You are currently browsing the category archive for the ‘Canada’ category.
Canada's own high representative of batshite-crazy misogyny.
The catholic church really needs to go. They are doing a fairly good job at self immolation as is, but the process itself is taking too long. The cloistered catholic church wankers, from their deslutory anti-rational palace of fuckwittery, make another bold statement:
“Ouellet apparently had no intention of wading into a public policy debate when called abortion a “moral crime” as serious as murder and said it is never justified — even in cases of rape.”
Not surprisingly, given Canada’s proclivity toward rationality, this little gem of religiously approved anti-woman twaddle did not go over well. Now Ouellet is doing PR backflips in order to correct the ‘spin’ he claims the media has put on his words.
“He’s not calling for re-criminalization. He was talking [about] a moral thing. This is a moral issue. He was not bringing this to the judicial level.”
Ah, right. The RCC is certainly not about limiting women’s access to reproductive services. They are not about buggering alter boys either.
At least the politicians in the Quebec know how to deal with the bullshite that oozes from the church’s direction.
“Parti Québécois Leader Pauline Marois, speaking at a weekend party policy conference, said she was “absolutely outraged” by the remarks and that Ouellet was trying to undo rights won decades ago.
“These remarks … take us back to [the] Middle Ages,” said Alexa Conradi, president of the Quebec Women’s Federation.
“At the same time, my concern really is at the federal level. There is movement of right wing Catholic groups to find different ways to re-criminalize abortion.”
Conradi said that since the Conservatives came to power, there have been a number of — failed — attempts to get private member’s bills passed that threaten Canadian women’s legal rights to an abortion”
This Ouelleut is a real peach. He concurs with the Steven Harper’s G8 initiative that gives a hearty thumbs up to sentencing women to die because it dovetails nicely with his sickeningly inane religious beliefs:
“Ouellet applauded the Harper government for its stance against funding abortions in the developing world.”
Your church sponsored douchery has a place. Firmly in the past. Condemning women to die and denying them their autonomy is reprehensible and has no place in the 21st century.
I don't do "women's rights".
Steven Harper does not believe in female autonomy. If his mendacious crew of ethically challenged social conservatives ever took power women across the country would have to mobilize and shut this country down to protect our reproductive freedoms. Evidence of the Conservative disregard for women is writ large as the Conservative government has decided, as a part of its’ G8 platform on women’s issues, not to fund abortions as a part of maternal reproductive care in the third world.
You would think that outright crazy crank-batshittery would take a holiday at least once in awhile. Unfortunately for us Canadians we are still given the pleasure of living under the yoke of religious-inspired delusional conservative ‘morals’ . Rule one in their insipid handbook of perfidious ass-hattery is this: If ye be woman, ye shall not have rights – especially when the holy fetus is involved. Let us examine what the Canadian government stance is, from the CBC report on our G8 position:
“International Co-operation Minister Bev Oda said the government would consider funding family planning measures such as contraception, but not abortion under any circumstances.
“We’re saying that we’re using the definition in our discussions of family planning, which does not include abortion,” Oda told reporters on Monday in Halifax, where she was meeting with her G8 counterparts.
“We’re not debating abortion; we’re clarifying family planning.”
Which is akin to making a garden salad without any allowing the use of any lettuce. Thank you Bev Oda for your wonderfully refreshing anti-woman stance. It is always hearting to see government policy based on fatuous religious beliefs, because the the frak needs evidence?
The Lancet has called the Canadian Conservative Government on its mendacity:
Canada’s position against funding abortions abroad is ‘hypocritical and unjust,’ a medical journal editorial says (via the CBC).
“The Canadian Government does not deprive women living in Canada from access to safe abortions; it is therefore hypocritical and unjust that it tries to do so abroad,” the Lancet says in an editorial Saturday.
The conservatives hypocritical? Not this bunch, the very same that want to abolish the gun registry despite the fact that police forces across the nation are strongly in favour of the gun registry. This is the same group of politicians who gleefully brought down the Martin minority government on charges of corruption that are now currently wallowing in the Jafer/Afghan Detainee accountability scandals of their own (not to mention the unwarranted prorogation of parliament). I digress. The Lancet editorial brings us back on track though:
“Although the country’s decision only affects a small number of developing countries where abortion is legal, bans on the procedure, which are detrimental to public health, should be challenged by the G8, not tacitly supported. Canada and the other G8 nations could show real leadership with a final maternal health plan that is based on sound scientific evidence and not prejudice.”
Decisions based on evidence? What is this crazy talk about ‘evidence’ you leftard crypto-fascist Lancet editors?!
“The Lancet said the plan’s omission of improved access to safe abortion services “is no accident, but a conscious decision by Canada’s Conservative Government not to support groups that undertake abortions in developing countries.”
“This stance must change,” the editorial said, noting 70,000 women die from unsafe abortions worldwide each year.”
Ah, but it is only 70,000 women who die per year. Come on they are just people women after all.
Rona Ambrose, who I would not trust to successfully rub two dimes together, spouts the following tom foolery as a ‘reply’:
Rona Ambrose, the status of women minister, defended Canada’s G8 initiative, citing a statement by World Vision Canada that the abortion debate was clouding the issue while 8.8 million children die every year from causes that would cost pennies to prevent. World Vision, one of the world’s largest humanitarian organizations, opposes abortion as a family planning method.
Ah, yes those damn womenz and their bodies. They just need to shut the f*ck up and die quietly.
Ambrose said the government wants to save the lives of women and children, Ambrose said.
“We ask the opposition to stop playing politics with this issue.”
Ah, yes I am guessing ‘Playing politics’ actually means: Stop debating our irrational faith based position with real world evidence and fact. You are just not playing fair; being all evidence based and supported by fact and what not. Let us leave reason firmly outside the political playpen.
Playing politics indeed. The buffoonery that passes for reasonable arguments from conservatives is shocking. How many clown cars need to be called in before Canada squares its position on abortion with reality?
I’m guessing not until the Conservatives are out of power and once again bidden to the background, where they belong.
Well the skies are darkening in Canada now, as the CBC reports:
“Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff was accused Friday of twisting media reviews to promote paperback sales of his latest book, True Patriot Love.
The book traces the influence of several generations of Ignatieff’s mother’s family, the Grants.
The jacket of the book includes a number of excerpts from newspaper critiques that leave the impression it won rave reviews when first published last spring.”
Exaggerated Claims! In a book jacket no less! Oh vapours take me now! How dastardly is this evil that does not sleep?
“take this snippet from the National Post: “Plenty of scope for a rich story … Some wonderful anecdotes, particularly about George P. Grant … Well written.”
In fact, the Post review in its entirety was far from laudatory.
“True Patriot Love offers little that is new on the Grants save some wonderful anecdotes, particularly about George P. Grant,” wrote reviewer Robert L. Fraser.”
Checkmate Ignatieff! You rotten scum.
“But on Friday, Conservative MPs called the book blurbs “dishonest” and said that in Ignatieff’s case, they were evidence of his unfitness for political office.
“This is the type of dishonesty that not even a first-year university student could get away with,” Alberta Tory MP Chris Warkentin told the House of Commons.
“I am wondering if the leader of the Opposition really believes that this is honesty or if this is maybe a case of deceitfulness.”
What an opportunity to divert the Public's attention away from Rahim Drunk Driving and Illegal Lobbying!
I would think that the Tories would better spend their time doing damage control over the Rahim Jaffer saga – a saga whose political toxicity has not even been fully realized yet.
Hmmm….can we juxtapose for a bit?
Jaffer :
The second email was written several hours after Jaffer was pulled over for speeding and charged with drunk driving and possession of cocaine. Several months later, Jaffer pleaded guilty to a lesser charge of careless driving and was fined $500.
“A company co-founded by former MP Rahim Jaffer pitched three projects to the federal government — including one involving a division of a waste management firm touted by his wife, ex-cabinet minister Helena Guergis, according to newly released documents.
Under the proposal, the total share of federal funding was to be about $100 million.”
“During their testimony Wednesday before the Commons government operations committee, Jaffer and Glémaud insisted they have never been paid for any lobbying activities and have never received a penny of funding from the government. […]
Meanwhile, two businessmen who heard Jaffer speak in August 2009 at a Toronto-area restaurant told CBC News they believed the former Conservative MP would be their connection to millions of dollars in government grants.
The men, who spoke to the CBC on condition of anonymity, said they were lured to the Aug. 25 meeting by an email that boasted: “Rahim Jaffer, who is the Canadian government money access point for us, will be in attendance.”
“We left with the impression Jaffer was the source of funding,” said the president of one company who pitched to Jaffer and business colleague Nazim Gillani, the author of the email and the organizer of the meeting.”
Yes Conservatives, lambaste Ignateiff about dishonesty and proper conduct, your credibility is certainly not an issue here. Show us the righteous Law and Order style of political leadership so many Canadians voted for!
I work in a behavioural/special needs environment. The children I work with are predominantly from the lower spectrum of our society. One of the many observations that I have made is the presence of a persistent deeply ingrained streak of homophobia. I hear the word fag or faggot or “you’re gay” several times a day. I put a stop to it when it is in my presence, but it rages rampant for the most part unheeded and unchecked. Some say I take this issue too seriously, that I should ‘lighten up’ or that these kids are just being kids.
Bullshit.
The victim of a vicious assault in south Edmonton says it was a hate crime and questions how police are investigating the attack. […] Barry, who is a lesbian, was walking with five friends along 96th Street near 75th Avenue about 3:30 a.m. Saturday. Four men yelled at them from the other side of the street, calling them “dykes and faggots,” said one of the women […].
The language is not particular shocking, four young men raised within ‘acceptable standards’, just got a little crazy right?
“Barry, who was drunk, had stumbled and fallen to one knee. When she did, one of the men kicked her in the face.
“It was just like someone drop-kicking a football,” Gouchie said.
The force of the kick flipped Barry on her back and knocked her unconscious for almost five minutes, Gouchie said. The four attackers, who appeared to be between the ages of 16 and 20, quickly fled, she said.”
A yes, true patriarchal representatives through and through. Find a vulnerable target, spew your vicious hate if circumstance permits assault the member of the other group. Run away, safe in your privilege and cowardice to continue your aberrant socially acceptable behaviour next time. Would attention to hateful language have stopped this crime? Who knows, but here is the valiant Edmonton Police Service galvanizing into action:
“CBC News has learned the investigating officer did not file a report. He also did not call in the dog team or Air 1, the police helicopter, in an attempt to track the four young men.
That is standard procedure for such a serious crime, according to one veteran of the Edmonton force, who spoke on condition of anonymity. He also said department policy requires officers to file reports on the same day, especially in a case involving a serious incident, such as an aggravated assault and potential hate crime.
With no report filed, police would have nothing to work with if someone called in an anonymous tip to Crimestoppers, the veteran officer said.”
Underwhelmed? The victim certain is.
“Barry blames the attack on a mistaken belief that hate against gay people is no longer an issue. [ed. emphasis]
“I think in this day and age, we’ve become complacent and passive about educating the young to accept people’s differences,” she said, touching her swollen, bruised face.”Everyone’s under the assumption that we’re past all that, but it’s right here. It’s happening to people that you know, that I know and love, all the time.”
We have banished the hate from polite conversation and there was a great deal ballyhoo about that particular incremental change. Has the underlying set of assumptions changed? No, most likely not.
Being a woman and having a sexual identity that challenges hetronormative norms is still not acceptable in society. You will be verbally abused and physically attacked. The forces in charge ( H/T to the EPS for providing such a clear example) will not take you seriously and will deploy the appropriate amount of bureaucracy to make sure you are marginalized and dehumanized.
So, it is up to us to stop the hate speech wherever we hear it. Call people on it. It is a possible cofactor that enables people to build up the ‘courage’ to attack marginalized groups. Polite society is one small victory for human rights, lets push for more.
Personal Expression or repression?
Al Jazeera reports: “In the Canadian province of Quebec a furious public debate has erupted over Muslim women who wear the niqab – face veil.
Out of over 200,000 Muslims in Montreal in Quebec, only a few dozen women wear the niqab, but under a proposed new legislation they could be barred from receiving public services.”
When I think about this issue I get a headache. The complexity and intersectionality of issues regarding women’s rights, religious freedom and society is staggering. Watch the video for a little background.
Canada is a secular democracy. I hesitate to fully endorse a law that prohibits anyone from wearing what they deem to be culturally important to them. Conversely, the Niqab and the Burka are both symbols of the oppression of women by the patriarchal rules of a delusional following known as Islam.
Modesty? Can men be immodest? Why is there not a male version of the Burka?
“No no no” you see the Burka protects women from men and their uncontrollable rape-happy urges. So says the Mullah, so says the Patriarchy. ‘Bullshit’ I say. Stripping women of their identities does not make them safer, nor does it prevent rape as the commodification and objectification happens by default in any patriarchal society.
The rub comes when people bring their cultural traditions to a secular society and then expect them to be accepted without a hitch. Whoa! Cultural relativism warning! Where do we draw the line when people bring potentially repressive traditions to our society? How much respect should we accord them? *gnash teeth*
The thing is that women choose to do repressive objectifying things to themselves all the time. Is it enough to leave the argument at if women ‘choose’ (aka obeying repressive cultural dictates) to wear the Niqab, so be it despite all the negative baggage associated with it?
To be honest, I really cannot say for sure one way or the other. What do you think?
Man, what do I do after denial stops working?
The Canadian occupation of Afghanistan is an international shame. We are killing innocent people and torturing people. The Geneva Convention needs to be dusted off and read 100 times by our military leaders and political drones so they get the idea of human rights are not just for “us” but extend to everyone in the world.
“A parliamentary committee has heard stunning allegations from a former translator who claims the Canadian military tried to cover up the fatal shooting of an Afghan man in October 2007.
Ahmadshah Malgarai also alleged to MPs in Ottawa that the Canadian military “panicked” and rounded up a half a dozen Afghans between the age of 10 and 90 after the shooting of a man sleeping on the roof of a compound in southern Afghanistan.”
Fantastic, murder someone and then round up possible witnesses for intimidation interrogation.
Apparently though Mr.Malgarai did not actually witness the execution.
“Malgarai testified he was not at the compound during the alleged incident, although he was allowed to see the intelligence report and took part in the interrogation of the detained men. He alleged a member of the military personally described it to him as “murder.”
Of course Conservative MP Laurie Hawn was there sowing confusion. Best to muddy the waters in defence of aberrant government policy.
“When Hawn then asked if Malgarai was calling Hillier a liar, Ahmadshad became agitated and accused the Tory MP of trying to put words in his mouth.”
What did happen that night? Something significant, the ripples are to big just to be a false allegation in my opinion.
Alfred Mccoy was right in his book A Question about Torture: using torture as official policy has serious corrosive effects on both the victims and the abusers. The effect is evident already in Afghanistan as the Canadian Armed Forces torture scandal continues to unfold.
Well as usual the snake oil sales people are shocked and surprised when their vaguely tested and potentially dangerous concoction gets put up to the scientific rigour and scrutiny other drugs must be subjected to.
A herbal diet product sold in Canada contains two potentially risky ingredients and can lead to serious heart problems, Health Canada says.
Herbal Diet Natural has been found to contain an ingredient similar to sibutramine, a prescription drug used to treat obesity but only under the guidance of a medical professional, Health Canada said Thursday.
Whoops! No problems with not listing active ingredients. Oh wait.
Herbal Diet Natural isn’t authorized for sale in Canada, but the product, without listing sibutramine as an ingredient, has been found on the market, the department says.
Sibutramine can cause side-effects such as increased blood pressure, chest pain, a higher risk of stroke, as well as dry mouth, trouble sleeping and constipation.
Just little things like higher risk of stroke and chest pain, take that Flabby Tummy! Oh, you can also choke to death or create an intestinal blockage that will brighten your day.
“In January 2010, Health Canada advised Canadians that natural health products containing the ingredient glucomannan in tablet, capsule or powder form, which are currently on the Canadian market, have a potential for harm if taken without at least eight ounces of water or other fluid,” the advisory says.
“The risk to Canadians includes choking and/or blockage of the throat, esophagus or intestine.”
Fantastic. This stuff is worse than homoeopathy because it can actually harm you, unlike well… water. Avoid the quackery folks, if you wish to lose weight decrease your caloric intake and increase your activity level.
bleatmop
Mystro
Dead Wild Roses 
Your opinions…