Source: On Line Opinion,  19 August 2016Louis O'Neill, who is studying writing at Macquarie University defended his right to freedom of speech:

“Frequently I find myself holding what one might consider a politically incorrect opinion, such as having scorn for Islam, disagreeing with myths peddled by the third wave feminist movement or finding no legitimacy in the claims of the black lives matter movement. As a result my adversaries are more than ready to deviate from the laws of discourse, veering off into ad hominem, red herring or appeal to emotion fallacies. The legitimacy of my political viewpoint is often times devalued, as I occupy the “privileged” end of the spectrum, being a heterosexual white male, and so I'm told that I mustn't speak on issues which aren't specifically related to my own demographic. Sometimes the sanctimony of my ideological combatants is so abundant that they feel they need not even engage further in conversation once I've pushed their buttons enough. Well to them I say, if your idea cannot withstand the corrosive qualities of informed conversation, then your idea is not one worth having. We must herald logic as the great sieve through which we may push idiocy and illogicality, and allow the juices of truth to percolate from it…” Read further here … http://www.onlineopinion.com.au/view.asp?article=18460

Continue reading

What is Canada?

On Aug 13, 2016, at 1:16 PM, Al Romanchuk <This email address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it.> wrote:

My goodness to Murgatroid!  I didn’t know that I was promoting fascism and communism, as though there is any difference.  Lordy, lordy I also didn’t know that NO work by humans produces anything.  I didn’t know that HUMAN BEINGS were NOT behind the inventions of all the technology, devices and gadgets people play with today and have been for decades.  Gosh, if I ever knew that someone OTHER than humans were behind all of this I would extoll the virtue of comfort, relaxation, non-production, idleness and simply rely on all those wonderful, productive taxpayers to supply me with all the amenities WITHOUT IT COSTING ME A CENT!
    But, Wallace, YOU FAILED MISERABLY IN NOT ANSWERING MY QUESTION and you perambulated on and on and lectured us about economics, cost-accountancy, state-mandated projects and a plethora of other matters of which you are much more intelligent than me.  I tend to be, and have been for the better part of my life, rather simplistic in these matters.  I look at the bottom line; do my expenses exceed my income, do I have to get a loan from the bank to make up for the deficiency and thus become even more indebted?  How can I possibly take home any kind of wage or salary when I have no income?  I’m in a conundrum!
    I have no quarrel with your dissertation and you may be right for all I know.  But it is all pigeon-English to me and although I have PLEADED with you for years to address these matters using UNDERSTANDABLE ENGLISH, you continue to provide your analyses in language which is almost alien.  Oh, on the question of my atheism let me put it to you this way: I have been an atheist all my life except for being married twice in the United Church and because of the Christianity surrounding them, my marriages failed miserably.  I don’t need an awakening nor have I asked for one from anyone.  My friends and colleagues take me for what I am; nothing more and nothing less.  But enough of this religious hogwash!
    So, if I might tap your brain, would you kindly answer my question.  If you don’t I can only presume that the question has very little relevance to you and should be dismissed out of hand!  BEWARE THE LEAVEN OF THE PHARISEES.


Wally Responded:

Continue reading


On Aug 12, 2016, at 9:57 PM, Al... wrote:

Good evening my friends, mes amis, mi priateli, mein freunds, and generally all of you good, unhyphenated Canadians,
    First, in CFL action although the Eskies beat the Alouettes yesterday 23-12 it was a sleeper, a lack-lustre game with absolutely no excitement.  They played as though they were on a binge the night before.  But today’s game where Winnipeg beat Toronto 34-17 the game was exciting but when the cameras focused on the fans more than half had emptied.  That’s how much they think of their Argonauts.  I’m glad that Winnipeg thumped Toronto.  There are two good games tomorrow.

And while I was watching the game today a number of questions about our country crossed my mind.  I settled on two questions which I pose to you:  

WHAT IS CANADA?  Is it “our home and native land” or is it “a land of hope for all who toil?”  My answer is pretty simple: I think Canada SHOULD be a “land of hope for all who toil” and that it should be a country where our elected representatives ACTUALLY represent our Canadian interests and maintain our former traditions and culture and laws.  
It should be a land where our politicians hold regular old-fashioned town hall meetings with no holds barred and no bloody time limits.  
It should be a land where our elected officials are always ACCOUNTABLE TO US AND ALWAYS BE TRANSPARENT.  

It should be a land where the people should be consulted by referendum on important questions affecting the defense, security and taxation of our people.  
It should be a land where our politicians extoll those who produce for the greater good and that welfare be minimized.  
It should be a land where education should be the mainstay of our society and that students remain in school for a purpose.  
It should be a nation where our politicians bring back total, unfettered, uncluttered FREEDOM OF SPEECH AND OF THE PRESS.  

Continue reading

Keeping the Australian Public Out: Race Inquiry by Ian Wilson LL.B.

The Human Rights Commission is seeking to have the public prevented from commenting on an inquiry into their handling of the University student race-hate case. (The Australian, August 8, 2016, p.5) The commission submitted that it would not be appropriate to consider submissions from the public. That, I think, is the best argument which one can giv...
Continue reading

Identity Politics and Australia by Chris Knight

Although I seldom agree with The Australian's "editor-at-large", Paul Kelly, his article "Race, Gender: The Risk of Identity Politics" (The W.E. Australian, August 6-7, 2016, p.15), raises issues that conservatives have become too afraid to address. In fact Kelly does talk about the question of "weakness": "This movement proves the ideological creativity of the Left, the manipulative power of human rights law and the perversion of the idea of justice - seen in this country in Section 18 C of the Racial Discrimination Act where individuals can (initiate) legal action because they are "offended" by others".

"The politics of identity speaks to deep human need. Yet its application veers towards narcissism, censoring of public debate, vicious campaigns of intimidation and a diminished public square. It is extraordinary to see how many institutions and prominent figures buckle before the campaigns of identity politics, too weak to stand on principle".

Continue reading