Archive for July, 2007

Over at Big City Loser, Smithers offers these comments on the attack on FD….

Flanders is planning an on-line petition, and though I don’t sign such things,my good buddy Galactus, Eater of Worlds, will probably show up and put his name to it. When details become
available, I will let everyone know. I’m sure “Heywood J. Blome” will want to show his support for Free Speech, Liberty, and etc.

How so predictably liberal. Let someone else fight (and pay for) something you enjoy. Isn’t that always the case with a socialist? It’s always someone else’s problem, and if a problem is to be addressed, let the government (i.e. somebody else) take on the problem. Rarely do you see a liberal taking on any sort of individual sacrifice or personal responsibility. The whole global warming hysteria is certainly a prime example of that one.

That’s why it usually takes conservatives to fight for and defend our country and its REAL values. One could kind of respect people who choose not to participate in something they don’t believe in, even if they are in the wrong. We can cut some slack to them, giving them the benefit of the doubt.

But for liberals who sit back and enjoy the hard fought battles by conservatives while not even lifting a finger (or a pen for that matter) in support? That’s a bit much – even for a liberal.

It’s not like we are asking them to actually contribute money or anything. That would be simply unfathomable.

And the fact that this is not about FD at all, but for the “right” to post their vile garbage, which on average and without prejudice, is 100 fold greater than you will ever see on a typical conservative discussion board. And they know it too.

But time will tell how they react when one of their own gets nailed for a “human rights” abuse. And when they try and rally support to end this madness, we can all just sit back on this side of the aisle and quip:

“We don’t sign such things.”


Comments 4 Comments »

(London) The president of the Islamic Medical Association has been called before Britain’s medical profession’s board of conduct following a particularly vicious attack on gays in a medical journal.

In a letter to the editor of Pulse – a journal for British doctors – Dr Muhammad Siddiq allegedly said that gay patients deserve neither help nor pity but they do need “the stick of the law to put them on the right path.”

“There is punishment and fine if you throw rubbish or filth in the streets. The gays are worse than the ordinary careless citizen,” the letter said. It also claimed that gays “are causing the spread of disease with their irresponsible behavior. They are the root of many sexually transmitted diseases.”



Remember what I said earlier about the false alliance between Islam and the Left? There will come a time when Islam will not accept this kind of treatment from the Secular commisars. And when that happen….

Cue the Cars….

Let the good times roll.

Let the good times roll.


Comments No Comments »

Watch this clip from Michael Coren’s show regarding the complaint launched against FD.

Two things:

#1 – Bill Whatcott is not the subject of the complaint. Connie Wilkins is. That does not really come through in the “discussion.”

#2 – Michael should have flattened these two “ladies” by reminding them that Mr. Whatcott made it clear THREE times that his beef was not against normal Muslims but extremist and violent ones.

Comments No Comments »

Wiesbaden, Germany – In the Rhine Valley city of Mannheim, the glittering minaret of Germany’s biggest mosque overshadows what was once the region’s most vibrant church, testifying to Muslims’ new confidence as Christian churches are closing down.

Years ago, 180 sisters of the Catholic order of the Sisters of the Divine Savior were the pulse of the city. Today, eight remain. Every weekend, roughly 150 Roman Catholics attend mass at the Liebfrauen Church, while up to 3,000 Muslims throng the Yavuz-Sultan-Selim mosque. Since the mosque was opened in 1995, Muslim shops and youth centers have become a magnet for the Muslim community.

Mannheim is not unique. Across Europe, the Continent’s fastest-growing religion is establishing its public presence after decades in basements and courtyards, changing not only the architectural look of cities, but also their social fabrics.

Hailed by many as a sign of Muslim integration, the phenomenon is also feared as evidence of a parallel Islamic world threatening Europe’s Christian culture.


In other news….

NEW YORK, July 26, 2007 — Charles Merrill, the artist who recently edited the Holy Bible with a black marker and pair of sissors, has lately burned a rare Islamic Holy Book, The Koran, valued at $60,000.00, in an undisclosed Chicago location. “The purpose of editing and burning Abrahamic Holy Books is to eliminate homophobic hate,” Merrill stated. “Both ancient books are terrorist manuals.”



So, in light of the Left’s support for the complaint against Free Dominion, I am reading these stories and I cannot help but shake my head.

I am wondering just how any thinking human being cannot see what the future holds.

I have a question for you, Mr. Lefty. When you finish your job at silencing Christians and social conservatives, making them completely voiceless and powerless, just who do you think you will be dealing with next?

When I ran against Dalton McGuinty and John Baird, the Liberal Party loved it because I was draining votes from the Conservative Party. The Liberals didn’t like me. But for them, I was the useful idiot who ensured that I would steal away some votes from their nearest competitor.

Well, it’s the same thing here, except that Christians and social conservatives are being squeezed out of the political landscape all together, and all that will remain are the Islamists and the Left to fight in the political new world order.

The Left and the Islamists have some very, very tough obstacles to overcome. These factions use each other to destroy social conservatives politically, but eventually they will have to deal with one another. And that is not going to be pretty for obvious reasons.

When the Left finally figures out that it made a very horrible mistake in squashing the civil liberties and power of their western conservative brethren, it will be too little and too late.

The enemy of your enemy is not always your friend.

Comments No Comments »

There is a dark cloud rolling across this once Christian soil,
where the saints and martyrs once preached and toiled.

Do you not know that they came to bring the gospel of Jesus Christ,
to a nation which had not yet known or heard or seen the Light?

They shed their blood and preached the Good News,
but it cost them their lives for there was no freedom of speech to use.

And in our day, we must really wonder,
what are they thinking of us and our bankrupted culture?

So I must ask you my Catholic brethren,
do you even care anymore about this country’s direction?

You come to Mass and smile and say ,
“what a beautiful, lovely and wonderful day”.

“But my hour is up now and I must be going,
there’s much relaxation, comfort, and leisure to be enjoying.”

And when you leave that church on Sunday morn,
do you even know or recognize the hatred against us in this culture of scorn?

For if you did your moral duty and voted correctly,
we would not be in this mess today under yoke of tyrannical Lefties.

For I’ll tell you straight so there is no mistake: your vote for that liberal politician
will cost me my livelihood, my house, and my position.

When you receive Our Eucharistic Lord do you think of my children
who will have to pay dearly for your treacherous sin and poor decision?

Do you not know me? I am sure you do.
Because you wave to me sometimes and say “how do you do?”

I am the guy that comes to 9AM Mass with my wife and four children
to give God the glory, praise and submission.

“What a lovely family”, I sometimes hear you say,
“things surely are looking up for our church today”.

But what will you say when I am no longer there,
forced to sell my house, my possessions, indeed – all that I have -
because the kangaroo koolaid kourts have stripped me bare.

My Catholic Brethren, when the thought police come after me, will you even care?
Now that you have been too accustomed to this world and its snares.

Will you put up any resistance, will you risk anything at all?
Or will it be time to go back to eating popcorn, beer, and watching the game of ball?

And make no mistake so we all know the score to follow,
your inaction and sloth today consigns my children to the gallows tomorrow.

So I say ‘Repent! Repent!’ and let’s put things aright.
For God’s judgement is soon to fall whether you like it or not.

For calling yourself Catholic means diddly squat,
for a Catholic in name only means nothing to God.

“Away from me, away from me, you wicked people of tin,
for I know you not because you did not care enough to resist the man of sin.

Freedom and truth in my Son’s blood I gave to you,
but you chose instead to be ruled by the Star Chamber few

Comments 2 Comments »

Students of history will have heard of SMERSH. It was a forerunner of the KGB, a Communist Party commissariat under Josef Stalin. SMERSH was empowered to investigate and arrest conspirators and public critics of “the Party” – people living in the former Soviet Union didn’t have constitutional freedoms.

Well, Canada has its own commissariats, in the form of Human Rights Commissions.

Some people refer to them as “kangaroo courts,” but that is misleading because they really are dangerous. That’s why I call them Commie-Commissions, and like SMERSH, they are empowered to investigate anyone who does not abide with the current stream of political correctness.

The most recent case that illustrates the Commie-Commissions’ contempt for free speech rights is a complaint against Connie Wilkins, the owner of

Read the rest here.

Comments No Comments »

Comments 1 Comment »

What keeps a society civilized?

The Law, in part.

But the law itself is not what keeps society civilized. In reality, it is the respect for the law that does so.

As Canadian citizens, we have certain unalienable human rights as a free people. One of these rights is to be treated fairly under the law regardless of social demographic. We expect, nay demand, that if a crime is perpertrated against one person, then the law should punish the perpetrator for the crime committed, irrespective of who the victim is.

Yet today in Canada, the only persons who qualify to be discriminated against appear to be Christians.

In the case of the uproar caused by the complaint filed against Free Dominion, this observation is even more pronounced. A previous edition of featured a strongly anti-Catholic cartoon caricature of Pope Benedict XVI. In the animated cartoon, the pope repeatedly marches to a statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary, then gives a Nazi salute with the caption “Heil Mary.”

Apparently, a Catholic complained to the Canadian Human Rights Commission. The complaint was dismissed. It remains to be seen, however, if the same result will forthcoming against Bill Whatcott for his comments (via Free Dominion) against radical Islam, which were well within the purview of reasonable debate and discussion.

If the decision against Free Dominion is not dismissed completely, how, I wonder, will anyone ask social conservatives and Christians, in particular, to respect the rule of law in this country?

Once the law loses the sense of objectivity and fairness, the people under its yoke will not remain there for too long without revolt. And, if the law becomes even more repressive and punitive, violence is not an impossibility.

The Left should not presume that the tyranny of these Kangaroo courts will not impact them. Because what keeps their government in power is the Right’s respect for the law, but when the sense of fairness and justice are removed from the law, then just how long can the oppressed give authority to those who abuse their duty?

The Islamists have long figured out that if you want to beat Western Civilization, you threaten it, intimidate it, and then attack it. They know that the Left wing of the political spectrum will buckle in and retreat, retreat, retreat. They retreat because they have no meaning beyond this world, and they would rather give up a little bit of territory and a little bit of freedom every day, then actually having to confront the terrible sacrifice it is going to cost for us to maintain our way of life. Islam has the after life. Athiestic Secularism does not. It is not difficult to see who is going to win.

And in there lies the enormous irony in this whole situation: the Right’s respect for the rule of law and the Left’s refusal to apply that law fairly will end up destroying our civilization.

O Canada, when are we going to stand on guard for thee?

Comments 1 Comment »

July 25, 2007

Canadian Human Rights Commission
344 Slater Street, 8th Floor,
Ottawa, Ontario K1A 1E1

Dear Sir/Madam:

In the event that a human rights complaint is levied against the Commission for a human rights abuse, what is the protocol for mediation and adjudication between the parties? Since the Commission cannot obviously adjudicate against itself as the respondent, there must be another judicial body to hear the complaint in an unbiased fashion.

In the near future, I am considering launching a complaint against the Commission itself on the basis of religious discrimination. Before I do so, however, I would like to know what the process is.

Yours very truly,

John Pacheco
Social Conservatives United

Comments 1 Comment »

Here are some observations about the Kangaroo Court’s proceedings against FD:

1) According to their website, it says the following about “Hate Messages”:

Hate messages

13. (1) It is a discriminatory practice for a person or a group of persons acting in concert to communicate telephonically or to cause to be so communicated, repeatedly, in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking within the legislative authority of Parliament, any matter that is likely to expose a person or persons to hatred or contempt by reason of the fact that that person or those persons are identifiable on the basis of a prohibited ground of discrimination.

(2) For greater certainty, subsection (1) applies in respect of a matter that is communicated by means of a computer or a group of interconnected or related computers, including the Internet, or any similar means of communication, but does not apply in respect of a matter that is communicated in whole or in part by means of the facilities of a broadcasting undertaking.

(3) For the purposes of this section, no owner or operator of a telecommunication undertaking communicates or causes to be communicated any matter described in subsection (1) by reason only that the facilities of a telecommunication undertaking owned or operated by that person are used by other persons for the transmission of that matter. R.S., 1985, c. H-6, s. 13; 2001, c. 41, s. 88.


So, in other words, if you are deemed to be an “owner or operator of a telecommunication undertaking”, you cannot be cited for complaints about “hatred”. The key here is the phrase “owner or operator of a telecommunication undertaking”. This should include discussion boards and not simply be restricted to Internet Service Providers. It is certainly sufficiently general for a broad interpretation.

2) Q.8 Has the Commission introduced any special measures to deal with hate on the Internet complaints?

The Commission recognizes that section 13 complaints are unique in both harm that hate causes and the special investigative challenges associated with investigating web-based activities. As a result, the Commission has instituted special measures to facilitate the investigation of section 13 complaints, including:

The assignment of all section 13 cases to the Anti-Hate Team which includes investigators with specialized expertise in the investigation of hate on the Internet.

Ongoing staff training to broaden knowledge about the nature of hate activity, its consequences and how to combat it.

A review of procedures and legal requirements to ensure that section 13 cases are dealt with expeditiously.


And yet despite their committment to expeditious proceedings for all the parties involved, it took them over a year to inform Connie and Mark about the complaint. According to Mark Fournier, Ms. Gentes filed the complaint on June 4, 2006. The Canadian Human Rights Commission sat on this for a year.

3) A Tight Deadline, Doncha think?

July 16, 2007

File 2006057
Ms. Connie Wilkins
c/o Free Dominion

Dear Ms. Wilkins: I am the investigator designated under Part III of the Canadian Human Rights Act to investigate the complaint of Ms. [name omitted at this time] against Free Dominion….

I am currently awaiting your full response to the allegations which is due on 18 July 2007.

I wonder if this is something that is common practice with the CHRC? Are they this sloppy with conservatives or does their incompetence apply to everyone?

4) The Commissioners can refuse to deal with complaints which are more than one year old, or which are beyond the Commission’s jurisdiction.

The Federal Court can be asked by either party to review the Commission’s decision.


The investigator gathers the information and evidence needed to prepare a report and makes a recommendation to the Commissioners. The investigator gives the respondent an opportunity to reply to the allegations. The investigator may interview witnesses or ask the respondent and complainant for documents or information. Both sides have a chance to review the investigator’s report and make submissions before the investigator presents the report to the Commissioners. Of course, the complainant and respondent may also reach a settlement during the investigation.

If the complaint is filed more than one year after the incident has occurred or if it appears to be beyond the Commission’s jurisdiction, the complaint will be sent directly to the Commissioners.


Apparently it’s not acceptable to wait for a year to file a complaint after an incident has occurred, but it is totally acceptable for the Commission to wait a year before informing the alleged perpetrator (or victim, depending on your perpsective) of the complaint.

What kind of banana republic proceedings are these?

4) A complaint has been filed against me

After the Commission has notified you, the respondent, about the complaint, you must provide a response in which you will be able to give your position on the situation. The next step of the complaint process depends on the circumstances of the case. In some cases, the Commission may ask the complainant to first try another redress procedure. For example, the complainant may be able to file a grievance under a collective agreement or may be able to appeal a decision by a government department or agency under another Act of Parliament. Cases will usually be referred to the Alternative Dispute Resolution Branch to consider the possibility of mediation. Mediation is voluntary and confidential and if either side chooses not to participate, or if the mediation does not work, the file is assigned to an investigator.

The case is not supposed to be assigned to an investigator until (a) after the Respondent has received the complaint and filed a response and (b), in most cases, until after the parties have been given an opportunity to consider alternate dispute resolution. This was not done in FD’s case. An investigator was assigned before any response was received from FD. This is yet another example of a kangaroo bungle.

5) The respondent is advised of the complaint as soon as it is filed with the Commission. Source

One year is the Commission’s view of “as soon as it is filed with the Commission”. Another administrative blunder.

Comments 2 Comments »

You little punk.

You come on FD, spewing your leftist garbage and accusing us of hate,
pretending you love freedom, democracy, and debate.

It was our Christian blood which gave you the right,
to come on FD and preach to us about your false human rights.

You slither on to FD and say it is full of racists and bi-gots,
but strangely you can’t stay away from lurking and even posting on our forum of “right wing nuts”.

Maybe there is something here you crave that you don’t get with your left wing hordes,
something honorable, exciting, and noble on this Free Dominion board.

“Tolerance, equality, and freedom!” you yelp for sea to sea,
but when push comes to shove, we are finding out these shouts only apply to thee.

How you have the audacity to presume on the right to post,
yet you can’t see your own foolish blindness if FD were ever reduced to toast.

But know this and know it well you little leftist punk,
if FD goes down, we certainly won’t be the only one.

For the same law which seeks to muzzle our freedom of speech and our rightful opinion,
won’t stop at us but will continue on well past Free Dominion.

So go ahead, please do, and post if you must,
we’ll stomach your rants, your hype, and your lefty thrusts.

We don’t expect you to agree with us or like us one little bit,
but for freedom’s sake, understand what this will mean to all of us – including you, you little leftist twit!

Comments 2 Comments »

To listen to Connie’s performance on Michael Coren’s Show on CFRB today, click here.

To view the running commentary of FD posters, click here.

Comments 1 Comment »

Free Dominion Day

This July 18th is Free Dominion Day,
where leftist tyranny and star chamber courts are the law and way.

A tyranny has been growing these past few years we all can plainly see,
to attack our families, Jesus, you, and me.

Our Christian fathers fought on far off shores
to protect our life, our way, and mores.

And if we could we would love to ask,
would our Christian fathers do the same today if put to the task?

Would they shed their blood and lose their lives,
for a country which has destroyed its sons, daughters, husbands, and wives?

And as for this generation, what has come of it?
Is there anything we would sacrifice or die for, or are we content with this pink outfit?

To see the Left wittle away at our freedoms,
to muzzle, to fine, and then to imprison.

What is it going to take for us to oppose these leftist twits,
who can’t stream two arguments together because they come from the same feminist culture of shit?

And many of them wake up in the morning and decide to complain,
invoking the Star Chamber court and calling down the rain.

How long, do you think, will it be before the Left realizes,
that respect for the law requires the law to fit all speech sizes.

And just how long do you think will Canadians put up with this yoke,
before Canada is no longer known as a country of peaceful blokes?

Don’t kid yourself, Mr. Lefty, and do try to realize before you preach,
that what keeps the peace and rule of law is our God-given right to free speech.

So, then, my conservative Canadian brethren,
understand clearly that this is our day, our hour and our leaven:

To speak the truth and stand on guard are not just words we sing on hockey days,
but here, right now, on this July 18th, our Free Dominion Day.

Comments No Comments »

Mark Fournier
Free Dominion
July 21, 2007

Canadian Human Rights Commission vs Conservatism
Why we fight and how we’ll do it

To state the obvious, Free Dominion is not a hate site. The irony is rich in that a website that was set up to combat the liberal hatred of liberty is now being accused of inciting hatred itself. But it’s not in the least bit surprising, in fact, it was inevitable. Liberals must try to silence conservatives because they cannot compete with conservatives in the marketplace of ideas.

Enter, the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

The Canadian Human Rights Commission is a perfect example of something that shouldn’t be allowed to exist in a free society. Its primary function is to provide liberals with power they cannot legitimately wield. Dressed up as a part of the legal system, the Canadian Human Rights Commission operates completely outside of natural law, yet it has the power to impose its decisions upon Canadians (as individuals and as a people) as if its decisions were legislatively empowered. Every one of their decisions effectively ‘writes law’ as potent as legitimate laws passed in the House of Commons.

It is essential that people understand that the Canadian Human Rights Commission is entirely a political instrument. Its transparent window-dressing as an arm of the law is cosmetic only.

The Canadian Human Rights Commission’s record of attacking conservatives and conservatism speaks for itself. What they did to one of their latest victims, Scott Brockie, was unconscionable, but the outcry his case engendered was not powerful enough to discourage the CHRC. They are now moving further up the conservative food chain and are going after non-establishment conservative political leaders and conservative websites.

This has gone on as long as it has because we, as conservatives, have allowed it to happen. Unless we draw a line in the sand, they will not stop. Why should they? They are only carrying out their true mandate.

The Canadian Human Rights Commission has apparently decided to draft Free Dominion to stand across the line from them.

We will answer their call.

To understand this coming battle we must first examine the terrain. As with all these standoffs between the CHRC and conservatives, much of the battle will be fought behind closed doors where few normal checks and balances apply. Playing on their field by their rules is a losing proposition, so we are going to take the battle to the people of Canada and beyond.

The CRHC has virtually unlimited resources at its disposal and a cimmera of legality with which to clothe itself. It has an impressive array of firepower, though much of it is to a free society what nerve gas is to war. Its problem is that its opponent has no physical reality (outside of a server in America and the backup copies that exist). Free Dominion is much more than a database in a computer somewhere, it is an idea, an expression of a political philosophy that we have chosen to call principled conservatism.

It is apparent from the nature of the complaint, and the CRHC’s participation in its execution, that the goal is the silencing of Free Dominion. The only thing certain in all this is that that isn’t going to happen. The reason that I can say that with such certainty is the Canadian Human Rights Commission doesn’t have the power to silence Free Dominion.

The second part of this battle is going to be waged on the internet and in other media and the real judges will be the people of Canada, and beyond, who we will treat to a grand tour of the CHRC. The CHRC wields total power behind closed doors, but they wield none in the marketplace of ideas provided by the internet, and that’s where we will fight the second war.

We have taken long term strategic measures against this day and we are implementing tactical procedures in preparation for what is to come. In this part of the war the CHRC will be playing on our turf, and in the marketplace of ideas they are at a distinct disadvantage.

What we are witnessing here is the inevitable result of the culmination of incremental chains conservatives have allowed liberals to impose on us all. This had to happen because we allowed the groundwork to be laid. But that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t view this as an opportunity to turn the tide.

Principled conservatives understand what is at stake here, and they understand how we got here and where we, as a nation, went wrong along the way. This battle the CHRC has drafted us into will cover many fundamental ideas and concepts and will clearly show the perversity of having an institution on the loose that operates above the law. With the internet we now have the ability to bring these many concepts right into the homes of Canadians.

Let the dialogue begin. Our country will be a better place for it.


Comments No Comments »

The following list shows all of SoCon Or Bust’s postings on the shameless attack against Connie Wilkins, Bill Whatcott, Free, and all Canadians who value their right to freedom of speech perpetrated against them by a paranoid bunch of Leftist losers who can only advance their agenda by political and star chamber type threats instead of open debate and dialogue.

Victory! – FD off the hook for now [Aug.05.07]

Sign the Letter of Support [July 31.07]

FD-CHRC squabble on Michael Coren’s TV Show [July 27.07]

My Catholic Brethren and the Star Chamber Few [July 26.07]

Freedom Snatching Commie-Commissions [July 26.07]

Kangaroo Courts and their Pimps Endanger Canada’s Peace [July 25.07]

My Complaint Against the CHRC [July 25.07]

A Possible Out for FD [July 24.07]

Media Reports on the Kangaroo Court [July 23.07]

You Little Punk [July 23.07]

Connie Wilkins on Michael Coren’s Radio Show [July 22.07]

Free Dominion Day Poem [July 22.07]

CHRC vs. Conservatism [July 21.07]

What the Chill is Going to Mean to the Left [July 21.07]

Attack on Religious Liberties by the Left [July 20.07]

Leftists’ Smackdown of Free Speech [July 19.07]

Human Rights Attack on Free Dominion [July 18.07]

Comments 3 Comments »

The cackle of the Left is almost deafening. They really don’t know what to do with themselves. First, they are defending free speech, then they are expressing their glee that conservatives are being hauled before the Kangaroo Court, and that Free Dominion might be forced to shut down in its current form. How they believe this is a victory for them requires, I am sure, a degree from women’s studies at Tyranny U.

It’s amazing how these people don’t read the writing on the wall. They are so in love with Islam that they don’t understand what attacking the Christian West is going to do to all of their pseudo “rights”. After all, everyone can clearly see the connection and the logical alliance between supporting a hijab day and pushing the homoerotic agenda forward. It’s just so damn obvious. Don’t you see it? There’s no contradiction there at all and we can all clearly see how freedom of speech, women’s “rights” and “gay rights” are all just going to fit right in with a civilization under Sharia law. It’s only us dumb conservatives who insist on pointing out that the socialist emperor has no clothes. As Mark Steyn remarked….

I’m a social conservative. When the mullahs take over, I’ll grow my beard a little fuller, get a couple of extra wives, and keep my head down. It’s the feminists and gays who’ll have a tougher time. If, say, theree of the five judges on the Massachusetts Supreme Court are Muslim, what are the chances of them approving “gay marriage”? (Mark Steyn, America Alone, p. xxvii )

Anyhow, this collective delusion seems to have creeped into their delight over Free Dominion, a discussion board where Canadians actually debate issues, being bounced into Kangaroo court. They haven’t figured out that once the bar is lowered to the extent that it will be if the CHRC accepts Ms. Gentes complaints against Bill Whatcott, let’s just say that things are going to degenerate very quickly.

Exhibit 1:

TORONTO, May 25, 2005 ( – The Catholic Civil Rights League today called on Aileen Carroll, Minister of International Cooperation, to review the funding relationship between CIDA (Canadian International Development Agency) and, an e-zine whose current edition features a strongly anti-Catholic cartoon caricature of Pope Benedict XVI. In the animated cartoon, the pope repeatedly marches to a statue of the Blessed Virgin Mary, then gives a Nazi salute with the caption “Heil Mary.” Source

As a Catholic I would consider this cartoon as an example of fostering hatred and contempt against the Vicar of Christ and Catholics in general. If the complaints registered against Bill Whatcott make it to first base, then this one will surely mean a home run. While Bill called out Muhammed as a false prophet (a theologically correct phrase), and his claims were backed up with historical fact, the same cannot be said for our government funded leftist site. Rabble’s defamation of Pope Benedict XVI was based on a lie that Benedict willingly served with the Naziis. This serves to incite contempt and hatred towards faithful Catholics, even though the Catholic faith was the predominant theological opponent to Naziism in its day.

Exhibit 2

TORONTO, Canada, May 28, 2007 ( – The Canadian Broadcasting Corporation independently approved a recently-aired anti-Catholic comedy that offended Catholics by depicting the Communion host as snack food, according to a spokesperson for Canadian Television Fund. CBC denied approving the controversial pilot show of The Altar Boy Gang that ran May 11, which mocked the Catholic sacraments of Holy Communion and Confession. A public outcry following the show’s airing led CBC Television’s executive vice-president Richard Stursberg to send a letter to the National Post defending the CBC, in response to an editorial in the paper condemning the anti-Catholic bias.

“It’s the broadcaster that determines what kind of program they want to support and air,” she said in a telephone interview from Toronto. Broadcasters abide by the Canadian Association of Broadcasters’ Code of Ethics, which prohibits “abusive or unduly discriminatory material or comment”, she said.

Two Conservative Members of Parliament have said they want the CBC to answer to a House committee for The Altar Boy Gang. MPs Brad Trost and Andrew Scheer promised to send letters of complaint to CBC officials and to request support from MPs of all parties in bringing CBC officials before the Heritage Committee.

“To depict the communion host, something so sacred, in this fashion, is an extreme act of sacrilege,” wrote Scheer, a Catholic, in a news release May 16.

“The Holy Eucharist is sacred to millions of Catholics across Canada and around the world,” said Trost, pointing out that the CBC has a history of airing anti-Catholic material–in an episode of the program Our Daily Bread, comedian Mary Walsh fed a consecrated host to a dog.

It strains credibility that the CBC does not understand what the Eucharist means to Catholics. Lots of fallen away Catholics work for the CBC, after all. So feigning ignorance just doesn’t cut it. So, if there is no ignorance, the level of contempt and hatred for the Catholic faith is clearly demonstrated by Ms. Walsh’s action. Throwing the most sacred thing in the Catholic faith to a dog is definitely an actionable item. For the intellectually challenged in the leftoid community, just think what the reaction would be if a conservative had thrown a copy of the Koran to a dog. Ya think the Rabblers would be tolerant of that action and accept the excuse that we “just didn’t know these things”?

There are, of course, many more instances that could be presented, but these are two that stick in my mind. I am sure there are many more serious examples which I will be cataloguing in the future. You never know when they might come in handy.

Comments 1 Comment »

I stand corrected. In my earlier post, I doubted whether the Left was so stupid to go after a genuine social conservative through Free Dominion. I was wrong.

Apparently, the whiner in question is a little woman from some two bit college in Quebec. And I am sure we are all shocked that it’s a female professor too! I know, I know. I am still scratching my head at the unlikelihood of thaaaaaat one.

Her name is Marie-Line Gentes and she is a wildlife biologist who studied at the University of Saskatchewan and now teaches at Vanier College in Quebec. A couple of pictures of her can be located here.

(Personally, I feel these women need a good macho man to settle them right down so they are not going around making fools of themselves.)

Anyhow, I scarcely know where to begin. This whole thing has been one big fat farce from the beginning. Here is the text of Mark Fournier’s post which details the substance of the complaint:

From the complaint:

03/09/06 “To see the original hitting Edmonton mailboxes tonight. (warning disturbing but necessary photo) “

04/24/06 “I can’t figure out why the homosexuals I ran into are on the side of the Muslims. After all, Muslims who practice Sharia law tend to advocate beheading homosexuals.”

03/09/06 “I defy Islamic censorship and speak about what I believe is the truth about violent Islamism and its threat to religious liberty in Canada.”

If you are not a Muslim and you have read the above, according to Gentes, you have been discriminated against. I imagine everyone is writhing on the floor right now but I’m not done discriminating against you yet. I’m going to reproduce some more stuff from her complaint to further torture you. These she added with no accreditation, but she doesn’t seem to be attributing them to Whatcott:

“How many of us pay nothing but lip service to the Muslim threat here in Canada?”

“Probably everyone want to jail a Muslim.”

“I have to ask why we are importing them here?”

“Islamic fundamentalism and its threat to Canada’s religious and civil liberties.” Source

No, no, no. Don’t get up. I know you are trying to adjust the knob on the tube, because you’re likely thinking what I’m thinking: “there must be more right?” Nope, there’s no more to come. That’s it. That’s the whole enchalada. The great “hate” case that our tax dollars are funding is contained in the above post. Part of the Conservative Budget no less. Makes you feel your donations to the CPC and tax dollars are being well spent attacking what your grandfather fought and died for, donit?

What has Bill Whatcott presented for this farce of a proceeding?

Here is the link to the article in question which was referred to above by Ms. Gentes.

1) Pictures of

a) fanatical Muslim brutality on a Christian girl,
b) destruction of Art,
c) the famous Muhammed cartoon picture.

A description of above pictures is presented in Paragraph 1.

2) Paragraph 2: Reporting the facts of recent Muslim aggression against Chrsitians.

3) Paragraph 3: An opinion on the facts in Paragraph 2.

4) Paragraph 4: An acknowledgement that not all Muslims are violent, but that history shows that Muhammed himself was a very violent man. Examples of this violence are cited. A smackdown of the main stream media, including the CBC, for their rank hypocrisy in blaspheming Christ but not defending the freedom of the press when a religious figure other than Christ is criticized. Typical of the Christian Broadcasting Corporation.

5) Paragraph 5: A reaffirmation that not all Muslims are violent but that Islamic theology itself is violent.

6) Paragraph 6: Citations from the Koran re: paragraph 5 claims.

7) Paragraph 7: An opinion expressed on the state of the affairs of the Muslim world, in particular the lack of resolve of Muslims to curtail the violence in their own community against non-Muslims, backed up by examples.

8) Paragraph 8: More reaffirmation that nominal Muslims are no threat, but that the extremists are a serious threat to religious freedom.

9) Paragraph 9: A doctrinal statement which is a truth of the Catholic faith: Muhammed was a false prophet since he did not accept the divinity of Jesus Christ. An opinion that Islam and Sharia Law is oppressive. A condemnation of Muhammed, a historical religious figure.

10) Paragraph 10: An appeal to “dear Muslim(s)” to convert to the Christian faith.


None of Bill’s comments are “hateful”. In fact, if the Left were to simply clear away the hateful frothing at the mouth for a moment and stop their incoherent babbling, they would concede that, in his own peculiar way, Bill has real concern for the Muslim (as a human person) and his salvation. There is certainly no intent to spread or even promote hatred against Muslims. To suggest otherwise is to admit a serious case of delusion.

His comments are “controversial”. They are politically incorrect. But we do not call in big brother because people have their feelings hurt. We certainly don’t call in big brother when the facts supporting the conclusion are well known and accepted by the wider culture. Bill went after fanatical Muslims and he pointed out that Islam is a violent religion. Not popular but historical. And certainly not a hate crime either – by any stretch of the imagination. Even if you had a liberal imagination, it would have to be pretty contorted to call the kangaroo court accusing this kind of (largely) factual and substantiated opinion a “hate crime”.

The fact that this thing was not laughed right off the desk of the functionaries of the CHRC is not surprising. But lost in all this is something much more ominous and dangerous for our culture. If Ms. Gentes is successful and Islam is going to be treated as such, it will be very difficult for Christians and Catholics in particular to not consider similar complaints against the Left who have vilified, blasphemed and defamed many Christian figures including Jesus Christ Himself, His Mother, and the Pope on a scale that makes the cartoons mocking Muhammed down right reverent.

If squeezing Muhammed or Islamic theology is not kosher, then neither are attacks against Jesus Christ or Christian theology either. That’s how it works. Just remember, my lefty friends, what’s good for the goose is good for the gander. If this decision goes through and costs Connie or Mark anything of significance, the free speech chill will not be contained to conservative circles. We’ll make sure the refrigerator door is kicked wide open so everyone feels cooler weather, global warming nothwithstanding.

Comments 2 Comments »

Well, we knew it was going to come sooner or later. The leftist controlled kangaroo court known as the Canadian Human Rights Commission, which has no credibility whatsoever, let my good friend and conservative activist, Connie Wilkins, know that she has been alleged to have breached some human right by allowing free speech on her very popular conservative discussion board, Free Dominion. Here is the text of the letter…

Ms. Connie Wilkins
c/o Free Dominion
2033 Unity Rd.
Kingston, ON
K0H 1M0

Dear Ms. Wilkins:

I am the investigator designated under Part III of the Canadian Human Rights Act to investigate the complaint of Ms. [name omitted at this time] against Free Dominion. As the investigator, it is my responsibility to gather the evidence in relation to the complainant’s allegations and, once the investigation is complete, to report on my findings to the Members of the Commission.

The report will include a recommendation for the disposition of the complaint. I can recommend that a conciliator be appointed, if the evidence supports the allegations in the complaint, or that the complaint be dismissed, if the allegations are not supported by the evidence. I can also recommend to the Commission that a settlement be approved if the parties reach an agreement during the course of the investigation.

I am currently awaiting your full response to the allegations which is due on 18 July 2007.

I would like to draw your attention to section 48 of the Canadian Human Rights Act which allows the parties to settle a complaint in the course of investigation. I would be pleased to discuss the possibility of a settlement with you or your representative at any time.

You can reach me at the address and telephone number indicated at the bottom of the first page of this letter. My direct line is 999-999-9999 and my email address is Please note that there are security and confidentiality risks in sending information by email.

Yours Sincerely,

Officer’s Name

The rest of the fallout can be read here.

Mark Fournier, Connie’s fiancee, mentioned that the assigned Commission functionary told them on the phone that the complaint relates to Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act which deals with hate speech and the internet. Now, anyone who knows Connie knows that the alleged hate speech could not be from Connie herself. Therefore, it was almost certainly from a poster on FD.

I very much doubt that the complaint lodged is directed at a social conservative issue. The only social conservative issue at play which would fall under a complaint is the whole homoerotic push to squash freedom of speech. We have a long track record in this country of the homoerotic agenda attacking Christian businesses and citizens to ensure their sexual proclivities are well entrenched into Canadian law and culture. If it does turn out to be this, I won’t be surprised at all. The Left cannot win or silence a conservative without the threat of financial ruin or imprisonment acting as their trump card. Look around western democracies today. A day does not go by without some Christian being harassed or some Church being challenged by the new sexual tyrants of our age. In fact, if you look at the rulings of this Commission and its provincial counterparts, who in Canada really believes that there is 50/50 split between conservative and liberal decisions? My guess is that there is probably a 100% victory ratio by liberals against conservatives.

Free Dominion is virtually the only Conservative discussion board in Canada. If it goes down, then the Left, in their utter foolishness, will think they have “won”. But what exactly will they have won? Not an argument. That’s for sure. They will have “won” the prize for being the thugs and crybabies in running to their sugar daddy, the federal government and some kangaroo court functionary, to put the smackdown on perspectives that are superior to their own. That’s no win. That’s merely showing us that they are not into democracy or free speech but use the instruments of fear and intimidation to push their agenda along.

Having said all that, I don’t believe the Left could really be this stupid. It would cause such a backlash and rallying point for conservatives and even non-conservatives that it would help ignite the conservative movement like never before. Revolutions never start without a martyr of somekind.

The offending post happened some time in early June. My bet is on this thread which started June 12.

As odious as racism is, Connie Wilkins and Free Dominion should not be held responsible because:

1) Free speech is protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

2) Connie Wilkins did not make the offending posts.

3) “Hate Speech” does not go away simply because some star chamber functionary doesn’t like it. Driving something underground only foments and “martyrizes” its leaders to act with even more aggression and zeal in their pursuit. To defeat evil, it must be allowed to rear its ugly head so it can be openly and resoundingly defeated – not by the force of law but by the force of reason.

4) Holding the owners of Free Dominion responsible for the personal opinions of the thread’s participants is ridiculous.

First of all, why should they be held responsible for the offending remarks and not the rebuttals also? You cannot hold the host of a discussion board liable for only 50% of the debate. It would be one thing if the discussion was simply one big racist love-in, it’s quite another where there is a lively debate on the issue from both sides. Yet, if the complainant wins, the Commission will effectively be saying “we only look at the offensive comments posted and not the comments of their opponents”. Free Dominion is not a publication. There is no “editorial position” of Free Dominion in support of racism.

Secondly, if the complainant is really concerned about putting down racism, rather than filing an unjustified and unwarranted complaint against Connie, she should be thanking her for allowing these views to be debated and defeated on FD. Boards like Rabble would never allow this discussion to happen because they’re little angry men and women who froth at the mouth so much that you can’t understand what they are saying half the time. In places like FD, everything is on the board for discussion. Good positions survive and change people’s perspectives. Bad positions are marginalized and booted. Racism can never survive in an open society where it can be confronted. But it can percolate under the surface for years until one day, it rears its ugly head and causes a lot more damage than otherwise would have been possible.

The Left doesn’t seem to get that. They continue to think that using the force of law to paper over the problems it perceives in this culture will fix the underlying problem. It’s like that in virtually every issue they confront. They prefer the muzzle to the microphone, the force of law to the language of liberty, and the recourse to fascism instead of the sweet smell of freedom.

We’ll see how all this plays out. Either way, conservatives have already won.

Comments 3 Comments »

Mark Fournier
Free Dominion
July 18, 2007

Human Rights attack on Free Dominion

We have been waiting for six and a half years and the day has finally arrived, somebody is going to try to silence Free Dominion using the Canadian Human Rights Commission.

Moments ago we found this in Free Dominion’s mailbox:

July 16, 2007

File 2006057

Ms. Connie Wilkins
c/o Free Dominion
2033 Unity Rd.
Kingston, ON
K0H 1M0

Dear Ms. Wilkins:

I am the investigator designated under Part III of the Canadian Human Rights Act to investigate the complaint of Ms. [name omitted at this time] against Free Dominion. As the investigator, it is my responsibility to gather the evidence in relation to the complainant’s allegations and, once the investigation is complete, to report on my findings to the Members of the Commission.

The report will include a recommendation for the disposition of the complaint. I can recommend that a conciliator be appointed, if the evidence supports the allegations in the complaint, or that the complaint be dismissed, if the allegations are not supported by the evidence. I can also recommend to the Commission that a settlement be approved if the parties reach an agreement during the course of the investigation.

I am currently awaiting your full response to the allegations which is due on 18 July 2007.

I would like to draw your attention to section 48 of the Canadian Human Rights Act which allows the parties to settle a complaint in the course of investigation. I would be pleased to discuss the possibility of a settlement with you or your representative at any time.

You can reach me at the address and telephone number indicated at the bottom of the first page of this letter. My direct line is 999-999-9999 and my email address is Please note that there are security and confidentiality risks in sending information by email.

Yours Sincerely,

Officer’s Name

This looks real. It appears to be written on official Canadian Human Rights Commission letterhead stationary.

Other than the last name of the complaintant, this doesn’t tell us much. It doesn’t say what the complaint is about or anything else. Notice also that Connie was supposed to have responded to it by July 18, 2007, which is today. It was a fluke that we even checked the mailbox before we came home.

Somebody has likely decided that because they can’t defeat some argument presented by someone at Free Dominion they will instead try to silence the whole site. It isn’t going to work.

We will be keeping everybody posted on each development as it occurs. If this persecution actually proceeds it will not be under the cover of darkness, we will keep a very bright light shining every step of the way.

I promise.

Comments 2 Comments »

In response to my article Popping Balloons, I received this rather amusing response:

marco.falcon said… hope you are joking…or maybe you don’t like sex…or maybe you are a repressed priest…I really don’t know…know what? you didn’t understand your dear jesus AT ALL…

Well Marco, I can assure you that I like sex. I have 4 children to prove it. My children are at home. Where are yours? In a condom somewhere flushed down a toilet?

I wish I were joking, but I am dead serious. Although you won’t hear the MSM talking about how we got from there to here, read the article below and WAKE UP.

We cannot pretend that 100,000+ aborted babies per year and the sterile sex propaganda that Canada has been swimming in for decades have no effect on the serious societal consequences that will be sure to develop.

How many politicians have the balls to call out the elephant in the room? Not many, I assure you. That’s why if you don’t call the elephant out of the room, but are content with his presence, be sure to bring your shovel, because the level of elephant dung piling up is sure to sink a nation.

OTTAWA – Canada is close to having more people approaching retirement than reaching working age.

There are already barely enough young people entering the job market to replace those retiring as a result of the aging of the population, Statistics Canada says in its latest report on the 2006 census, a breakdown of the age and sex of the population.

“Population projections show that in about 10 years, Canada may have more people at the age where they can leave the labour force than at the age where they can begin working,” it said.

In 2006 there was just over one person entering the job market for each person leaving it, down from 1.4 at the time of the previous census in 2001, and 2.3 in the 1970s.

“Canada has never had so many people close to retirement,” it said.

That presents challenges for employers and for society as a whole, it added. While the report doesn’t state what those challenges are, they include worker shortages, rising health care costs and increasing demands on private pension systems.


Comments No Comments »