This is quite distressing.
We have seen the purging of essential information from police and military training manuals in the US, but at least up here, in Canada, we have a Prime Minister who is not afraid to say out loud that the greatest threat to Canada’s security is Islamic terrorism.
Yet, we are seeing this same linguistic purging going on in CSIS?!?!?
This is not good, not good at all.
When political correctness trumps public safety, we are all …….’d!
Having said this, I am not surprised.
Over the years, I have interacted with a large number of high level civil servants – and not only do I speak their language, I am very, very familiar with their thought patterns and behaviours. For example, when Stephen Harper’s Conservative government was firs elected, I heard conversations among the highest echelons of the civil service on how best to circumvent the government’s will, how to intentionally introduce flaws into programs they are ordered by the government to implement so as to make the elected officials look foolish, and so on. (The mandarins did not know I was not on their team….)
Which is why, whenever someone raises the issue of term limits of elected officials, I suggest that we create term limits for how long an individual may serve in the civil service, regardless of the level. After all, inexperienced elected officials and VERY experienced apartchicks does not a good governance structure make!
I would recommend capping any individual’s term limit to work for ANY level of the civil service at no more than 12 years…
But, I digress…
This year, for Christmas, I bought my kids each a copy of Sun Tzu’s ‘The Art of War’.
One of the first lessons it teaches is that if you cannot name/define the enemy, you have already lost.
Keep that in mind as you watch this video, which shows that increasingly, our security forces are not permitted to name/define the enemy.
Sad, so sad…
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
TORONTO, January 31, 2014 — B’nai Brith Canada, the country’s senior Jewish human rights organization, has been informed that the Ontario Attorney General (AG) has not consented to the laying of hate crime charges against Mr. Elias Hazineh. Hazineh, who spoke at the Iranian-inspired Al-Quds Day rally at Queen’s Park to an adoring crowd, was caught on video issuing an ultimatum that Israeli Jews either leave Jerusalem or be shot.
“We are disappointed by the decision not to confront hatred on the streets of Toronto,” said Frank Dimant, CEO, B’nai Brith Canada. “It seems that we have sadly grown accustomed to hearing hateful rhetoric spewed at these pro-Iranian-regime, anti-Israel events. As we have noted, Al-Quds Day, a now annual event, is a route by which Canadians are being exposed to the radical and hateful ideologies of the late Ayatollah Khomeini and the banned terrorist group Hezbollah.
Don’t get me wrong – I am a ‘free speech absolutist’.
But, as others keep reminding me, we do have laws on the books in Canada that make ‘incitement to violence’ a criminal offense – and ‘incitement to violence against a group protected on either racial or religious grounds’ is not only a ‘simple’ criminal offense but a ‘hate crime’…
….and, when AT THE SAME TIME incitement to violence against ‘Jews’ becomes acceptable and is not acted upon by ‘the authorities’, our society has stopped being decent….or civilized!!!!
Sad, so sad…
As I have been busy for the last few days attending Essentials of Freedomconference in Edmonton, Alberta, (they have been kind enough to ask me to say a few words on the topic of Cultural Marxism and Political Correctness), I have been a little busier than usual. (More on this later!)
CodeSlinger has been very gracious and has stepped in with a most excellent guest post (note – edited to insert source links):
In a two-year-long experiment, four elementary schools in New Zealand got rid of all safety rules governing playtime at recess and lunch break. Kids could go back to climbing trees, skateboarding, bike-riding, or playing such barbaric games as dodge ball, bull rush, or tag. Just like they used to, before the nanny state ruined everything.
Of course, the playground immediately descended into mayhem, the infirmary was flooded with injured children, and the learning environment was hopelessly disrupted…
Actually, when you let children play vigorously, and you give them freedom, the children are better behaved overall, more able to concentrate in class, and less likely to get hurt at play.
Oh, the horror!
The progressive matriarchs and their metrosexual disciples, who hold the school system in their politically correct clutches, were left palpitating in scandalized disbelief. To them, vigorous play is violent and dangerous, and freedom is the deplorable result of inadequate supervision. And evidence to the contrary is simply not acceptable!
These same progressive matriarchs and metrosexuals, who manufacture clueless, helpless, fearful people by never letting kids take a risk, were shocked and outraged to find that kids are actually pretty good at not hurting themselves or each other when you let them do what they want.
“The great paradox of cotton-woolling children is it’s more dangerous in the long-run,” says Grant Schofield, a professor of public health at Auckland University of Technology. We need a university professor to tell us this? Well, apparently, progressives do. You can tell he’s talking to progressives, because he calls this a great paradox. Normal people just
call it obvious.
These same progressive matriarchs and metrosexuals, who think that social order can only by maintained by breaking young spirits to the yoke of collectivism, were confused and distressed to discover that kids have neither the time nor the inclination to get into trouble when they’re busy playing interesting and energetic games.
“The time children get into trouble is when they are not busy, motivated and engaged. It’s during that time they bully other kids, graffiti or wreck things around the school,” says Bruce McLachlan, Principal of Swanson Primary School in Auckland. But his words are lost on progressives, who are too intent on undermining religion and tradition to admit the truth of
age-old proverbs like, “idle hands are the Devil’s playthings.”
These same progressive matriarchs and metrosexuals, who think the purpose of a primary education is to turn boys into little girls, were perplexed and disturbed to observe that kids have a much easier time sitting still and concentrating in class when you let them burn off enough energy during recess.
This is especially true of boys. Girls don’t find it that hard to conform to the sedentary, structured classroom setting. But healthy young boys have enormous amounts of energy, which they simply cannot keep bottled up. Therefore, progressives forbid them from burning it off, and then punish them when they can’t sit still. And when that doesn’t work, reach for the
drugs. Progressives call this “positive socialization,” but normal people call it punishing boys for being boys.
Four schools in Auckland were involved in the experiment and all reported similar findings: bullying and vandalism dropped sharply, the time-out area was completely emptied out, playground accidents were reduced, and classroom performance was improved.
In spite of these dramatic successes, only one of these four schools cared enough to make this way of doing things permanent. (Note: the principal of that school was a man.)
Still, one is better than none, and we can hope that this is the first hint of the beginning of the end of the politically correct progressive stranglehold on our public schools.
But as of right now, it’s obvious that the vast majority of school principals care much more about the politically correct progressive agenda than they do about the well-being of your kids.
Remember that, next time progressives exhort you to think of the children!
When members of the media are afraid to criticize a member of their country’s Military, who they honestly believe had abused his position of authority for personal gain/power, we have a problem.
Yet, that is exactly the situation we find ourselves in, in Canada, in 2014.
More and more voices in the media are being silenced through lifetime gag orders against them, brought about through the actions of a specific Agent of the State (and member of the Military, none-the-less)!
This has created such an unprecedented chill on speech that news reporters – even when addressing the public – refer to him as ‘He Who Must Not be Named’!
Help one of his latest victims, Mark and Connie Fournier, by popping over to Indiegogo and listening to their story, spreading it through the internet and, if you have the means, perhaps dropping a few pennies to their legal fund.
P.S. This is an interesting twist on the story: the guy doing the silencing had, in the past, been a candidate for election as a member of a political party deeply philosophically opposed to the party one of his targets had been a candidate for… Do we really want to have the courts be the ones settling philosophical differences between various political parties and their candidates/supporters? In my never-humble-opinion, this is one very slippery slope…
Sad, but true.
As of today, January 23, 2014, and after 13 years online, Free Dominion is closing its doors to the public. We have been successfully censored.
Today, Ontario Superior Court Justice Robert Smith issued an order in the Richard Warman vs Mark and Connie Fournier and John Does defamation case heard September, 2013. In addition to ordering that we must pay Warman $127,000, Justice Smith issued an injunction against us ordering we that never publish, or allow to be published, anything negative about Richard Warman. This means we are barred for life from ever operating a public forum or a blog (even about cookie recipes) where the public can comment. If we do so, any one of Warman’s handful of supporters could, and probably would, use a common proxy server to avoid being traced, plant a negative comment about Warman on our site, and we would both be charged with contempt of court. If that happened –unlike in the Ottawa courtroom where we were blocked at every turn from presenting a defense– we actually would have no defense. We would both go to jail. This life sentence was imposed for our terrible crimes of voicing our honestly held beliefs and allowing others to do the same. Defamation law, in its current state, is entirely inadequate and counterproductive when applied to the internet. Now it is being used as a tool of censorship. Effectively!
We are assessing our options.
Mark and Connie Fournier
“If it takes force to impose your ideas on your fellow man, there is something wrong with your ideas. If you are willing to use force to impose your ideas on your fellow man, there is something wrong with you.” – Mark Fournier
Happy Martin Luther King day!
What exactly is Political Correctness?
What is Critical Theory?
Why do feminists attack European/Christian/Jewish misogyny, but no other form?
Why is the American brief history of Slavery the only form condemned by modern inteligentsia?
I have written a little about this, and the one and Only CodeSlinger has not only widely commented on the topic, but also guest-posted ‘What is Cultural Marxism’.
If you prefer the answers in a video format, here is a very accessible summary (saying much of what CodeSlinger’s post several years ago explained) by PJ Media’s Bill Whittle:
Surprise, surprise: yet another enemy of real food attacks the traditional diet…
What is interesting in this article (and makes it worth reading) is this bit:
In 2009, former editor–in–chief of the New England Journal of Medicine Marcia Angell admitted that the “evidence-based” studies published in her former publication and most other “scientific” journals are totally unreliable:
“It is simply no longer possible to believe much of the clinical research that is published, or to rely on the judgment of trusted physicians or authoritative medical guidelines. I take no pleasure in this conclusion, which I reached slowly and reluctantly over my two decades as an editor of The New England Journal of Medicine.”
In her bombshell article, Drug Companies and Doctors: A Story of Corruption, she documents how doctors and scientists are bought and paid for by Big Pharma.
“Clinical trials are also biased through designs for research that are chosen to yield favorable results for sponsors,” she writes.
Yet more evidence pouring in that ‘peer-review’ is more of a ‘pal-review’…
For a deeply insightful commentary on the state of science today, see CodeSlinger’s comment here.