.b., what I think is most offensive is your idea that all of us who disagree with you must be intolerant, racist, sexist, bigots, homophobes, etc., while liberals are all wonderful, tolerant people.

Here's an interesting story, which perhaps you might like to explain:

Slain because he refused to call his mother's lesbian lover Daddy

Four-year-old Jandre Botha disobeyed an order to call his mother's lesbian lover "Daddy".

So the lover, Engeline de Nysschen (33), viciously assaulted Jandre while demanding that he must call her "Daddy".

Jandre died from his injuries, which trauma expert Professor Mohammed Dada said were similar to those of a person who had fallen from a double-storey building.

At 6:26 PM, s.b. said...
Lots of comments have suggested/ assumed I engage in these acts with the use of the pronoun "you"

The defamation is the assumption/suggestion that I engage in sexual acts with my students.

And anonymous if your wife and yourself would pursue a teacher for having an opinion in a non school related forum, then you really have proven all of my points.

I think people's private lives are private, you think we should conduct witch hunts on teachers who have opinions.

Your vision of Canada sounds so much nicer than mine. Right back to the 16th century. You can use a legal text called the Malius Malificarum "the witches hammer" by Krammer and Springer. It's been used for centuries to do just what you propose.

The last anonymous post was quite a gem of homophobia, and sadly missuses this poor child.

Again, I think you are proving my points.

At 6:44 PM, s.b. said...
correction:

Malleus Maleficarum
"THe Witches' Hammer"
by Kramer and Sprenger

At 6:47 PM, Chris said...
s.b.,

"You" are misreading the posts if that's what "you" think. Jesus I feel like I'm talking to Bill Clinton here. No one actually suggested you do these things or you have sex with your students. What I said was there is a limit to what is acceptable activity. Tolerance is great, but there are limits. I'm glad you finally seem to agree with me.

I think what people are worried about is that your foolish opinions are affecting the way you teach. How can you possibly say Mozart ate feces? And you're a science teacher and a top Liberal blogger? I know I'd be concerned if my kids were in your class, and I'm sure Jason is concerned now.

This isn't a witch hunt. As a teacher, you have a special responsibility with young people, and you seem to be totally irresponsible. You're making wild, stupid accusations and smearing all kinds of people. That's not something teachers should do.

At 6:49 PM, Chris said...
By the way, you've made it into Chris V.'s Liberal Montage of Shame.

http://chrisvanoostveen.blogspot.com/

At 6:51 PM, Anonymous said...
"Lots of comments have suggested/ assumed I engage in these acts with the use of the pronoun 'you'"
----------
Come on, you can't be this stupid; no one is suggesting that at all and you know it. So you can cut this rhetoric garbage. This typical Liberal misdirection smokescreen technique doesn't wash. And its not going to lead anywhere.

"The defamation is the assumption/suggestion that I engage in sexual acts with my students".
----------
Again, where EXACTLY was this said? Careful here, thats a double edged sword your playing with.

"And anonymous if your wife and yourself would pursue a teacher for having an opinion in a non school related forum, then you really have proven all of my points".
------------
Wrong. ANYTHING you say and do in school is a "school related forum". As a teacher I'm surpised to see you don't realize that most basic tenent. If a teacher was reported and they truly believed that they did nothing wrong, then there would be nothing to worry about, would there?

"I think people's private lives are private, you think we should conduct witch hunts on teachers who have opinions."
---------
And if a teacher in his or her private life was a Nazi or part of the KKK, I guess by your logic, that shouldn't matter should it?

If its private, then it stands to reason that a teacher should be keeping it that way with good reason shouldn't it? And if a teacher voicing their "opinion" goes quite contrary to what I want my child to be learning and the values my wife and I hold, you can be damned sure that I will be letting the right people know about it.

"Your vision of Canada sounds so much nicer than mine. Right back to the 16th century. You can use a legal text called the Malius Malificarum "the witches hammer" by Krammer and Springer. It's been used for centuries to do just what you propose.
----------
And you should try "Rethinking Liberal Education" to stop thinking in the past.

"The last anonymous post was quite a gem of homophobia, and sadly missuses this poor child".
----------
Kindly explain exactly how that post was homophobic.

"Again, I think you are proving my
points".
----------
And you are living proof of ours. Thank you.

At 7:13 PM, Anonymous said...
Mr. Cherniak, if you want to be respected by the party, it's best not to let great Liberals like Mackenzie King be dragged through shit on your page. That's not appreciated, I can tell you that.

Conservatives (who by the way seem to be the only ones offended by this so far) are going to be in office for many years. When we find the next King-like leader, then, Mr. Cherniak, we will truly be "back." Until then we've got a lot of work to do.

At 8:25 PM, Anonymous said...
Wow. I just stopped by, read all the idiotic posts and am flabbergasted.

S.B., do you have any idea how stupid you sound?

Wow.

I guess you think you're pretty smart and tolerant and everyone railing against you is racist, intollerant, bigotted rednecks, but from a completely nuetral position (didn't vote Liberal, Conservative or NDP last election), you come across as a dangerously deluded moron. It's like you been filled up to the brim with ultra-liberal talking points and can't spout anything else except wild, easily disproved accusations.

In short, you come across like an idiot who doesn't know s/he's an idiot.

Maybe you should take that age-old advice, "Better to keep your mouth shut and be thought a fool than to open it and remove all doubt."

Seriously - you've removed all doubt.

At 8:31 PM, Ti-Guy said...
Like I've said in the past...Liberal bloggers have got to find a way of zapping the righty trolls who infest their blogs so tenaciously or no sensible person is going to bother reading them.

And it's not that they're so vulgar, so much as they're so damn witless.

At 8:39 PM, Anonymous said...
Ti-Guy, the only blogger who's being vulgar and witless is s.b.

Have you read her posts?

At 8:43 PM, Anonymous said...
By the way s.b., I love how you liberals have mindf***ed everyone with all this silly phobia language. Anytime you can't respond to an argument, you just squeal "HOMOPHOBE!" and expect to be let off the hook.

Tell me, please, how is this a gem of homophobia? It just repeats a couple lines of a real news story. This actually happened.

So tell me, what phobia is it called when you're afraid of a four-year old boy who won't call you "daddy" because you're his mom's lesbian lover, and you beat him to death? I really want to know what that's called, s.b.

normal-four-year-old-kid-o-phobia?

WHERE DO YOU TEACH?

At 9:14 PM, Anonymous said...
"Like I've said in the past...Liberal bloggers have got to find a way of zapping the righty trolls who infest their blogs so tenaciously or no sensible person is going to bother reading them. And it's not that they're so vulgar, so much as they're so damn witless."
------------
And lets see how this little tidbit of idiocy can be demonstrated by changing two words -

Like I've said in the past...Conservatives have got to find a way of zapping the lefty trolls who infest their blogs so tenaciously or no sensible person is going to bother reading them.

And it's not that they're so vulgar, so much as they're so damn witless.

At 9:29 PM, Anonymous said...
"I think people's private lives are private, you think we should conduct witch hunts on teachers who have opinions."

s.b., what's your position on Jim Keegstra?

At 10:05 PM, Dennis said...
SB - "I think people's private lives are private, you think we should conduct witch hunts on teachers who have opinions."

Well SB, Jim Keegstra had opinions as well, made in his capacity as a teacher. Shall we educate everyone here as to what his "opinions" are as they relate to Jewish people?

Lets see - revolutionists, treacherous, imposters, communists, secret, sneaky, manipulative, deceptive, barbaric, subversive, sadistic, materialistic, money-loving, and power hungry.

But thats all ok, because that is just a teacher telling his students his "opinion".

Face it SB, you're losing ground here. As time goes on, its going to be more and more difficult to withdraw from the field with a face saving geture. Just give it up.

At 10:08 PM, Anonymous said...
"Like I've said in the past...Liberal bloggers have got to find a way of zapping the righty trolls who infest their blogs so tenaciously or no sensible person is going to bother reading them."

Ti-Guy, the only reason Jason hasn't zapped all these posts is that they aren't written by crazy righty trolls, they're written by his friend s.b., who also attended the Copps party and is mentioned in Jason's post. Fundamentally, I'm very, very interested (sorry) in how Jason is going to respond to her.

At 10:10 PM, Parliamentary Sex Therapist said...
All of you should be ashamed of yourselves.

Why don't you put your tremendously over-inflated egos in park.

Time to move on and let a sense of decency and respect for fellow human beings return to this blog.

Jason doesn't deserve this shit and neither do his readers.

At 10:11 PM, s.b. said...
As I have said before teachers have had their licenses taken away for promoting hatred in the classroom. Promoting hatred against an identifiable group is also illegal in Canada and appropriate charges were laid.

Teachers could also be removed from their posts for other illegal acts. I do not believe a teacher has ever been stripped of thier licence or even disciplined for having an opinion, especially when not in a classroom.

What amazes me, is that you guys are still attacking, threatening and maligning me. Wow! I must have really hit a nerve there. I'm worth alot of your time and energy. I go away for a few hours and come back and you guys are still at it. It's funny and sad really. By the way, where are those kids of yours? Shouldn't you be spending time with them instead of me?

At 10:19 PM, Chris said...
Parliamentary Sex Therapist, I think you might have found some new patients here.

Unfortunately, I must say that I think Jason does deserve this. Take a look at these despicable posts on Harper here or here, for which Jason has never apologized. As they say, what goes around comes around. If guilt by association works on Harper, then surely it does on Liberals too.

And what was Jason's reaction when a close friend of his vandalized Wikipedia's site to call Harper a "douche bag"? Jason thought that was pretty funny.

As I say, I'm still sorry this page now looks like this, but the worst posts come directly from s.b., who he seemed happy to meet in his post. I promise, should he clarify his position, we can all let this issue die and never post on it again (though obviously I can't speak for s.b.).

At 10:25 PM, Dennis said...
"What amazes me, is that you guys are still attacking, threatening and maligning me."

And calling us homophobes is not a malignant attack? Saying "I am going to sue your ass off" is not a threat?

Really. Get over yourself.

"I go away for a few hours and come back and you guys are still at it. It's funny and sad really."

And yet HERE YOU ARE!

"By the way, where are those kids of yours? Shouldn't you be spending time with them instead of me?

Kids do funny things. Like activities outside the house. Or like going to bed. So don't worry about my kids; they will be fine, because I teach them important things. Like, its NOT ok to eat your own poo and to not listen to people who say its ok.

At 10:25 PM, Anonymous said...
"Promoting hatred against an identifiable group is also illegal in Canada and appropriate charges were laid."

lucky for you s.b. that conservatives aren't an identifiable group

At 10:28 PM, Dennis said...
I'm done. This sick topic has got about as much mileage as its going to get from me. I'm just glad I pay VERY close attention to what is being taught to my children and who those teachers are.

The important lesson I've learned is to not let my vigilance down. In today's world, my family and I cannot afford to.

At 10:32 PM, Anonymous said...
hehehe

you liberals are interesting dudes

i like this guy best

At 10:42 PM, Chris said...
I'm done with you too. I never threatened or defamed you, s.b., sorry, though as Dennis points out, you've threatened and defamed us. You're going to sue my ass, for what, exactly?

In just one post, you say we're sexually repressed, judgemental, homophobic, racist, mysoginistic, and imply we'd prefer teachers like that. That's pretty offensive, though I'm not planning to try to sue you. You're a joke, and I hope Cherniak says so before he becomes one too.

At 11:57 PM, s.b. said...
You et. al. are all still trying to threaten me by, "contacting the right people" or "finding out where I teach"

It still amazes me that you think teachers shouldn't have opinions, even out of the classroom, and continually bring that up. You guys really did take the progressive out of conservative.

You have missed my points entirely, which is not surprising, and keep assuming that I am advocating or engaging in an act.

I know that these acts occur. I believe that if they are done in private by consenting adults it's really not my place to approve or disapprove of it.

For this, my teaching abilities have been insulted, threatened and slandered, mostly by people who are "anonymous". It's impossible to defame people who are anonymous by the way.

Why have I engaged in this discussion with you? You are entitled to your opinions, unless they promote hatred, which is illegal in Canada. What you are not entitled to do is impose your opinions on other people's lives and their bodies. Which is what conservatives like to do.

You et. al. have proven this with your continual threats to my teaching credentials and your assertions that teachers cannot have opinions you disagree with, even outside the classroom when speaking to other adults.

I have chosen to keep engaging in this converstion because the longer it goes on, the more it proves my point.

Conservative ideals are about imposing social views on others, through threats, intimidation, legislative changes, social coersion, whatever.

Liberals must stand in support of everyone's rights and freedoms, regardless of difference, sexual difference, racial difference, religious difference, cultural difference. Liberals celebrate difference. Conservatives try to crush it.

Thank-You for your participation gentlemen.

At 12:19 AM, Chris said...
Jason, your comments?

Are you prepared to celebrate the contributions of a Liberal blogger who says the following:

About Mackenzie King:

"Oh yeah, William Lyon MacKenzie King ... I'd place bets on him being gay, as he never married. THough some say he had a girlfriend, she was probably just a fag hag and a smokescreen. He was also completely nuts." (here)

About Scott Brison:

"Oh anonymous, I'm a fag hag. I love gay men. I even kissed Scott Brison last night, twice. He was the only man I kissed all night. He said I looked great. O.K. there's a bit of a difference between a fag hag and a fruit fly, but that's a little above your head. I'm just a fruit fly. Fag Hags want to convert gay men." (here)

About Mozart:

"Mozart was a coprophilliac. That means he got off on his lovers shit. He liked to play in it and even eat it. BUT HE WAS MOZART!!" (here)

About love:

"I washed my son's cloth diapers by hand for over two years, putting my hand into a toilet full of his faeces about four times a day. Was this gross? I didn't notice. I love him. Mothers clean their children's shit and vomit up all the time. It's called love." (here)

About sexual fetishes:

"Shitting on people and pissing on people is ok, as long as it's done in private. It's no one's god damn business. Get over it. It happens all the time. Your conservative and intolerant view of it isn't going to stop it or make it go away. ... Ask a dominatrix how many staight business men like to be dressed up as babies shit their pants and be changed. You can look that up in google under shit fetish as well, or a university level text book on human sexuality." (here)

s.b., go back and re-read our posts. No one said teachers can't have opinions. No one said you engage in these acts. I let you speak for yourself above. If you want to point to something specific I wrote, you go right ahead.

At 12:37 AM, Anonymous said...
"You et. al. are all still trying to threaten me by, "contacting the right people".
---------------
There was never a threat there, real or implied. The only "threat" you saw was one that was wrongly infered. What was said was "....and if a teacher voicing their "opinion" goes quite contrary to what I want my child to be learning and the values my wife and I hold, you can be damned sure that I will be letting the right people know about it."

Now where in there were YOU mentioned by name? You are a teacher? Yet, you cannot even bring a simple grasp of reading comprehension to bear.

"It still amazes me that you think teachers shouldn't have opinions, even out of the classroom, and continually bring that up. You guys really did take the progressive out of conservative."
----------
And I supposed you put the small "L" in Liberal. Spare us. No one is suggesting that someone cannot have their own opinion. What we are saying is that there are limits to free speech. And you damn well know that.

"You have missed my points entirely, which is not surprising, and keep assuming that I am advocating or engaging in an act."
----------
How many times does it have to be asked of you to prove EXACTLY where this has been suggested of you? This constant Liberal tactic of smoke and mirrors must be tiresome for you.

"I know that these acts occur. I believe that if they are done in private by consenting adults it's really not my place to approve or disapprove of it."
---------
Absolutley. But I will bet you dollars to doughnuts that most people don't want teachers teaching their children about filth like that.

"For this, my teaching abilities have been insulted, threatened and slandered, mostly by people who are "anonymous". It's impossible to defame people who are anonymous by the way".
--------
In the same vein and by that very "logic", its impossible to be defamed by said people who are likewise anonymous.

"What you are not entitled to do is impose your opinions on other people's lives and their bodies. Which is what conservatives like to do".
---------
And how is that done EXACTLY?

"You et. al. have proven this with your continual threats to my teaching credentials and your assertions that teachers cannot have opinions you disagree with, even outside the classroom when speaking to other adults."
---------
If your attention span wasn't so atrophied, you'd know that what we were talking about was NOT speaking to adults about those things on your own time OUTSIDE of class, but teaching it as acceptable practices to students IN the class.

"I have chosen to keep engaging in this converstion because the longer it goes on, the more it proves my point."
---------
Thats nice. We've proven ours a long time ago. Nice to see you're finally keeping up.

"Conservative ideals are about imposing social views on others, through threats, intimidation, legislative changes, social coersion, whatever."
---------
Ah, some more of that vaunted Liberal tolerance I see.

"Liberals must stand in support of everyone's rights and freedoms, regardless of difference, sexual difference, racial difference, religious difference, cultural difference."
-----------
In other words, "Canadian values" right? Oh, excuse me, only Liberals have the monopoly on what is to be considered "Canadian values". How remiss of us Conservatives who are Canadian citizens.

"Liberals celebrate difference. Conservatives try to crush it".
-----------
How EXACTLY?

"Thank-You for your participation gentlemen".
---------
I certainly cannot say your welcome.

At 12:43 AM, Anonymous said...
hey s.b., do you work for Christina Renaud? Head of Science at Chelmsford Valley District Composite School in Sudbury, Ontario?

Am I close?

At 12:55 AM, Dennis said...
Actually, that school is more popularily known as Chemmy High.

LOL, of all the coincidences. I went to that school. And just when I think I'm done, this gets more and more interesting and a new can of worms is opened!

At 1:00 AM, Chris said...
SB, you might like to check out this article here: Blogger sacked for sounding off.

Basically, a guy was fired for posting comments on his blog that brought his company into disrepute. This was considered to be gross misconduct. Though it happened in the UK last year, and it was in a bookstore, I wonder whether it would also apply in your case, and I'd like to test my theory that it does.

In that case, he just made fun of his boss for wearing sandals. Whatever. You, on the other hand, say Mozart loved shit and Mackenzie King's girlfriend was a fag hag. Given your total lack of evidence for this I think it brings your teaching ability into question. I also think it brings your school into disrepute.

I think, given this information, your school's PTA, in Sudbury or not, would not be pleased with you. This is the kind of thing that undermines respect for teachers generally, for our education system generally. I hope you consider that when you post again.

At 6:42 AM, Sean L said...
Yo Anon et al.., one does not have to agree with s.b.'s opinions let alone anyone elses so what exactly is your problem. I couldn't care less if Mozart was or even is someone said he was a copraphiliac. And as far a sWLMK goes, we ALL know he was a flaky guy, if he was gay, whoodeedoo. If someone uses a certain term to describe his female companion as a "fag hag", well, as a parent, I may not use the term myself, but I certainly wouldn't be bothered if this person taught my kids..

I'd rather have a person with real views and opinions teaching my brood than some NDP robot that waves the party flag, ignores the gifted in favour of churning out an army of fluffy Happy Happy mediocre "average" students and spends the day teaching by the book without actually having an own thought on the issues.

You must have very very little to do with your free time than to argue these issues with someone on Jasons POLITICAL blog and not on S.B.s own. Perhaps you are insecure and are afriad she will just delete your rantings whereas you know that Jason is busy and hasn't had time to erase your hate.

At 7:20 AM, Anonymous said...
"Yo Anon et al.., one does not have to agree with s.b.'s opinions let alone anyone elses so what exactly is your problem".
-----------
You Sean, I couldn't really care less if a teacher is gay, as long as he or she knows how to teach. I'm all for difference of opinion, and lively class discussions that debate issues. But I just wouldn't want a teacher telling my kids things such as that its perfectly acceptable to eat feces and spread it all of yourself because its a "private thing", that people should be tolerant of that, and if they are not, well then they are hate filled bigots. Don't tell me for one second as a father you wouldn't be concerned if your kids came home and recounted that to you.

"I'd rather have a person with real views and opinions teaching my brood than some NDP robot that waves the party flag, ignores the gifted in favour of churning out an army of fluffy Happy Happy mediocre "average" students and spends the day teaching by the book without actually having an own thought on the issues."
------------
Thats just me, but I'd rather have a person with real views and opinions keeping stuff relevant to the classroom. That doesn't mean that students with gifts can't be challenged or students with problems shouldn't be addressed.

"You must have very very little to do with your free time than to argue these issues with someone on Jasons POLITICAL blog and not on S.B.s own."
--------------
You don't know me or anything about me, so kindly don't presume to tell me how much free time I must have or how well you think that time is spent.

"Perhaps you are insecure and are afriad she will just delete your rantings whereas you know that Jason is busy and hasn't had time to erase your hate."
----------
And that would be just typical of Liberal blogs; to call a Conservative's opinions "ranting and hate". So much for the vaunted Liberal tolerance now eh? Its ok to do anything in private, but just don't be have a Conservative opinion. Why thats a DIFFERENT thing all together. But don't worry, we are the Liberals (da da da daaaaaaaaaa) we'll do your thinking for you.

I'm outta here, too. These Liberal justifications for tolerating absolutley anything is really starting to wear on me. Seeing the things SB is typing makes me thankful that I pay close attention to what my kids are learning in school. So, I look upon this as a learning experience, realizing for a fact that I can't let my guard down at any time.

At 10:11 AM, s.b. said...
You know Chris et. al. to the best of my knowledge, we don't have PTA's in Canada. Which makes me think that at least some of you are American.

Another infamous troll named Vargas is from Atlanta, and as such, should really be ignored, if he has nothing constructive to add to the conversation. You still haven't e-mailed me Chris, so I can find out if you're American, interesting.

Parent Councils have no ability whatsoever to discuss a teachers credentials or evaluate their performance. It would not be allowed. They deal with things like book purchases, school calenders, milk programs, school boundaries, etc. A witch hunt would certainly not be entertained, even for a moment.

I'm afraid that even the school boards in Canada would not deal with your complaint.

They would speak to you nicely and then direct you to the licensing body for the province. The licensing body would then take your comlaint and dismiss it, as having absolutely no bearing on the classroom or the performance of my duties as a teacher.

As far as speaking out against one's company is concerned. You're right. I can't speak out against my school board, my principal or school. I can't even be on a parent council in the school board where I teach, or speak out against my son's principal or school. That would be subject to disciplinary action. I can't even have a public opinion on school closures.

But that is not what I am doing here. And again, I'm not teaching a class of students. I'm speaking to adults on my own free time.

My speculations have been identified as such, and supported with evidence. They can be argued for or against. These are historical people. My views on these individuals are not solitary or unsubstantiated. They may or may not be true, as with much historical account and analysis.

All I have done is defend the right of other people to express their sexuality as they see fit in private.

Just defending someone else is enough to set off a character assassination and a witch hunt for conservatives, which is very clear in all your posts.

My vision of Canada includes the FREEDOM TO DEFEND THE RIGHTS OF OTHERS without being threatened.

A Conservative vision of Canada obviously does not include this freedom.

At 10:28 AM, s.b. said...
Sean,

They don't post on my blog because if they do, I can find out where they are from. It is probably the U.S., for many of them. They may even be paid for what they are doing, by conservative organizations.

Jason could probably block U.S. servers from posting on his site and could definately block anonymous comments, or shut down this comment thread any time he wants. He chooses not to. His choice.

At 10:34 AM, NBT said...
Shoshana.

Just because you have a lot, or even all, gay friends doesn't give you the right to say the word "fag" when not speaking exclusively to them.

At 10:41 AM, NBT said...
Where'm I? I'm here. Why are you calling on me, I think poo eating and pee drinking is for the birds, I can't stand s.b. or Jason or Paul Martin.... how did I get lumped in with these guys?

I think Jason shouldn't have called MacIsaac "a sick man" and should focus on his ideas on separation, not stuff in his bedroom, that's all.

At 10:58 AM, NBT said...
Wow, I skimmed through this quickly. Crazy.

Look, I'm gay, and I don't think ANYone here is "homophobic". The only offensive person I see is S.B. throwing "fag" around because it makes her feel "inclusive", as if having a bunch of Jew friends and calling yourself a "k--- like" would be a showy example of your "tolerance".

She doesn't like to "agitate to creat dissonance" or whatever the he__ she said - she just likes to hear herself be more tolerant than everyone else.

I think Dennis was wrong to suggest the Liberals are presenting MacIsaac to Canada as leader material - that doesn't make him "homophobic".

I think Jason was wrong to harp on MacIsaac's bedroom life, because it attracts, hmm, let's see... discussions like THIS. That doesn't make his readers "homophobic".

What's inappropriate is s.b. trading on her gay friends to blithely pretend she's part of some "fag" club, when she is anything but.

Now. Is the Liberal Party back? I'll believe it when I see it. I prefer a system with two competitive parties, so I'd like either them or the NDP to get their asses in gear. Democracy only works with two sides functioning.

At 11:01 AM, NBT said...
If s.b. turns out to be a lesbian, then I still don't think she should be saying the word "fag".

And for god's sake, where on earth did the idea of a gay WLMK come up? Speculation doesn't count.

At 11:08 AM, NBT said...
you know that Jason is busy and hasn't had time to erase your hate.

I don't see anything specifically "hateful" here, really.

At 11:42 AM, Chris said...
s.b.,

Let me respond to your comments here and here:

s.b., I'm not an American. I was born in Toronto. I live in Markham. I have been to the U.S. about three times. I'm not paid by any conservative organizations. I'm not in any conservative organizations. I never have been. I don't belong to the Conservative Party, though I voted for them in January. I also voted for Jean Chretien's party twice. I voted for Dalton McGuinty in 2003 (though I regret doing so). I am pro-choice, pro-same sex marriage.

I'm a real redneck, I guess.

At 12:08 PM, Anonymous said...
S.B., I'm not terribly interested in this whole shit-eating is Ok/is not Ok argument. I'll let parliament decide. I'm sure it's a priority for the Liberals now. But I am interested in how you think what you write outside of school is irrelevant to your position as a teacher. The fact is, you may be correct. What you are saying is offensive, disgusting, and somewhat unbalanced but is defintiely "progressive" so unlikely to come under scrutiny. Still, Chris Kempling, a teacer in BC with a fundamentalist Christian viewpoint on homosexuality, was recently censured and suspended by the BCCT for writing a letter to the editor of his local paper (kinda like an old school blog). It didn't talk about his school, or his fellow teachers, or his principal, but it was stilled considered conduct detrimental to his position as a teacher. Of course, his conduct wasn't "progressive". So it would seem that what a teacher says outside of a classroom is relevant. At least if you are a conservative.

At 12:11 PM, Anonymous said...
"You know Chris et. al. to the best of my knowledge, we don't have PTA's in Canada."

Are you sure you're a teacher? Of course we have PTAs here, though some of them have different names, like PTOs. If you don't know anything about this, then that explains a lot. Obviously your PTA hasn't been doing its job.

At 12:25 PM, Chris said...
That is very interesting. Thanks, anon. s.b., more reading material for you:

Kempling v. The British Columbia College of Teachers, 2004 BCSC 133

[6] The Panel also found that, despite the appellant's conduct occurring off-duty and the lack of direct evidence of a poisoned school environment, an inference could be drawn as to the reasonable and probable consequences of his published writings. Although the Panel did not explicitly state what those consequences were, their quotation of the following passage from Shewan v. Abbotsford School District No. 34 (1987), 47 D.L.R. (4th) 106 at 110 (B.C.C.A.), (as quoted in Ross v. New Brunswick School District No. 15, [1996] 1 S.C.R. 825 at ¶44) is indicative:

The reason why off-the-job conduct may amount to misconduct is that a teacher holds a position of trust, confidence and responsibility. If he or she acts in an improper way, on or off the job, there may be a loss of public confidence in the teacher and in the public school system, a loss of respect by students for the teacher involved, and other teachers generally, and there may be controversy within the school and within the community which disrupts the proper carrying on of the education system.

The Hearing Panel found the appellant guilty of conduct unbecoming a BCCT member.

At 12:44 PM, Anonymous said...
I read this today on Warren Kinsella's blog - but then he erased it. Anyone got the skinny on this? Speculation?

March 24, 2006 - It's really, really late, or really, really early, depending upon your point of view.

Tonight - I won't provide any details - I had a mind-boggling, jaw-dropping, life-altering experience. If you know me, you already know that I can be pretty much be brought over to your side with a handshake and a beer.

Someone, tonight, bought me a beer and offered a handshake and immediately made me feel crummy about approximately 13 years of bad stuff. From combatant to doubter in 30 minutes.

It's like Rabin used to say, I guess: who else do you make peace with, but your enemies?

At 1:01 PM, s.b. said...
Just because what I have said has been twisted by people who are anonymous does not constitute misconduct.

NBT I used the term fag hag, which refers to women not gay men. It is the only term I know of to refer to a straight women who is in love with a gay man and tries to win him over. If you have another term , please let my know and I will refrain from using this term in the future. It is a commonly used term in the gay community and is only considered disrepectful, possibly to the women for their intentions, but is also used quite affectionately.

I don't refer to gay men as 'fags' I am aware of the etymology of that word. See my post on the witch trials today. The term fag is from a bundle of sticks because men who were accused of being gay were coated in and tar set on fire to burn witches. I apologize for the use of this term, even indirectly.

Don't refer to the posts of others to decide what I said.

The use of terminology in these communities is the issue of much debate with gay, lesian and bisexual not even being good enough. I believe many have settled on the term queer, which I prefer, but many also consider this offensive.

There is no consensus in the queer community which terminology is derisive and which is not. As I have said, I know of no other term for a women who is in love with a gay man. The comment has been blown ridiculously out of proportion anyways.

Mackenzie King never married. He had a close female friend who was. If they were lovers why not just get a divorce. My grandparents divorced. It was not uncommon. When Ashley MacIsaac was being attacked as 'sick' by these individuals, I put forwad that Mackenzie King, consulted his dead mother and his dog Pat for political advice and that he was in my opinion, probably gay and his "girlfriend" was a smokescreen.

It is speculation, but again why not just get a divorce, if they were lovers. And what husband lets his wife spend all her time with a rich and powerful man in public, if he's not gay?

Anonymous et. al.,
Still the threats to my teachers certificate, and to all techers in fact. We better just be quiet and let rabib conservatives say whatever they want, because we just might lose our licenses to teach.

Now Jason, I think these anonymous posters and Chris have had far too much time for me and have launched a far too calculated attack at all hours on everything I have had to say. These anonymous people are very skilled at twisting people's words and have a lot of time on their hands to do it.

I think you have enough posts from enough different computers to find out who these people are. They are not interested in constructive or civil discourse. They are interested in attacking, discrediting and threatening.
They have refused invitations to e-mail me or come to my web site.

Are they posting from government computers? Are they working for right wing lobby groups or think tanks? Are they Americans? Get your computer friend to trace these posts and find out who we are really talking to.

There is no way that all these 'anonymous' posters have that much time and energy for me if they are just ordinary citizens. And I can't ever recall a Canadian saying they were going to be vigilant at a PTA meeting.

At 1:06 PM, s.b. said...
Oh yeah chris just read the court case.

This teacher was convicted of promoting hatred against homosexuals, which could poison the school environment. I have stated twice and now I will state for a third time. Teachers have been disciplined and had their certificates revoked for promoting hatred. I am aware of that.

That is not what I am doing. I am defending the rights of others to keep their sex lives private. Not exactly the same thing. Did you read the court case?

At 1:17 PM, Chris said...
s.b., you are magnificent.

"Are they posting from government computers? Are they working for right wing lobby groups or think tanks? Are they Americans? Get your computer friend to trace these posts and find out who we are really talking to."

I'm laughing so hard I can hardly breathe. Just about everyone on Jason's site now is in Canada. You don't need to be a computer expert to figure that out. Just look here.

At 1:24 PM, Anonymous said...
So..... calling people fags is offensive, but calling people fag hags is okay? Like it wouldn't poison the school environment or anything?

At 1:25 PM, Dennis said...
"Are they posting from government computers? Are they working for right wing lobby groups or think tanks? Are they Americans?......."
------------
......we just don't know. They aren't saying. Its a conspiracy.

Choose your Canada

;-)

At 1:32 PM, Chris said...
By the way, for anyone new to this chain, no one is twisting SB's words. Read what she said herself, right here.

At 2:39 PM, Anonymous said...
SB, it is you who is likely going to be sued now, unless you wish to retract your statement above. Dr. Kempling was never convicted in any court case of anythng, let alone "hate speach". Retract it or I will be sending a copy of this blog to his lawyers.

And for those who think they know, here's the real deal, the real reason this man was suspended and sanctioned by the BC College of Teachers:

ir:

The letters published in the January 9, 2005 edition of the Observer regarding
same sex marriage have highlighted the arrogance of the Liberal government, to
foist a monumental change to our social fabric by changing the definition of
marriage. The Conservatives are dithering over how to deal with matter, while
the Liberals, NDP, Bloc and Greens are all in favour. The Christian Heritage
Party, which I represent locally, is actively working to maintain the
traditional definition of marriage (which, ironically, a majority of Liberals
including Martin voted to sustain less than six years ago). I have personally
read editorials in gay publications which decry the push for marriage, calling
it a "straight" institution that they had little interest in.

In Massachusetts, two-thirds of the same sex marriages are lesbians, even
though gay men outnumber lesbians two to one. And when two researchers
(McWhirter and Madison) surveyed 236 men for their book, The Male Couple, they were unable to find a single couple who had remained faithful to one another.
In other words, infidelity (and now adultery I suppose) is the norm, not the
exception for gay couples. And it causes as much emotional heartache and
relationship break-ups as it does for heterosexual couples. Is this the kind
of relationship we want to give official blessing to?

There's another problem. Now that our liberal social activist courts
have "read" sexual orientation into the Charter, and mandated same sex
marriage, there is no logical reason to prohibit bisexuals or polyamorists
(which are both orientations) from demanding the right to marry as many people
as they want. To forbid them would be discrimination based on sexual
orientation. Coming soon to a court room near you.

Marriage is not a human "right". It is an institution with obligations, for
fidelity, for raising children, and for ensuring social stability, that was
established long before government decided to get involved. Not everyone is
currently allowed to marry (we have restrictions against those too young, blood
relatives, already married, etc.). Furthermore, there were no discriminatory
prohibitions against same sex couples co-habiting, willing their estates to
partners and so on. This whole affair has been orchestrated by a tiny minority
of activists with good connections, who don't even have the mandate to
represent their own social group.

We need to demand that our government allow a referendum on this radical change
to a basic social institution. Canadians are smart enough to weigh both sides
of the argument and render a decision. And the Christian Heritage Party will
lobby hard to help make that happen.

Chris Kempling
Quesnel

At 2:45 PM, s.b. said...
Yeah that shows 16 posts. There are 123 on this thread and two of the 16 posts are from 'unknown'. That's 12.5%

I don't know of a country called 'unknown'. Hmm

You still haven't told me whether you read the court case you posted.

At 3:03 PM, Anonymous said...
And another point, given s.b.'s desire (and Liberal's in general) to track down those who dare disagree, I would suggest using an anonymizing proxy when posting the her little barfblog. Go to google and search anonymous surfing proxy and you'll be well on your way. Afterall, if Chinese dissidents can say what they think safely, why shouldn't we.

ps Up yours Tom Wappel.

pps s.b., where's your retraction? I've got a nice e-mail already written, just waiting to send it :-)

At 3:08 PM, Chris said...
s.b., that page I posted a link to shows who is on Jason's site. It doesn't show who is posting. The reason some show up as "Unknown" isn't that it's some Replubican conspiracy in Texas out to get you, but that they're using servers that don't have a country listed. Like the vast majority of Jason's readers, they're in Canada.

And yes, to answer your question, I read the case, apparently unlike you. Kempling was never convicted of anything. I'm just really curious how someone like you could ever be a teacher. I guess I understand how you could be a top Liberal blogger, but that's another story. Jason, your thoughts?

At 3:16 PM, s.b. said...
Mr. Kempling was found guilty of professional misconduct for making discriminatory and derogatory remarks against homosexuals publicly, which could lead to the poisoning of the school's atmosphere.

His teaching license was suspended by the B.C. College of Teachers. The Supreme Court of B.C. upheld his suspension and awarded costs against him. Given that this was appealed to the B.C. Supreme court, and the decision was upheld one could reasonable call it a "conviction".

I consider descriminatory and derogatory remarks hate. especially when directed at an identifiable group. He is lucky he wasn't charged criminally with hate for his "letters" to the local newspaper. I suppose there still is a great deal of leeway in Canada to express hateful opinions without prosecution.

So, are you a part of The Christian Heritage Party Mr. most recent Anonymous, because that gives us something to work with?

Go to my friend cotegouche's site he would love to have a discussion with you about your views and how exactly they fit into Christianity.

It's not outragous to assume some of these people are American's, as I've said Vargas, a notorious troll, is from Atlanta, that's Georgia not Texas.

At 3:18 PM, s.b. said...
There are also other people posting on other blogs from government computers. Also, not something I made up.

At 3:23 PM, Anonymous said...
"This teacher was convicted of promoting hatred against homosexuals, which could poison the school environment."

Are you taking that comment back?

At 3:30 PM, Anonymous said...
"Are they posting from government computers? Are they working for right wing lobby groups or think tanks? Are they Americans?......."

She's bang on with this statement and you all know it. Of course you are denying it, that only confirms that its true, since all neo-cons/fascists are liars. Its a vast right-wing conspiracy against shoshana berman and her like minded progressive compatriots, righteous crusaders for justice, fighting for the rights of the underprivilidged! Truely they are the heros of our time!

What courage, what dedication!

Shoshana Berman, I applaud you standing up against the tyranny of the capitalist, fascist white male christian oppressors.

Without you and your like, we would surely be living in a brutal theocratic dictatorship under the thumb of George Bush and his friends from haliburton and enron!

Onward and Forwards, great soul and gentle spirit!

At 3:31 PM, Chris said...
s.b., you're once again missing the point entirely. If you really think nothing you have written here could poison the school atmosphere, that it's all fine, then why not post your name and school?

If your talk about hag fags and eating shit is so heroic, and all of us are just lunatic Republican hatemongers from the nasty deep south, then why not post your name and school?

It's pretty clear why you're not doing it. You know that this is unacceptable for a teacher. Personally, I agree that homophobic teachers shouldn't be teaching. But some of the things you've posted here are incredibly foolish and hateful. There is such a thing as Liberal hatemongers, and I think it's pretty clear that you're one of them.

I'm very interested in Jason's opinion on this.

At 3:43 PM, s.b. said...
I guess you haven't figured out that I'm not afraid or intimidated by you. Funny that should be obvious by now.

I have already clarified my statement. The decision of the Teachers College that he made derogatory and demeaning remarks about homosexuals that could poison the attmosphere of the school was appealed to and upheld by the Supreme Court of B.C with costs awarded against him.

Most recent Mr. Anonymous, at least you're being funny now. That's a step in the right direction.

P.S. I never said I was heroic.

At 3:51 PM, Anonymous said...
Hey s.b.,

Can you find your address on this list?

1. 436 Perth Ave, Toronto (416) 762-8524
2. 40 Oaklands Ave, Toronto (416) 926-9205
3. 539 Brunswick Ave, Toronto (416) 929-7099
4. 56 Chiltern Hill, Richmond Hill (905) 770-4939
5. 23 Mowatt Crt, Thornhill (905) 731-8686
6. 120 Promenade Cir, Thornhill (905) 764-7144
7. 33 George Henry Blvd, North York (416) 490-1373
8. 1925 Steeles Ave E, North York (416) 498-4473
9. 9 Kingsbridge Crt, North York (416) 631-0245
10. 3364 Petrie Way, Oakville (905) 825-8846

At 3:55 PM, Chris said...
Oh.

"I agitate to create dissonance and reset the equilibrium in the direction I choose. Consenance is a difficult thing to shake. I believe I have shaken you and the entire concept being discussed."

But you're no hero, gotcha.

At 3:58 PM, Anonymous said...
"Just because what I have said has been twisted by people who are anonymous does not constitute misconduct."
-----------
What you call "twisting" is in reality a rebuttal. But don't let your Liberal distinction trouble you.

"Now Jason, I think these anonymous posters and Chris have had far too much time for me and have launched a far too calculated attack at all hours on everything I have had to say. These anonymous people are very skilled at twisting people's words and have a lot of time on their hands to do it".
------------
Oh, boo-hoo the big bad Cons are tearing a strip off me. Help me out here. Whatever shall I do? You whine that we are anons because that is the only thing you think you have to attack. All you can do is attack the messenger. Its our right to be anons and we have our reasons to be, none of which have anything to do with your little conspiracy theories. And really, it doesn't take very much skill to counter the things you say; its been quite elementary actually.

"I think you have enough posts from enough different computers to find out who these people are."
-------
To do what? "Sue our ass off?" Um yeah, ok.

"They are not interested in constructive or civil discourse. They are interested in attacking, discrediting and threatening".
-----------
And you aluding to us as homophobes and as racists is not? As I've said, be careful here, you are playing with a double edged sword.

You have been asked numerous times to provide proof EXACTLY how we've been threatening you, and you've NEVER came up with it. We're still waiting.

"Are they working for right wing lobby groups or think tanks? Are they Americans? Get your computer friend to trace these posts and find out who we are really talking to".
-----------
This is priceless. And assuming, for even one second that they were, or if you find out who "we" were, how does that even matter? Should we trace every single person? Or only the ones YOU can't convert? Yeah, thats what I thought.

"There is no way that all these 'anonymous' posters have that much time and energy for me if they are just ordinary citizens."
--------
The guvmint is comin' to git me!Quick everyone, hum the theme to the X-Files - "do do do do do dooooooooo".

"And I can't ever recall a Canadian saying they were going to be vigilant at a PTA meeting".
----------
LOL, and what exactly is wrong with being vigilant? What was said EXACTLY was "I sit on the PTA and I pay VERY close attention to what my children are learning in school. If ANYTHING like this would ever come up, or they were reading from books like "I Have Two Dads", I'd be switching them schools or Boards before the day was even out."

And you know what? As a parent THAT IS MY RIGHT!!! How does waht I said threaten you in anyway? Thats right it doesn't. So save the rhetoric, put away your smoke and mirrors and grow up. You want to make those kind of accusations? Fine.

"They have refused invitations to e-mail me or come to my web site".
---------
And how exactly does it prove any point you are trying to make because I refused to go to your website? Reading what you post here is enough, I don't need to add to my pain.

I know I've said I was done with you, but this time, I'm gone for sure. You accuse people of threatening you, and yet you do exactly the same thing. You tell us we are bigots and intolerant, but you cannot even suffer a few Conservatives and their points of view with calling them names. You're a pathetic, childish, joke. Its hard to fathom how you could ever be a teacher.

Good riddance.

At 3:58 PM, s.b. said...
For those people who have been reading the twisted summary of my comments from anonymous et al.

I said that Mozart was a coprophiliac, and clarified that technical term with an explaination. This is the ONE AND ONLY TIME I have mentioned eating faeces and I said "may have". One mention, as an explaination of a technical term. This claim is also substantiated by more than one historian.

I used the term "fag hag" ONCE also already clarified several times. I don't believe it is actually derogatory and is often used quite affectionately. I apologized for indirectly using the term 'fag' because of its etymology.

I am not in a classroom nor did I make these remarks in a classroom,
both of the people the terms referenced are dead and it is therefore not defamation, but historical conjecture, as was outlined several times as such.

And anonymous et al. still want a witch hunt for my teacher's certificate. Amazing. Truely amazing.

For defending the Rights of others to do what they want with their own bodies in private.

Good thing the Christian heritage party isn't in power. We probably wouldn't have many teachers left.

At 4:03 PM, Anonymous said...
You can read what she actually wrote here.

Anyways, it's nice to see that teachers need all that time off for professional development days, preparing lesson plans and such.

At 4:05 PM, s.b. said...
My suggestion was to ignore people or block them if they have nothing constructive to add and are from the U.S, especially when discussing the Liberal Party and not international matters.

I guess you missed that post.

At 4:07 PM, Anonymous said...
"So, are you a part of The Christian Heritage Party Mr. Most recent Anonymous, because that gives us something to work with"?
-------------
No actually. Why, is it a blacklisted group by the Government? Are they a hate group? Lets see, I'll take a moment to google this up.........

........hmmmmmmm....."Advocates policies based on Christian values and traditions."

My word, *gasp* the horror! But I guess its ok to not to tolerate them right? After all, its a CONSERVATIVE group. SO much for the vaunted Liberal "tolerance".

At 4:07 PM, Anonymous said...
"Good thing the Christian heritage party isn't in power. We probably wouldn't have many teachers left."

Once again, shoshana speaks the truth that most of you fascist right wing bigots are too fanatical to even realize!!

Can't you all see that christians are oppressing good honest teachers!?

These people are trying to organize themselves and actually want to take power of the COUNTRY with their political organization!!

Preach on shoshana! Tell it like it is! Your sweet words of truth cut through the neo-con lies like rays of light in the darkness!!

At 5:22 PM, Anonymous said...
Jason, it's been 2 full days. Don't you have anything to say about this?

The Liberal Party is back

2006-03-25T18:30:00.000-05:00

If you haven't done so yet, check out the comments here. If Jason deletes the page, I will post a saved copy of all the comments.

Here's a montage that I think accurately displays the current state of the Liberal Party:

Enjoy!

I feel sorry for Jason Cherniak (Part II)

2006-03-24T23:33:00.000-05:00

When Scott Brison left the Conservatives for the Liberal Party, he said "I have no interest in being part of a right-wing debating club where we get together at conventions and debate how to privatize sidewalks."

Well, I wonder how he feels now.

Last night he went to the big Liberal party for Sheila Copps, and apparently had the honour of being kissed by a 37-year-old biology teacher who has now taken over Jason Cherniak's site with comments defending fetishes involving urine and feces, supporting Ashley MacIsaac, claiming Mozart ate feces for fun (without any evidence), Mackenzie King was gay (ditto), and his girlfriend was a "fag hag." Here is a selection of her comments (posted under the name "s.h."):

"You really should have left out the peeing comment if you wanted to have a discussion on leadership. You should know better. I believe Mr. Trudeau said it best, 'The government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation' or something close to that. Please try to honour that Liberal value in your future posts. Mr. Cherniak." (link)
"Mozart was a coprophilliac. That means he got off on his lovers shit. He liked to play in it and even eat it. BUT HE WAS MOZART!!" (link)
"Oh yeah, William Lyon MacKenzie King ... I'd place bets on him being gay, as he never married. THough some say he had a girlfriend, she was probably just a fag hag and a smokescreen. He was also completely nuts." (ibid.) [As s.h. herself said, "Slanderous allegations should also perhaps be moderated. For the benefit of everyone involved."]
"e-mail me. I'll give you my teacher's college registration number. You can file a complaint see how far you get. Try looking up shit eating fetish instead. It comes up on google, under that you will find the technical term." (link)
"I'm a professional in the life sciences. I've taken courses in human biology, sexuality and psychology. If biology teachers shouldn't discuss these things chris then who should, with out having their professional status threatened or questioned. Should doctors be able to talk about this? Should Phychologists and Psychiatrists be able to talk about this? Should relationship councilors be able to talk about this? Should this be discussed in University in human sexuality courses, or should we just discuss the missionary position and call it a day." (link)
"Oh anonymous, I'm a fag hag. I love gay men. I even kissed Scott Brison last night, twice. He was the only man I kissed all night. He said I looked great. O.K. there's a bit of a difference between a fag hag and a fruit fly, but that's a little above your head. I'm just a fruit fly. Fag Hags want to convert gay men. I don't. Shitting on people and pissing on people is ok, as long as it's done in private. It's no one's god damn business. Get over it. It happens all the time. Your conservative and intolerant view of it isn't going to stop it or make it go away. I'm sure you're o.k. with all kinds of things being done to women that I might personally find offensive, but it's their choice, not mine. Ask a dominatrix how many staight business men like to be dressed up as babies shit their pants and be changed. You can look that up in google under shit fetish as well, or a university level text book on human sexuality." (link)
"I will not be demeaned or threatened by you into being quiet. You are intolerant Chris [Bryden] even of clinical terminology and a biologically relevent explaination for your concerns. You can think whatever you like, but you can't impose it on anyone else. Do what you like with your body. Leave mine alone." (link)

Have fun in your new party, Scott. Now you won't have to listen to any nasty debates about sidewalk privatization.

I feel sorry for Jason Cherniak

2006-03-22T17:27:00.000-05:00

Hard to believe, maybe, but it's true. How did this happen? Read the comments on his last post, in which he calls Liberal leadership candidate and fiddler Ashley MacIsaac's urine obsession a "horrid fetish." Basically, things went like this:

Jason Cherniak: "Pissing on people is disgusting."

Legions of Liberal Bloggers: "No it isn't! How dare you be so intolerant! REPENT!"

Specifically...

Brian Dell: "Mr Cherniak needs to open up his mind a little. 'horrible fetish'? Good Liberals don't go around saying someone's private diversions are deviant. That's what socons do!" And then: "Mr MacIsaac would bring refreshing substance and gravity to the name, 'Liberal!'" ["refreshing" I guess is a relative term]
James Bowie: "Ashley MacIsaac is a cool dude."
s.b.: "Oh my God Jason ... You should know better. I believe Mr. Trudeau said it best, 'The government has no place in the bedrooms of the nation.'"
David Imrie: "I'm want to call Ashley MacIsaac a national icon simply because he is from Nova Scotia and plays the fiddle."
NBT: "You can't be either a liberal or a Liberal and go around saying that it's disgusting to pee on people ... Mr. Cherniak should retract his statements."

Jason has suspended comments on his site, and I can't say I blame him.

Actual Liberal Shadow Cabinet Revealed

2006-02-22T23:08:00.000-05:00

Well, the mole was clearly lying. The Liberal Party announced its Shadow Cabinet today, but aside from Opposition Leader Bill Graham, my predictions were wrong.

A full list of the critics is available here. Note to Liberals: several of you are no longer entitled to be known as "The Honourable." Sorry, Bill Matthews, Bonnie Brown, etc. Amazingly, 56 current Liberal MPs, a majority of their 102 seats, have managed to secure the "Honourable" title, mostly through appointments to the Privy Council.

Here are some of the highlights of the actual shadow cabinet:

The Associate Immigration Critic will be Andrew Telegdi, of "niggers because they want to be niggers" fame. Now he can apply his same insights to immigrants. Truly, a great pick!
The new Associate Critic of the Ministry of Complex Files is none other than Michael Ignatieff. Why not have a human resources critic who is so skilled with the AK-47?
The new Associate Social Development Critic is Omar Alghabra, of "Islamic Power" fame.
The new Transport Critic is Belinda Stronach. Now she can help bake us a bigger transportation pie (or something). Is this file complex enough?
The new Industry Critic will be former separatist Jean Lapierre.

One Day Story (No, Really)

2006-02-17T00:18:00.000-05:00

Well, it looks like the freakout is over. After listening to Liberals squeal in delight at the thought of retaking power after what Cherniak called the "worst week in world history," it now looks like (as predicted) Emerson-Fortier-gate has, if anything, helped Stephen Harper.

According to a new Decima poll, CPC support has held at around 35%, while Liberal support dropped 5% to 25%.

In other news, that nasty Stockwell Day is planning a number of initiatives:

He plans to hire 1,000 more police officers, and create an armed border patrol to keep the "bad guys" out of Canada. I am waiting for the official response from Liberal Public Safety Critic Omar Alghabra.
He plans to list the Tamil Tigers as a terrorist organization. Liberal Citizenship Critic Judy Sgro will likely be responding to this outrage.
He plans to improve Canada-U.S. relations. Liberal Foreign Affairs Critic Bonnie Brown will not be amused.
He plans to reveal the "shocking" true cost of the Liberal long gun registry, and then cancel it. This looks like a job for Liberal National Defense Critic Michael Ignatieff.

Meanwhile, the Young Liberals of Canada welcomed Liberal Opposition Leader Bill Graham.

Hypocrisy on Crossing the Aisle

2006-02-08T16:46:00.000-05:00

Paul Wells asked for examples of Conservative hypocrisy, denouncing Belinda and welcoming Emerson. He did not ask for examples of Liberal hypocrisy, welcoming Belinda and denouncing Emerson. According to Wells, it will be "harder to find nominees" for Liberal hypocrisy. Okay. Let me suggest a few:

(1) The Liberals: Who better than Belinda herself? According to Belinda, she jumped because of her principles, not to get a cabinet seat. Of course, she knew about Harper's principles all along, and still ran under Team Harper. Emerson, on the other hand, ran under Team Martin, and he was left election night wondering whether the new Liberal leader will be Belinda or Michael Ignatieff. As Belinda says, "People have got to be scratching their head. And I think it is very hypocritical." So do I, Ms. Stronach.

(2) The Media: There are probably hundreds of nominees, but my favourite is Jeffrey Simpson. He wrote a column on May 18, 2005, justifying Belinda: "What drove Belinda out" (hint: it was the socons). No need for a by-election then. And (surprise!) he thinks we definitely need one now. He wrote today in the Globe that "There ought to be a law against doing an Emerson, switching political parties without giving the electors a chance to pass judgment on the switch." OK. There ought to be a law against doing an Emerson. Doing a Belinda is just fine. Could that have anything to do with the parties they were jumping from/to?

(3) The Blogosphere: Jason Cherniak. No explanation needed, but just in case, compare this post from Belinda's crossing to any post in the last three days. Back then, he said Stronach's defection shows the Conservatives are too far right, and blamed it on Harper as follows: "Stephen Harper screwed up royally." Now, Emerson crosses, and Jason is definitely against this sort of thing ("MPs who cross the floor should run for re-election unless they sit as independents"). And Emerson doesn't show the Conservatives have moved to the centre. And once again, Harper Screwed Up! (surprise!). Jason, sometimes you need to figure out how to write something else.

Paul, I bought Maclean's last week, and I thought your massive election piece was great. But there's lots of hypocrisy to go around.

The Harper Cabinet

2006-02-06T18:22:00.000-05:00

I'm delighted with the new Harper cabinet. For a CPC majority, the party needs gains in the 905 and Quebec (including Greater Montreal), plus maybe a few more seats in Atlantic Canada and Vancouver's suburbs.

Seeing what has happened, I don't blame David Emerson for switching parties. With McKenna, Rock, Manley, and Tobin all out, the Liberal Party looks set to be led by someone like Ignatieff or Belinda. He just followed his principles, and isn't that what matters? That's what we've been hearing since Belinda jumped. I guess I'm wrong about him being the Canadian Heritage Critic for the Liberals (see below).

Speaking of my predictions, I'm still waiting for the Liberal shadow cabinet. Rick Mercer got only 1 of 12 predictions right: Vic Toews for Justice Minister. I think he'll be a great minister. I also think I'll get more than 1 of my 20 right.

Lastly, as I noted on Cherniak's site, I find all this faux Liberal outrage about Fortier and Emerson just hilarous. I just watched Politics with Don Newman, and the CBC journalists sounded like the Muslims protesting against those Danish cartoons (see below).

We have just heard since Jan 23 that Harper didn't win anything in Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver, so he didn't really win. And here he does something to ensure these cities are represented in cabinet, and listen to the howls of outrage!

Liberals didn't want anyone from Montreal, Vancouver, etc. in cabinet because they wanted Harper to fail. They wanted to remind everyone how his cabinet doesn't represent the big urban areas.

And now it does, and they don't know what to say.

Wonderful.

MOREOVER: The difference between Emerson and Belinda is this. When Paul Martin explained Belinda's decision had nothing to do with politics, all the reporters laughed in his face. When Stephen Harper explained Emerson's decision today at the press conference as being apolitical, and in the best interests of the country, nobody laughed.

UPDATE: Lorrie Goldstein comments as follows:

Forget about rabid Liberals who will whine about Harper's luring of Emerson. They have zero credibility based on how they gloated over Stronach's defection. Same goes for rabid Tories who were gloating yesterday that Emerson's defection is their revenge on the Liberals. They're hypocrites.

Now, I like Lorrie Goldstein. But please. Enough.

If they said, in response to Belinda, that all politicians who switch parties should resign and submit to a by-election first, and don't say that for Emerson, then yes, they're hypocritical. If they said you shouldn't be able to switch to a new party, and only be allowed to become an independent, and then turn around and welcome Emerson, then yes, it's hypocritical.

But just because some Conservatives were upset to lose Stronach, and happy to gain Emerson, it doesn't make them hypocrites. This is politics. Some people need to wake up.

The Religion of Peace

2006-02-05T22:07:00.000-05:00

At the risk of having more people threaten lawsuits, or criminal prosecutions, or whatever, let me boldly say, what is wrong with these people?

In 2002, literally hundreds of people were killed in riots concerning the Miss World beauty pageant.

It's now 2006. And how many more people will be killed because of a few cartoons? If you want, you can keep track, at The Religion of Peace.

Terrorist attacks, horrific murders of innocent people, stoning women and gays to death for "vice" ... and Muslim leaders typically respond in one of two ways: (a) death to non-believers! or (b) well, we don't condone this activity, and we're concerned about Islamophobic reactions.

But dear God, let someone have a beauty pageant, or draw a cartoon, or "mishandle" the Qur'an, and all hell breaks loose. As this woman suggests, it's time for another Holocaust.

A few embarrassed Muslims have helpfully noted that "We condemn the shameful actions carried out by a few Arabs and Muslims around the world that have tarnished our image, and presented us as intolerant and close-minded bigots." The problem is that many, though not all, are exactly that.

UPDATE: Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak has warned the cartoons might lead to "terrorism and radicalism." Crazy thought: if you respond to a drawing by blowing up innocent people, aren't you really a terrorist to begin with?

You have nothing to fear, but...

2006-02-05T07:38:00.000-05:00

The Liberal response to my post below has been predictable: more fearmongering (can't they do anything else?). Some people have started deleting comments from other people from their blogs, fearing they might be charged or sued. Jason Cherniak has added a disclaimer on his blog to correct the scores of people who think all the comments on his blog reflect his opinions. Others say I'd better get a good lawyer.

Well, as a member of the bar, I thought I'd take this opportunity to perform a public service and provide some quick advice to the Canadian blogosphere: Don't let them scare you (too much). Defamatory libel is a very serious offence, and you absolutely should not engage in it. But simply writing things that Liberals find inconvenient is not necessarily libel (although you wouldn't know it from reading some of their outraged responses).

As I noted at Cherniak's site, the Supreme Court ruled, in R. v. Lucas [1998] 1 SCR 439, that for a defamatory libel conviction, the Crown must prove knowledge of falsity and intent to defame beyond a reasonable doubt (as someone else noted, C.C.C. s. 309 also applies). I have done a fair amount of research into the Graham story, as you see below, and while I'm not
totally convinced the story is true, at this point I think it's more likely true than not. I certainly have no knowledge of falsity. My intent is to raise this issue, because I think it's a serious one, and I'm very disturbed that Mr. Graham has not addressed it. I respect politicians who want to keep their private lives private, but hey, when Fab, Frank, Eye, FrontPage, LifeSite, Free Dominion, etc. (not to mention Lawrence Metherel) basically accuse you of being a pedophile, that's a good time to speak up, and maybe start suing people (assuming the allegations are false).

I don't see this as an issue of Charter rights and freedom of expression; I see it as a duty to point this out, before our government (or Official Opposition, at least) becomes a total laughingstock. What if Metherel shows up back in Toronto in the next few months, eager to talk to the media? Look, I actually have a lot of respect for a lot of Liberals: there are several worthy candidates for the job that were overlooked. (Don't worry, I won't embarrass them by mentioning them here.)

Anyway, this might be hard for the Libranos to understand but citizens are entitled to make fair comment on matters of public interest without fear of persecution and defamation claims. Remember to be responsible with what you write; be diligent, check your sources, do all the research you can, and decide for yourself. No one publishing an honest opinion on a matter of public importance, having thus acted, will be convicted or held liable for anything.

Liberal Shadow Cabinet Revealed

2006-02-02T14:38:00.000-05:00

Rick Mercer revealed the Conservative Cabinet a few weeks ago. With the help of the Liberal campaign mole, I am now able to reveal most of the new Liberal Shadow Cabinet. Of course, if I've forgotten anyone, please let me know.

Overall, Liberals will miss the experience of several former MPs, including:

Alphonso Gagliano (AdScam)
Jane Stewart ($1B HRDC Scandal)
Allan Rock ($2B Long Gun Registry Fiasco)
David Dingwall ("I am entitled to my entitlements")
Art Eggleton (untendered contract to girlfriend Maggie Maier)
Don Boudria (vacations with Claude Boulay)
Ethel Blondin-Andrew (fur coats on government credit card)
Claudette Bradshaw (Irving flight scandal)
David Smith (Abotech)
Jean-Guy Carignan (hit and run)
Tony Valeri (Landswapgate)
Elinor Caplan (opponents are "bigots, racists and Holocaust deniers")
Carolyn Parrish ("Americans, I hate those bastards") ... and of course,
Jean Chretien (Shawinigate, and François Beaudoin).

But there's still an outstanding group of MPs ready to take their place in Canada's next Shadow Cabinet. Here they are:

Bill Gr aham - Opposition Leader and Critic, Families and Caregivers
On February 1, 2006, it was announced that Bill Graham will be the Leader of the Official Opposition. Graham is notorious for having a sexual relationship with a 15 year old boy, Lawrence Metherel, while he was married with two children. But what is not known is that Graham apparently then provided Metherel with support payments of $1,500 a month for 15 years. So, he has valuable experience as a caregiver that will be put to good use in the shadow cabinet.

UPDATE: Some people have commented that Graham's failure to address these accusations is telling, especially since they originally appeared in Fab Magazine, a Toronto-based gay publication that's surely popular in Graham's own riding. But as Jason Cherniak has helpfully noted, "one person's unsubstantiated claim does not a rapist make." Besides, it's not true that Graham hasn't addressed this. In an interview published in the Globe and Mail on January 22, 2002 (but not available online), he said "People might be interested in that aspect of my private life, but it is not relevant to my performance as a politician."

He added that he's "at total ease with himself and the respect of my family and friends and the Prime Minister who put me here." So, what's everybody upset about, eh?

UPDATE PART II: Frank Magazine is back, with an article titled "Bill Graham Makes Canadian Political History! Bisexualist Opposition Leader." Way to go Bill!

Keith Martin - Critic, Health
Keith jumped to the Liberals from the Canadian Alliance in 2004, saying he was "excited" that Paul Martin is not "wedded to the Canada Health Act." Although Paul Martin quickly denied it, he does go to a private clinic himself. His doctor of 23 years, Sheldon Elman, is the founder and CEO of the Medisys Health Group.

As a medical doctor himself, Keith has long campaigned to allow parallel, private health care services. It will truly be exciting to watch him fight for needed reform as the new Health Critic of the Official Opposition.

Omar Alghabra - Critic, Public Safety and Security
Canada's new terror-supporting, Islamist member of Parliament has been very active on security issues. He has denounced the RCMP, CSIS, OPP, and called Bill C-7, the Public Safety Act to impede terrorist activities, "offensive." However, he recently refused to condemn suicide bombings.

As President of the Canadian Arab Federation, he opposed calls to designate Hamas, Hezbollah, and Islamic Jihad as terrorist organizations. When CanWest media called these organizations terrorist groups, he condemned them for bias. He is also involved with the Islamic Society of North America, which is currently being investigated in the US for ties to terrorism. It is not known whether he personally agrees with his colleague Susan Azzeh's comment that "Maybe it's time to blow up some Jews." However, he does support and speak for Solidarity for Palestinian Human Rights, which helped incite the 2002 Concordia riots.

Unfortunately, our new critic of public safety and security will not be able to travel to the US until he passes a security check, including fingerprinting. Unless of course the US relents and stops their racist discriminatory practices.

Bonnie Brown - Critic, Foreign Affairs
Bonnie is well known for comparing the war in Iraq to the attack on Pearl Harbor. She also compared the U.S. to the Nazis moving across Europe, and noted that the U.S. is only in Iraq because of oil, the bad U.S. economy, politics, to create business for arms dealers, to deflect attention away from Enron... and so on.

With Bonnie on the job as Foreign Affairs Critic, we can be sure that Canada-U.S. relations will enter a new Golden Age.

Michael Ignatieff - Critic, National Defense
Michael ("Iggy") has taken a lot of criticism for some unfortunate comments about Ukrainians ("peasant embroidered shirts, the nasal whine of ethnic instruments, phoney Cossacks in cloaks and boots"). But look, he was misunderstood, okay? And he doesn't support torture either (more misunderstanding). Or the Iraq war (that was as a private individual).

Clearly, he can make a fine National Defense Critic. There's even a video of him showing a bunch of Kurdish terrorists how to use an AK-47 machine gun in Turkey in 1993. Surely he can use these skills to train our army, or perhaps our customs officials, who those nasty Conservatives plan to arm with guns.

Scott Brison - Critic, Government Accountability
Like Keith Martin, Scott jumped to the Liberals in 2004. Since then, he has demonstrated his commitment to accountability as Public Works Minister.

Take, for example, his recent remarks in a crowded Wolfville restaurant to Sandra McGrath, who had asked for his help with an employment insurance position:

"I’ve got something to tell you, I’ll be the MP for a very, very long time and you can kiss my ass."

UPDATE: Scott is also bilingual, so he can be accountable in both official languages. When his personal assistant Adele Desjardins told him he's falling behind in his French lessions, he corrected her as follows: "How dare u speak to me like that?"

Ralph Goodale - Critic, Finance
Yes, Ralph will be back as Finance Critic.

Don't you believe all this talk about the Income Trust scandal/leak. That's just the kind of hocus-pocus make-believe that will lead us right into a gaping black hole of the kind of deficits we saw under Mulroney and Harris.

Ralph will be an invaluable Finance Critic. As one of the only remaining people who don't believe there is a fiscal imbalance, his work on this issue will be a true asset to Canada.

Jean Lapierre - Critic, National Unity
As a founder of the separatist Bloc Quebecois, Paul Martin's Quebec lieutenant certainly understands the national unity file. And just because he co-founded a separatist party, as Paul Martin said, it doesn't mean that he's a separatist.

Some might say that he still believes in separatism, that he calls his opponents Nazis too much, or that he ran screaming like a maniac through the streets of Calgary in 1990 after Chretien won the Liberal leadership, but with him as our National Unity Critic, we can be sure that the future of our country is secure.

(If Jean decides to go back to radio instead, the new National Unity Critic will surely be Joe Comuzzi. He did say, in response to AdScam, that "that's just the way things are done in Quebec." But he apologized, so it's really a non-issue.)

Belinda Stronach - Critic, Skills Development (and Other Complex Files)
Although Belinda dropped out during her first year at York University, she has valuable experience in business and politics. She is clearly multi-talented, as she showed by praising and then demonizing Mike Harris, and demonizing and then praising Paul Martin, depending on her party at the time.

With Belinda as Canada's new Skills Development Critic, we can rest easy knowing that she will show the new government the way to bake a bigger economic pie for all Canadians.

TODAY'S QUOTE: "En anglais, s'il vous plaît, yeah."

Paul Martin - Critic, Environment
It's true: the former PM will be back on a temporary basis as Environment Critic. He has a wealth of knowledge about this issue, as his company, Canada Steamship Lines, has a long track record of polluting the Great Lakes.

In fact, his ships often dumped iron ore pellets into the Great Lakes, mostly at night or when no other ships were around to avoid being seen. In 2002, CSL was fined $125,000 for attempting to cover up an oil leak 22 nautical miles long and fifteen meters wide near Halifax. This was the largest ever fine for ship-based pollution in the history of Canada, since the "offender obtained significant material gains by choosing not to properly maintain the pollution prevention equipment on board the CSL Atlas."

Environment Critic Martin will be able to use his experience to ensure that the proper regulations are in place so that his company refrains from polluting the Great Lakes in the future.

Judy Sgro - Critic, Citizenship and Immigration
The former Minister of Immigration is unfortunately known mainly for her role in Strippergate, in which she put exotic dancers from Romania on the fast track for citizenship in exchange for work on her election campaigns (and free pizza deliveries from an Indian who was trying to avoid being deported). Apparently, she has also employed suspected terrorists and war criminals from North Korea and Sri Lanka, some as "senior staffers." But it is important to remember that she has denied (most of) the allegations.

And besides, she did great work on the stripper visa program. As Immigration Critic, we can be sure she will work hard to ensure that Romanian strippers and assorted terrorists who work on her re-election campaign are granted Canadian citizenship.

Tom Wappel - Critic, Veterans Affairs
Tom has a bad reputation because of an episode in 2001, in which an 81 year-old war veteran wrote to him to ask for help in getting veterans benefits, and Tom responded as follows:

"According to my records, you were a past supporter of mine, yet it seems that in this past election you supported the Canadian Alliance. How is that you are writing me for help if you did not think enough of my abilities to justify voting for me."

But as Tom explained to the Toronto Star, he is fully justified in helping only those who vote Liberal: "I can decide who to help or not to help."

With Tom Wappel as Veterans Affairs Critic, we can be sure that he will work tirelessly to ensure that veterans who voted Liberal will get all the benefits to which they are entitled.

Andy Scott - Critic, Solicitor General
The member for Fredericton, and former Solicitor General, is well known for accidentally revealing the former government's plans to prejudice the APEC inquiry in 1998. On the other hand, he has invaluable experience acting as a "cover" to protect Prime Minister Chretien from the RCMP Public Complaints Commission.

He will make a fine Critic of the Solicitor General.

Lawrence MacAulay - Critic, Public Works
Sure, Lawrence was forced to resign after Ethics Counsellor Howard Wilson concluded that he breached conflict of interest rules by directing government projects and contracts to his friends and family, including a $3.5-million RCMP grant to Holland College in P.E.I., headed by his brother.

But look at it this way: there are only about 138,000 people in P.E.I. MacAulay has a big family. It was just a mistake. He'll be a great Public Works Critic.

Hedy Fry - Critic, Multiculturalism
The former Minister of State for Multiculturalism is notorious for her comments that "crosses are burning on the lawns of Prince George as we speak." The RCMP then noted that no crosses have been burned in Prince George for over 20 years.

But let's keep things in perspective. As Hedy has since noted, it was her "job was to track hate crimes and hate activity in Canada." And as the Multiculturalism Critic, she can continue to track down these crimes, maybe on a lawn near you.

Andrew Telegdi - Associate Critic, Multiculturalism
Yes, multiculturalism is an important issue (like democratic reform), so the Liberals need two Multiculturalism Critics.

Andrew has distinguished himself by calling Waterloo students "niggers because they want to be niggers."

This was not a racial slur though, just an intellectual Marxist saying. He was misunderstood. So it's surely not important that he defended the comments and refused to apologize in January 2006.

Colleen Beaumier - Critic, Social Development
Colleen is known for her comments to the effect that before U.S. intervention, Iraq under Saddam Hussein was "a progressive country with health care for all and education and human rights for women."

Of course, there were a few rape rooms, and horrific torture and executions, but that's not really what she meant.

David Emerson - Critic, Canadian Heritage
David might be best known for saying that Jack Layton has a "boiled dog's head smile", which is apparently a traditional Chinese insult.

As a Critic, David Emerson will enhance our Canadian heritage by insulting other MPs with traditional sayings from other cultures.

He can also help Hedy Fry track down hate activity in Canada.

Ujjal Dosanjh - Critic, Ethics Reform
Ujjal, like many others above, jumped from another party (this time the NDP) into a Liberal cabinet post. Unfortunately he has a bad reputation for trying to bribe other MPs to do likewise, especially before crucial non-confidence votes.

He was caught on tape trying to bribe Gurmant Grewal and his wife Nina, both conservative MPs, to abstain from a vote, or even join the Liberals, in summer 2005. On the tapes, he promises rewards ("Cabinet right away may be possible"), and tells Grewal to wait, because eventually all defections are rewarded "99.9% of the time." He doesn't promise anything explicitly, because such negotiations "require certain degree of deniability."

Don't believe all that though. Those tapes were doctored. Dosanjh will bring a fresh new perspective to ethical reform, and ensure that the proper regulations are in place to prevent him from bribing other MPs in the future.

Albina Guarnieri - Critic, Status of Women
As the Status of Women Critic, Albina will work to protect a woman's right to choose (to establish the supremacy of life and the protection of the unborn).

"The decision as to which life merits protection cannot be left to judges, doctors, or even women themselves. The issue must be dealt with on a national level by Parliament so that we as elected representatives may once and for all establish the supremacy of life and the protection of the unborn as would befit a civilized society. We must not be condemned by a future Parliament for legitimizing the termination of hundreds of thousands of unborn Canadians."
- Albina Guarnieri

"Bill C-43 is abortion on demand with red tape...In effect, the legislation makes it possible for women to seek and obtain abortions for reasons that may have more to do with lifestyle considerations than with actual physical endangerment."
- Albina Guarnieri

"In fact, the health clause will operate as nothing more than a rubber stamp condonement of abortion on demand. It will allow women to abort their unborn child based on a fleeting notion of immediate convenience."
- Albina Guarnieri

These are just 20 of the members of the new Shadow Cabinet. The final configuration, of course, will depend on Prime Minister Harper's Cabinet. He is expected to name 28-30 ministers, so the Liberals will need to find another 8-10 or so Shadow Ministers.

Let me know if you have any ideas on who they're going to pick.

(Take that, Mercer.*)

* No taxpayer dollars were used in writing this post.