Archive | Bureaucratic Incompetence RSS feed for this section
May 5, 2014

Ken Thompson Loved His Children by Brian Bedard

Ryan Steacy, Mike Ackermann liked this post


I admit I never gave much thought to Family Law. Like many people looking from the outside in, I figured our court system was designed to serve justice, and I thought that people who complained about it were probably just disgruntled about their own obligations. I was brought up to take responsibility for my actions and to respect authority. Of course, once I myself was thrust into the family courts, I quickly learned that not all authority respects me.

Now that I find myself part of the growing cry for the reform of our Family Court system, people often share emotional stories with me about how this system has treated them. I always try to remind myself that for every story there are two sides. But in fact, there are more than two sides whenever children are involved.

And I am seeing more and more of the impetus for reform coming from the very children who were left to grow up with the decisions of our dysfunctional system. They are realizing what was taken from them, and they are asking questions.

Ken Thompson Loved His Children by Brian BedardTrena Thompson, now a mother herself, is one of those children. She has been speaking out in honour of her late father, Ken Thompson. She is not only talking about systemic abuse, she has the documents to prove it. After his death, Trena discovered that her father had hidden over 500 of his documents amongst her own files. It is a paper trail which tells clearly the story of one of the worst cases of abuse of power orchestrated against a man whose only wish was to be a dad.

Trena wants her father to be honoured and recognized as a hero to all other parents who have endured such oppression.

He saved his files for a reason, stuck them in with mine to help us all. I want to see that it is used as a perfect example as to how flawed the current system is.

The systemic collapse of justice in the town of Sarnia is more than evident in the fact that Trena’s father was given two different identities. Two names were submitted: Kenneth John Thompson and John K. Thompson. And this led to two different case numbers being created by the Family Responsibility Office, which in turn resulted in the demand for two different child support payments from the same man. His attempts to correct this deceitful error went on for years.

The Family Responsibility Office was relentless in its efforts to collect the extra payments, disregarding what should have been a simple clerical error, and sending him back to court where lawyers and judges failed to question or prevent the ongoing disparagement of his character.

Every time Ken Thompson took steps to free himself from the dysfunctional system, he was punished. Lawyers filed documents suggesting that he was mentally ill when he wrote letters asking to visit his own children.

Trena grew up being told

“Your dad is going to steal you… you should run away whenever you see him.”

Furthermore, false allegations of sexual abuse were put forward, effectively discrediting him.

Ken Thompson died of a myocardial infraction, which is a technical term for a heart attack, but I think it really is as simple as calling it a broken heart.

Without a doubt in my mind both heart attacks were induced by the stress, false allegations and fraud the courts were putting him through. The oppression of it all is enough to make the strongest sick. My dad used to always ride a bike, ate healthy, and had his black belt. His first heart attack came a year and a half after the first allegation of him sexually abusing me. Breaks my heart because I know my dad didn’t do that,” says Trena, in a video she made to courageously share his story.

She is determined to continue his struggle for justice, because even after all these years, the system has not changed.

As I consider Trena’s case, I have questions I cannot answer. How does something like this happen? Why are good parents treated like guilty deadbeats?

Ken Thompson loved his children. He worked earnestly to provide for them. Plenty of good people face divorce. And good people want to take care of their children. When they go to Family Court seeking resolution, why are they served with retribution?

When the Family Responsibility Office was mandated to enforce court-ordered family support payments, it was handed exceptional power. As long as their procedural requirements are met, FRO employees are allowed to blindly disregard basic human respect and compassion. And they will be the first to tell you that it is the Family Court that hands them the paperwork needed to wield this power. It is much like a bulldozer set in motion without consideration as to what may be in its path.

But who takes responsibility for the effects of a biased court ruling? Is it up to a cash-strapped parent to siphon more of their funds into the system and away from their children? Where does someone turn when mistakes are made? We have no checks and balances. There is nothing to protect a parent from being villainized by an emotional ex-spouse. There is no way to ensure that the court’s decisions are fair.

Judges and lawyers too often benefit from motivation that has little to do with the well-being of the children. Make no mistake: children are hurt when the very people that should be keeping them safe from harm are allowed to use them as a possession.

Personally, I have asked more than one Family Law lawyer whether they feel our current system is flawed. “Off the record”, they readily agree that it is. But when I’ve asked them why they don’t speak up and become a part of the solution instead of the problem, the conversation always ceases. I guess, after all, lawyers thrive on conflict. It’s a plain fact that the more complicated the case, the more money the lawyers make.

Judges are not motivated to make changes either. A cookie cutter approach facilitated by no-fault divorce seems to have made their job simple.

And this is another question I cannot answer: If the divorce act is a no-fault system, why are allegations even considered in Family Court to begin with?

Indeed, if a serious allegation such as sexual abuse has been put on the table, does this not deserve to be addressed in Criminal Court? And then if a conviction is made, such information can be entered into the Family Court case with true authority to protect the innocent.

On the other hand, where is the protection from a parent who is committing the offence of false allegations? Should mere allegations be all that is required for a child to be taken away from a parent?

Parental alienation creates lifelong scars. From Trena Thompson’s perspective, the Family Court ultimately alienated her from both of her parents. She was deprived of her father because of unsubstantiated allegations and her mother was taken from her by the adversarial approach that our Family Court thrives on.

I hope this whole situation is used as a example as to why they must stop creating and enabling conflict within families,” she comments.

Trena also recalls her dad’s integrity through it all.

“In all the years my mom hurt my dad he never spoke ill of her, just honestly. He would always tell me that she was not always like that.”

If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

March 16, 2014

Is Nanaimo RCMP Sgt. Sheryl Armstrong a complete idiot?

Lucien Noguès liked this post


Is Nanaimo RCMP Sgt. Sheryl Armstrong a complete idiot? Or just thoroughly ignorant of the laws she supposedly enforces?

I honestly don’t know what else you can say about a so-called “police officer” who has absolutely no idea of what she speaks.

I also can’t fathom how moronic [alleged] reporter Darrell Bellaart must be that he refused to do the most basic fact-checking prior to making both himself and his newspaper the laughing stock of the nation.

The story coming out of Nanaimo (“Nanaimo RCMP discover Soviet assault weapons“) is that the RCMP discovered “Soviet assault rifles” and Thank God they did!!!! God only knows what could happen if these heinous “assault weapons” fell into the wrong hands!!!

Except for one small pesky fact.

The SKS is NOT an “assault rifle”.

It is a semi-automatic firearm. That means it fires a single bullet with each trigger pull. It is a non-restricted rifle you can legally purchase at any gun store in the country.

Bellart writes:

“The weapons are capable of rapidly firing up to 10 bullets without reloading.”

No, they are not.

The SKS, like all semi-automatic rifles in Canada, are by law limited to 5 rounds in the magazine. Anyone with even a passing knowledge of firearms law would know that. An RCMP Sergeant most definitely would. Or should. Unless she is more interested in a scary headline than the truth.

So either reporter Darrell Bellaart is an idiot for not doing his own research, or he’s a moron for believing the wheelbarrow of dung Nanaimo RCMP Sgt. Sheryl Armstrong tossed in his face.

Or maybe he was just so desperate for a headline he didn’t care about journalistic integrity, in which case I can’t understand why the newspaper employs him.

Regardless of which (or all) of the above is true, Darrell Bellaart is probably the most lazy and pathetic example of a “reporter” I’ve encountered in a very long time.

As for Sgt. Sheryl Armstrong, you’d think we were in Beirut, not Canada, when she spouts off drivel like this.

Any time you have something capable of firing more than one bullet (in rapid succession), it’s concerning,” Armstrong said. “You think about the massacres we’ve had with AK-47s.

[NOTE: Nanaimo Daily News edited the article to remove this comment since this article was written. The original article appears below.]

Well, if I could find even a single “massacre” in Canada committed with an AK-47 then maybe I would think about them, but since there hasn’t been one I can’t.

If the Nanaimo Daily News wants to report the news then by all means do so. Tell your readers a couple of alleged criminals were found with some stolen merchandise, drugs and guns. But don’t treat your readers like 3-year-olds and cry “The Sky Is Falling!” just because a couple of criminals were caught in possession of non-restricted firearms.

Yours in Liberty,


Christopher di Armani

Nanaimo RCMP discover Soviet assault weapons
Routine investigation of shed near Nanaimo home uncovers pair of SKS Tula semi-automatic rifles

A cache containing two assault weapons, drugs and $18,000 in reportedly stolen goods was uncovered by police in a shed during a routine investigation. Nanaimo RCMP officers made the discovery in the 200-block of Pine Street earlier this week.

Two Soviet-era SKS Tula semi-automatic assault rifles, a scooter valued at $3,000, and an estimated $15,000 worth of bicycles were hidden in the shed, along with a quantity of heroin, cocaine, methamphetamine and marijuana. Police would not say what led to the find.

But the discovery of two Russian assault weapons is of particular concern, given the potential danger they pose to public safety. The weapons are capable of rapidly firing up to 10 bullets without reloading.

“If they fall into the wrong hands, now they’ve got a semi-automatic weapon,” said Sgt. Sheryl Armstrong of the Nanaimo RCMP. “Or if some young child finds them and thinks they’re a toy, and there’s ammunition, look out.”

Guns capable of firing one bullet after another are often used in mass shootings.

“Any time you have something capable of firing more than one bullet (in rapid succession), it’s concerning,” Armstrong said. “You think about the massacres we’ve had with AK-47s. If you can fire off (multiple) shots just like that, it has the capability of harming more individuals than a single shot.”

Christopher Durkin, 43, appeared in provincial court Thursday facing weapons, property crime and drug charges. His next court date is set for April 1.

If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

March 1, 2014

The RCMP Hates One Thing More Than Firearms: Firearm Owners



The priorities of the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) are screwed up.

You may think tracking down child pornographers might be a bigger priority for RCMP investigators but I suspect you would be wrong. The RCMP seems far more intent on tracking down law-abiding gun owners and building files on them instead.

In 2013 and 2013, for example, the RCMP spent $1 million on their “Firearms Internet Investigative Support Unit”.

What’s that, you ask? It’s an RCMP unit comprised of one RCMP sergeant and 6 civilian employees whose sole job is to troll the internet and track what certain Canadians are saying, doing and thinking.

Ordinary people like you and me.

We’ve committed no crimes, nor will we.

We mere citizens have the audacity, however, to own private property the RCMP deems unacceptable.

We own firearms.

Canadian firearm owners, the legal ones who take the safety courses, pass RCMP background checks and receive spousal support for their firearm license application, are the most law-abiding segment of society. Collectively we own millions of firearms yet we harm nobody.

We are a threat to nobody. I can say that with certainty because the RCMP themselves “permit” us to own firearms. They stamped “Approved” on our firearm license applications and sent us on our way to be checked up on continuously by Chief Firearms Officers and other RCMP entities like the “Firearms Internet Investigative Support Unit”, supposedly to enhance public safety.

If we attend a gun show we’re tracked. If we buy a gun we’re tracked. If we sell a gun we’re tracked, and at each and every step the RCMP decides if we are “eligible” to retain our firearm license. Should they deem us “ineligible” our license will be revoked, we will be arrested and our firearms seized.

Gun-Owners-Eat-BabiesAll because we dare own firearms.

If we’re so dangerous why were we issued firearms licenses in the first place?

Clearly we are not dangerous.

We are no threat to anyone. Anyone, that is, except the RCMP bureaucrats who believe firearms in the hands of good people is a bad thing.

To those folks we’re far worse than any child molester, serial rapist or murderer.

We’re gun owners.

(I can’t wait to send in my firearms license renewal  application! Their file on me must be pretty thick by now and I’m sure this article won’t help my case.)

Manufacturing Criminals

Just this week the RCMP turned thousands of Canadian gun owners into criminals when they arbitrarily reclassified 2 firearms from Non-Restricted (anyone can own one and take it to the shooting range or out to the woods shooting) to Prohibited (you can ONLY take it to a shooting range IF you can get an Authorization to Transport it).

Anyone who owns the CZ-858 manufactured after 2006 or the Swiss Arms Classic Green rifles is now a criminal in possession of a prohibited firearm despite the fact each and every person purchased these firearms legally.

Each and every one of those licensed firearm owners are all now liable for up to 10 years in prison (Criminal Code Section 92 -2) for possessing a rifle the RCMP “allowed” them to purchase legally for the past decade.

RCMP bureaucrats made this decision to manufacture criminals out of ordinary law-abiding Canadians. There was no order from the Minister of Public Safety. There was no threat to Canadians. There was simply a bureaucratic decision by the RCMP to manufacture thousands of “gun criminals”.


For what it’s worth, and that value s yet to be determined, Public Safety Minister Steven Blaney is “troubled” that unelected and unaccountable RCMP bureaucrats keep pulling this crap. In a statement issued on February 29, 2014 he wrote:

Conservatives have always stood up for law-abiding gun owners.

That’s why I was troubled to learn of a decision made by unelected bureaucrats to prohibit a number of rifles imported from Switzerland.

I want to assure you that I will not let law-abiding gun owners suffer as a result of this situation.

These now “prohibited” firearms had been classified as non-restricted for more than a decade. The RCMP has no idea how many of these rifles exist, and they have not announced any plan on how to deal with those who purchased these firearms lawfully.

I want to assure you all options are on the table to fix this situation. I will also be taking steps to make sure this never happens again.

The actions of these bureaucrats are absolutely unacceptable and I will be announcing concrete measures in the coming days.

Our Conservative Government is on your side — and we will always stand up for the rights of law-abiding firearms owners.

Thank you once again for your years of loyal support.


Steven Blaney
MP, Levis-Bellechasse

While it is refreshing to see Steven Blaney come out so strongly against this arbitrary criminal creation the real definition of the Conservatives having “always stood up for law-abiding gun owners” will be seen in what Blaney actually does on this issue.

Unless he orders the RCMP to reverse both of these firearm re-classifications immediately his words will be meaningless.

If he merely offers compensation for these firearms and allows the RCMP bureaucrats to order their destruction then we will know exactly where the Conservative government stands in relation to law-abiding Canadian gun owners: with the RCMP and their unelected and unaccountable anti-gun bureaucrats.

Standing up for law-abiding gun owners means stopping the RCMP’s attacks on us. Period.

The Harper government and Minister of Public Safety Steven Blaney specifically must take control of these RCMP bureaucrats immediately.

So far that hasn’t happened.

The High River gun confiscation fiasco was never resolved to anyone’s satisfaction, except maybe the RCMP’s. No heads rolled, nobody lost their jobs for violating the Rights and Freedoms of Canadians. It is business as usual as far as the RCMP is concerned and law-abiding Canadian gun owners are understandably fearful.

At any given moment any one of us can be turned into a criminal with the potential to spend years in prison even though we’ve followed every rule, obeyed every law and jumped through every hoop asked of us, all at the whim of some nameless and faceless RCMP bureaucrat.

That is what’s unacceptable.

If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

October 27, 2012

Road Procing – A new tax to pay what our gasoline taxes supposedly pay for, with added bonus of spying on us 24×7



Government is innately wasteful. It’s a simple enough concept to understand really.

When a group of people are not accountable for the money they spend there is no incentive to spend that money wisely.

While a simple concept, bureaucrats and politicians routinely show they cannot comprehend it.

Take the Greater Vancouver Regional District (GVRD) and TransLink. These two thoroughly unaccountable groups continually waste millions and millions of dollars doing God knows what and for what reason. What is unassailable is that they waste money like there’s no tomorrow. TransLink, for example, continually runs deficits despite never actually paying attention to what commuters in the Greater Vancouver area want.

That would be roads that make commuting faster and more sensible, just in case anyone cares, not bicycle lanes on the Burrard Street Bridge.

No, bicycle lanes are mandatory not so much because cyclists demand them, but because TransLink signed on to the Seville Charter, an agreement that requires cities to make “transportation networks more conducive to cycling.”

The document aimed at the national and transnational level underlining the benefits of cycling as a daily mode of transport, citing improved health, reduced traffic congestion, significantly cheaper infrastructure, and lowered transport emissions among many other advantages.

Stripped of its politically-correct double-speak, what that means is simply social re-engineering, or making we mere citizens do what “our betters” want us to do.

Forget the notion that cars make up the overwhelming majority of transportation on our roads and bridges. That’s irrelevant, since the overriding thought of these unelected bureaucrats is that people shouldn’t be driving cars in the first place. It’s unhealthy according to them so we must be moved out of our cars, no matter what.

The latest strategy by these social engineering buffoons is to add ANOTHER tax onto those evil people who still dare drive a vehicle on public roads called “Road Pricing”.

Essentially this plan is being proposed for two reasons. First, as I have already mentioned, is the social engineering they deem necessary, and second, as a way of generating more revenue to do what they’ve already taxed us to death on: mass transit.

The GVRD already taxes vehicle drivers 15 cents per liter of gasoline to pay for these programs, whether we use them or not. They already have in place additional taxes on property and land grants that allow them to charge a premium for parking when using the transit system, yet the still do not have enough money for their grand schemes.

Shocking, isn’t it? Okay, no it’s not even remotely shocking. It’s typical of the bureaucratic mindset.

“We’ll just raise taxes to cover the shortfall.”

Since the GVRD and TransLink are unaccountable to anyone and spend money like it’s rain falling from the sky, they naturally need more money since the millions they already steal from British Columbians is not enough to cover their wasteful spending.

“Road Pricing” is their latest scheme that would require every single vehicle to be equipped with a GPS transponder so government would know where your vehicle is at all times. Whenever your vehicle crosses an arbitrary border or travels on a road they deem “taxable”, you would be sent a bill.

They conveniently forget that the gasoline tax and the special addition to our property tax is already in place and was supposed to pay for these agencies.

Let me say that again. These agencies have already added taxes on gas and property to cover their expenses.

They are so inept at managing their resources, however, that they must now pass an additional tax scheme that will cost hundreds of millions of dollars to implement, not to mention create another layer of bureaucracy to track every vehicle, and therefor every person, in the Lower Mainland.

Setting aside the obvious privacy considerations that should mean an automatic “NO!” be screamed by every single British Columbian, these bureaucrats want to be paid twice for the work they didn’t do the first time.

How typical. How predictable.

How despicable.

Frank Hilliard made some interesting points recently in his article “Road Pricing Needs to be Strangled at Birth“.

OK, now why is all this extremely dangerous, anti-democratic and anti-libertarian? It’s dangerous because this system will allow the government to monitor the movement of everyone in the area. No matter where you go, what you do, who you see; everything will go into a giant database. All the personal freedoms we now enjoy will go out the window.

Secondly, every road regulation you break will be automatically recorded. If you’ve ever checked your speed against a GPS (and who hasn’t) you know it’s almost impossible to not break the speed limit even if you’re trying hard to comply (and who is). This means that instead of just taxing you for the kilometers you’re traveling, they’ll be able to fine you for EVERY little infraction you made along the way.

And thirdly, the basic idea is anti democratic. Why should car drivers be asked to pay for bus riders anyway? If car drivers wanted to ride the bus, they would! If they wanted to pay for a Translink pass, they would. The fact is car owners want to use their cars, not the local bus system.

This is what so infuriates urban planners, politicians and cultural Marxists. The private automobile gives people a freedom they NEVER had before it arrived. They want to shut that down and go back to the 1890’s when you had to take mass transportation if you wanted to travel.

They want control. Road pricing is all about control.

We need to kill this monster in its crib before it gets out, grows up and ends Canadian liberties.


Amen, Frank.

If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

September 13, 2012

Canadian Public School System is a Breeding Ground for Stupidity

EDMONTON, ALTA.: MAY 31, 2012 - Ross Sheppard high school teacher Lynden Dorval is suspended for going against the school's no-zero policy when grading students' tests. Photo taken on May 31, 2012 in Edmonton. (Rick MacWilliam, EDMONTON JOURNAL)

Over a 100 years ago, when immigrants came to clear and farm Canadian land, the community members quickly built churches for various denominations.

Then came the schoolhouses.

The provincial government helped finance the structures that served the dual purpose as a place to educate the children as well as a focal point for all the communities’ social functions and affairs.

The public school system served a vital societal role in offering an education to every child, regardless of financial wherewithal that precluded most families from sending their offsprings far away to the fine European learning facilities.

Anybody who went through the old-fashioned public school system came out with a solid, rounded education in such subjects as reading, writing, math, history, geography, English, Latin, Romance languages, science, civics, music, religion, morality, respect and character.

With time, as socialism became trendy, the public school system program strayed far from its original purpose and began to crumble under the weight of politically-correct policies and practices that essentially denied children an education.

As columnist Joseph Sorbran wrote:

“In 100 years we have gone from teaching Latin and Greek in high school to teaching Remedial English in college.”

Educator Bertrand Russell observed that the difference between a bright, inquisitive five-year-old, and a dull, stupid nineteen-year-old was fourteen years of the British educational system.

Distraught parents, still forced to pay school taxes to keep the public school system afloat, had a choice of enrolling their children in expensive private schools which might mean the heartbreaking undertaking of sending them many miles away from home for month-long stretches.

Or the parents could take on the exhaustive role of homeschooling their children to ensure they had the best possible education for giving them a good send off into life.

If the government could, it would outlaw private schools and homeschooling.

Both produce educated students who are thinkers who grow up to constitute the middle-class society that the government wants to obliterate to bring in a Marxist One-World Order.

When virtuous people forsake a constitutional society for a crock of politically-
correct scum, the inevitable result is social and political instability that rots on the stump of decadence and immorality.

The Edmonton Public Schools, like other public school systems across this land and other Western nations, is a brainwashing factory, a breeding ground for stupidity, the training of students to be what Marxist Vladimir Lenin called “useful idiots”, who know nothing and cannot think for themselves.

But they will make fine lazy louts and moochers, idlers and infidels, drunkards and dependents, scoundrels and sluts, power-hungry politicians and apathetic citizens who in turn leave a nation ripe for tyranny.

As Mark Twain said:

“God made the Idiot for practice, and then He made the School Board.”

Only the educated thinkers of middle-class status can keep a nation strong and free and maintain its sovereignty. Only dedicated teachers the likes of Lynden Dorval who knows the right way to prepare students to embark on life will save Canada from the clutches of the United Nations and a tyrannical One-World Order–a path no sane, educated person wants to trod.

Some students of the Edmonton Public Schools (and elsewhere) have learned one lesson perfectly: they can slide from one grade to another without doing a lick of home work that leaves them free to indulge in the hedonistic time-wasters of dope-smoking and playing video games.

Real life is not going to be as generous.

Due to the system boring them silly and they are nothing more than a waste of desk space and public funds, the school system has set a policy to push them through the factory in 10 to 12 years, regardless that they know zippo when they go through the pretense of graduation–if they last that long.


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

September 11, 2012

Edmonton School Bureaucrats Are Morons

EDMONTON, ALTA.: MAY 31, 2012 - Ross Sheppard high school teacher Lynden Dorval is suspended for going against the school's no-zero policy when grading students' tests. Photo taken on May 31, 2012 in Edmonton. (Rick MacWilliam, EDMONTON JOURNAL)

When I say that Edmonton school bureaucrats are morons, I am directing my ire at the bureaucratic buffoons who believe life is a fantasy directed by them personally.

EDMONTON, ALTA.: MAY 31, 2012 – Ross Sheppard high school teacher Lynden Dorval is suspended for going against the school’s no-zero policy when grading students’ tests.
Photo Rick MacWilliam, EDMONTON JOURNAL)

Back in June of 2012 Edmonton school teacher Lynden Dorval was suspended for not playing by school bureaucrat’s utopian rules that stated nobody can get a zero, even if they don’t turn in a single assignment.

Sucking off the government teat obviously has it’s perks, doesn’t it?  You can make completely ludicrous rules and fire good and decent people for being smart enough not to follow them.  Or not being stupid enough to blindly follow them, I suppose, is another way of putting it.

Lynden Dorval has the audacity to believe his job is to prepare young people for the real world.

In the real world people actually have to complete work if they are to be paid and earn a living.  Imagine that!

This ability to think critically is obviously well beyond the capacity of school board officials, much to the detriment of teachers and students alike.

This fantasy-land where “everyone is a winner” and “both teams get a trophy” is just that: a fantasy land.  It doesn’t exist in the real world.  If it did then everyone who entered the US Open Tennis Championship should be awarded the trophy, right?


There is only one winner.  That’s life. That’s the way things work outside of the ivory towers of academia where they succeed only in training kids for failure.

Personally, I believe Lynden Dorval should be awarded a medal for his ability to comprehend the obvious: that rewarding students for not doing the work is just plain stupid.

“It’s on that handout I give them at the start that it’s up to them to come to me to make arrangements (to finish the work). I stay after school three days a week and I’m usually in my room at lunch hour, and sometimes the kids have spares so I tell them, ‘You make arrangements with me to come in and make up the work.’ ”

“No-Zero” policies are stupid. While they certainly will help with their apparently-stated goal of “ensuring more students make it through the school system” that isn’t the same thing as actually educating students, is it?  (Uh, the answer to that is “No” just in case the Edmonton School Board superintendent is reading…)

You determine what a student has learned by the work they do and the scores they receive on tests designed to see what they know.  What a thought!  About the only thing a student learns by the enforcement of asinine “no-zero” policies is how to skate through life without every actually doing anything.

No company in their right mind wants to hire employees that won’t work.   On the upside, that means we’re training a whole new generation on how to be school board bureaucrats.

No, that’s not a good thing, in case you’re wondering.

“It is regrettable that after a long career with Edmonton Public Schools, you chose this very public and destructive course of action,” says the letter from the district superintendent.

Actually, what is a “destructive course of action” for students and society alike is insisting against all reason that “everyone is a winner” when they are not.

School Principal Ron Bradley has clearly been drinking the Kool-Aid for far too long.  In an audio recording obtained by the CBC he defends the asinine policy and then blames the media for the harsh light of reality that’s now shining down upon him.

If Principal Ron Bradley and the Edmonton School Board actually decides to fire Lynden Dorval the only thing they will prove is that they are every bit the morons I think they are.

Hey, I’m willing to be proven wrong…  Are they?

Not likely.  They’d rather get rid of a good teacher who actually cares about the kids in his class than admit they’ve screwed up.

It’s the bureaucratic way.

If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

August 7, 2012

When is your private property not your own? Whenever a bureaucritter of the Nanny State says so.

Michel Beauchamp and Josee Landry's front yard garden

We like to believe that when we make the most expensive purchase of our lives, our family home, we’re actually the ones who own it.  It’s a fallacy, however, as more and more homeowners, if I can even call them that, are discovering across North America.

When we buy a piece of land and a house, we believe we can do what we want with that land and home.

Oh, we’re such silly people sometimes, aren’t we?  The bureaucritters of the Nanny State, ever desirous of control over our every waking moment, continually come up with stupider and stupider rules to inflict their will on us and our property.

It wouldn’t be so bad if these bureaucratic buffoons did not have the full power and weight of the State behind them, but they do.  Submit or Die seems to be the motto these Nanny State Bureaucrats live by, and they aren’t particularly caring about which one we do, either.

Anyone who knows the story of Carl Drega knows exactly what I’m talking about.  (For the full story on Carl Drega’s decades long nightmare that ended with his death please read The Ballad of Carl Drega by Vin Suprynowicz)

Michel Beauchamp and Josee Landry's front yard gardenThe latest case of bureaucratic stupidity comes out of La Belle Provence and the town of Drummondville, where Michel Beauchamp and Josee Landry are learning all about “approved” gardening from the mindless minions of the State.

Welcome to their municipal bylaw nightmare, where growing their own food is a crime punishable by a fine of $300 PER DAY for every day they do not comply with a bureaucratic order to remove their garden.

And why must they remove their beautiful and useful garden, you ask?  It doesn’t comply with The Rules, you silly citizen!  And the Rules say every front yard MUST… yes MUST contain the prescribed amount of useless green grass or else!

Ah yes, I remember now… The Rules Are More Important Than People.  How silly of me to forget, even for a moment, that it’s the Minions of The State who are in charge of my life and not me, a mere citizen.


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

July 24, 2012

City of Toronto reverses decision to ban medal-winning sport shooters from Ontario Summer Games promotional event

Cockroaches and politicians have one thing in common. Both scurry for the shadows when the spotlight is on them.  In the case of Toronto politicians, that spotlight is public displeasure with their latest stupid decision.

As I wrote yesterday, gold-medal sport shooters Chris Baldwin, 18, and Sabrina Sergeant, 17, were told they were not welcome as Ambassadors to promote the World Record Camp Games.

Outrage was fast and furious once Tony Bernardo of the Canadian Shooting Sports Association (CSSA) made this asinine decision public.  Faced with intense public outrage, the cockroaches at Toronto City Hall did what they always do… they ran cowering for cover, but not before reversing their decision.

City of Toronto spokeswoman Deborah Blackstone said that Chris Baldwin and Sabrina Sergeant have now been “re-invited” to attend the ceremony for the World Record Camp Games, intended to promote the 2012 Ontario Summer Games to be held in Toronto Aug. 16-19.

Given the recent events in the city, city staff made a decision not to have the athlete ambassadors representing sport shooting participate in the on-stage welcoming ceremony component of the World Record Camp Games due to the very young audience expected to participate in the event,” Deborah Blackstone wrote in an e-mail Monday.

“Upon further reflection, and discussion with the Games organizing committee, the City of Toronto regrets the decision that was communicated to the Canadian Shooting Sports Association.”


So was it the decision to slap these two medal-winning athletes in the face what these cockroaches regretted?  Or was it merely that they regretted communicating that decision to Tony Bernardo and the Canadian Shooting Sports Association?


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

July 23, 2012

Ontario Summer Games Committee to award-winning target shooters: You’re Not Welcome Here

Politicians and bureaucrats have an incredible talent for sending precisely the wrong message.

In this regard the Government of Ontario and the City of Toronto have combined for a new all-time low: blaming two award-winning sport shooting youths for Toronto’s ongoing gun and gang crime problem.

Chris Baldwin, 18, and Sabrina Sergeant, 17, are both very accomplished athletes. They both devote countless hours every week to hone their skills so they can reach their current goal of winning the Ontario Summer Games in August.

They are perfect examples of what we should promote to young people everywhere: dedicated, focused, hard-working, goal-oriented and most importantly, law-abiding.

These two young athletes are also, according to Ontario government officials, to blame for all of Toronto’s gun crime.

That is logic that only a politician can comprehend.

Michael Fusco of the Ontario Summer Games (who can be reached at 2012 City Hall 8th Floor, West Tower, 100 Queen Street West, Toronto, ON M5H 2N2  phone: (416) 338-5721, email: ) wrote to the Canadian Shooting Sports Association (who sponsors these two athletes) the following message:

Unfortunately due to the untimely shootings that have taken place in Scarborough and the City recently, we have received a directive that we can no longer have the Sporting Rifle Athlete Ambassadors present on stage at the World Record Camp Games event. This is unfortunately something that has been handed down to us out of our control and we deeply apologize.   We realize that gun violence has nothing to do with the sport of Sporting Rifle or any of your Athletes and that your sport promotes the safe and responsible use of rifles.  We appreciate your understanding of this matter and apologize to both the CSSA and your Athlete Ambassadors sincerely.  Should you have any questions, please contact Cathy Vincelli at 416-397-5349.

If Michael Fusco, Cathy Vincelli, Ontario Summer Games and World Record Camp Games event organizers, the Province of Ontario and the City of Toronto comprehend “that gun violence has nothing to do with the sport of Sporting Rifle or any of your Athletes and that your sport promotes the safe and responsible use of rifles” then they should be plastering the city with billboards of these two athletes, promoting them as role models for other young people across Ontario.

Instead what do these politically-correct, anti-gun, mind-numbingly stupid cowards do? They tell two gold medal-winning sport shooters are not welcome as Ambassadors to promote the World Record Camp Games.  They paint two highly successful young athletes with the same filthy brush as criminal gang members who murder people indiscriminately in crowded shopping malls and block parties with illegal firearms.

Disgusted doesn’t even begin to express how I feel about Michael Fusco, Cathy Vincelli, Ontario Summer Games and World Record Camp Games event organizers, the Province of Ontario and the City of Toronto.


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

July 7, 2012

Poorly-Written Laws Are Criminal


To maintain the ascendancy of the Constitution over the lawmaking majority is the great and essential point on which the success of (any nation’s) system must depend; unless that ascendancy can be preserved, the necessary consequence must be that the laws will supersede the Constitution; and, finally, the will of the Executive, by influence of its patronage, will supersede the laws …
— John C. Calhoun (1782-1850) American statesman


In a July 2nd column, Christopher di Armani asked a resounding question: “Does the Yukon Territory really need another layer of bureaucracy to do the job the RCMP is already paid to do?”

Then on July 3rd, he went on to blister the breeches of British Columbia Agriculture Minister Don McRae for introducing a Bill titled the “Animal Health Act” that would make it criminal for anyone to exercise their constitutional free-speech right by disclosing a disease outbreak in any animal population. To ensure muzzle compliance, the government inserted an outrageous penalty of two years in the slammer and a $75,000 fine for offenders.

Those observations reminded me of a study once conducted by the Vancouver-based Fraser Institute that said those who dare define regulations would find themselves working in a quagmire.

At the relevant time, I suggested the writers could have possibly saved four pages of mire by simply saying “it’s a law”. It doesn’t matter if it’s called a regulation, act, statute, rule or a sow’s ear, a regulation is still a law.

It doesn’t matter if the law is enforced by the tax collector, mining inspector, game warden, fisheries officer, bylaw officer, dog catcher or the police.

They have power over you.

An individual can be arrested, charged, have property seized and be forced to shell out mind-boggling amounts of money on defense in the courts and before quasi-judiciary boards. Often, the exercise is akin to trying to nail jelly to the wall.


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

June 16, 2012

Pro-Gun Groups praise Vic Toews for ending “back-door” registry, but did he really?


After Bill C-19 passed and was proclaimed into law Canada’s so-called “Long Gun Registry” was officially dead.  Except that it wasn’t.

The law said it was, but the RCMP is still dragging its heels when it comes to actually deleting the data contained in the registry database.   They claimed it will take months to work out the details of how to delete the data which is, to be blunt, garbage.

The database is specifically set up with a field called “Class”, into which one of three classes of firearms can be entered.  For example, if you have a registered handgun this field will say “Restricted”.  If you have a machine gun this field will say “Prohibited”.

For non-restricted firearms this field will contained, shock of shocks, “Non-Restricted”.

Anyone with the brains of a flea can simply select all database records where “Class” = “Non-Restricted” and then press the Delete key. It’s very simple, yet apparently far beyond the ability of the techs at the Canadian Firearms Program.

Okay, to be fair that might be a slight over-simplification, but not by much.  The Quebec injunction preserving data on Quebec firearm owners is one problem.  The anti-gun and anti-freedom mindset of some members of the RCMP bureaucracy is certainly another.

To make matters worse the provincial Chief Firearms Officer (CFO) in Ontario issued a decree that all firearm retailers MUST keep track of all non-restricted firearm sales, which includes recording all information about both the firearm and the person purchasing the firearm.

This information (exactly the same as what is stored in the federal database) is then stored in a ledger in the firearms retailer’s place of business.  The catch is that the ledger is not the property of the retailer, it’s the property of the provincial CFO.

This decree has also been issued by the CFO in every single province across Canada.

The additional catch to all of this is that the CFOs have tied this data recording requirement to the Business Firearms License (BFL) of the retailer.  Don’t want to keep gun registry data?  No problem.  The CFO will be happy to revoke your Business Firearms License and voila!  You’re out of business in a heartbeat.  Otherwise your business operates at the whim of the CFO and you will do whatever he tells you.

Since a firearms business requires a Business Firearms License in order to operate business owners were placed in an impossible situation.  The law says they don’t have to keep the information but the bureaucrat who issues their BFL says he’ll cancel their license if they don’t.  On top of that, regular firearm owners won’t purchase firearms from the retailer because the retailer is going beyond the requirements of the law and keeping information they are not entitled to.

It’s a lovely Catch-22 that annoyed Public Safety Minister Vic Toews so badly he issued a decree that this practice was to end, effective immediately, or else.  (more…)

If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

February 25, 2012

Zero Tolerance = Zero Common Sense = Zero Justice


The case of Jessie Sansone and his ordeal at the hands of the Almighty State should sound the alarm bells deep inside every Canadian’s brain.

Three government agencies, all now abdicating responsibility for the fiasco, combined for a perfect storm of abuse upon Jessie Sansone, all because his 4-year-old daughter drew a picture of her dad holding a gun.


Owning firearms is legal in Canada! (IF you have the correct permission slip from the Almighty State, that is.)

Not that Jessie Sansone owned any firearms, of course, but who cares about a pesky little detail like that?

A parent should not be arrested by three cops, hauled away in handcuffs, strip searched and locked in a cell simply because his kid drew a picture.

Is there absolutely NO common sense left in this nation???

Reading the rationalizations of the Forest Hills Public School staff, Family and Children’s Services mouthpieces and the Waterloo Regional Police leave me utterly astounded that so many theoretically smart people can act so stupidly. That they’re now scrambling to rationalize their atrocious actions comes as no surprise at all. (more…)

If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

February 19, 2012

Public Safety Minister Vic Toews: Are you really as incompetent as your protestations make you appear?


I couldn’t help but laugh as I read reports that Public Safety Minister Vic Toews is suddenly shocked to learn what Bill C-30,the “Protecting Children from Internet Predators Act”, actually contains.

I find this odd, since I’ve listened to him defend Bill C-30 repeatedly and blather on endlessly about how police can never abuse their powers under this act; that he is actually protecting Canadians from abuse instead of inflicting it. All his protestations are despite the fact that numerous reporters and television interviewers who have clearly explained it to him.

If there is one thing Canadians can do with less of (other than all this government invasion of their privacy) it’s politicians that are too bloody lazy to read the legislation they are attempting to ram down our throats.

Minister Toews is either blatantly incompetent or he is attempting to deceive the Canadian public when he claims he doesn’t know what Bill C-30 contains.

Either option is possible.  Both allow for his recent vile and disgusting behavior in the House of Commons, where he said anyone who doesn’t like his atrocious legislation must be in league with child pornographers.

Either is also possible when Minister Toews attempts to make the claim that he didn’t realize that Bill C-30 allows “any police officer” to demand personal client information from an ISP and for any reason, as is clearly laid out in Section 17 of the Act as it currently stands.

“I’d certainly like to see an explanation of that,” Toews told host Evan Solomon after a week of public backlash against Bill C-30, which would require internet service providers to turn over client information without a warrant.

”This is the first time that I’m hearing this somehow extends ordinary police emergency powers [to telecommunications]. In my opinion, it doesn’t. And it shouldn’t.”

Well, Minister Toews, if the very first time you’ve heard about the contents of Bill C-30, specifically Section 17, then you must be incompetent.  If the Bill should NOT allow this, then why did you have your minions write it in?


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

February 18, 2012

The United Nations Needs Dismantling


The United Nations is not a secret organization.

Everything said and done at the United Nations level is printed, published and online in the form of books, papers, documents and YouTube videos.

The problem is that much is written in invisible ink and the reader must possess the uncanny ability to read between the lines; every word is couched in innocuous-sounding, freedom-loving Double-Speak.

I don’t know if the intentions of some nations were good when the United Nations was formed by a bunch of Communists and the Charter signed in 1945 by the “morally righteous uplifters” to promote the “feel-good tenets” of “world peace”, “security” and “cooperation among nations”.

But the United Nations has certainly strayed off-course into an evil, slow-motion movement toward a soviet (council)-style world government.

The failed United Nations replaced the failed League of Nations, a “feel-good” international organization which resulted from the signing of the post-WWI Treaty of Versailles in 1919. It’s purpose was to achieve “international peace”, “security” and “international cooperation”–all the same “principles” as The League’s successor.

In reports coming back to me, the UN has become hated worldwide. The gullible, bleeding-heart UN reps become cocky, pretentious and obnoxious because they feel superior when in the presence of the dirt-poor countries where they are dispatched to “do good”.

They drive shiny new vehicles, are housed in swanky hotels, where, at the end of the day, they wash off the land’s slime with hot showers, change into fresh clothes, then quaff cocktails before ordering expensive dishes from the menu. The meals are prepared for them; served to them; and somebody cleans up after them.


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

February 15, 2012

Gun Owners Continue to Face Criminal Charges for a Law That Doesn’t Exist


I am flipping tired of the unmitigated hubris that continues to spur Canada’s game-playing cops and court system in their indefatigable zeal to prosecute innocent gun owners with the same pesky, recycled sections of the Canadian Firearms Act.

In order to demonize gun owners to the hilt, the Government of Canada saw its way clear, at the behest of the United Nations, to dump the unlawful, unconstitutional, non-Charter-proofed Canadian Firearms Act of 1995 into the Criminal Code of Canada, ironically behind the Constitution Act 1982, and the Charter of Rights and Freedoms centrepiece, which is supposed to be the supreme law of the land.

Turning ordinary citizens into criminals is obscene.

Under the Firearms Act, a person’s Charter right to be “presumed innocent until proven guilty” is turned wrongside out with a reverse onus provision: a gun owner is GUILTY until proven GUILTY.

Seldom, if ever, do the courts acquit a person tried for firearms infractions. The judges’ thinking is ‘if you’re not guilty you wouldn’t be here.’

Note: See Christopher di Armani’s excellent column herein for a list of 11 constitutional infractions committed between the covers of the Canadian Firearms Act: “Conservative MP Cheryl Gallant understands why gun owners hate the Firearms Act. Pity the Minister of Public Safety, Vic Toews, isn’t listening to her.”

In one example, No. 11, Conservative MP Cheryl Gallant said:

“...Bill C-68 allows for both military and foreign enforcement as well, but with no other part of the Canadian Criminal Code enforceable by the military, especially a foreign military. We wondered why that one was added. The truth is this provision was included to legitimize the future presence of foreign troops on our land.”

She then asked the salient question:

“Why would Canada ever need foreign troops enforcing Canadian gun laws?”

The “foreign troops” refers to militaries based in every country of the world that are in the process of being replaced with a One-World Military. It is part of the United Nations’ machinations to spread a One World Government around the planet. A global military will have the international power to ultimately confiscate firepower from the world’s total population, except for the police and military–a game plan which Canadian Firearms Act architects, Prime Minister Jean Chretien and his eager Liberals, salivated to enforce during their reign.

The rub is that Canada would stick its head in a fiery furnace if the United Nations told Canada to do so.


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

December 28, 2011

Truth: The Most Deadly Weapon


Truth is a funny thing.

In today’s world, truth has become relative, not a certainty as it was in times past.

Today, truth is whatever those in Power say it is, and when someone is able to prove them wrong, that someone usually disappears and is never heard from again.

What prompted this little musing?

I’m signed up for a list of Freedom-related quotes, and yesterday’s email contained a few interesting quotes, but the one that struck me was the one by author John Gilmore:

“Truth: the most deadly weapon ever discovered by humanity.
Capable of destroying entire perceptual sets, cultures, and realities.
Outlawed by all governments everywhere.
Possession is normally punishable by death.”

It was the “Outlawed by governments everywhere” line that caught my eye and actually made me laugh out loud, simply because it is so true in and of itself.

The trouble isn’t so much that governments despise the truth, for I don’t believe that is the core issue.  What governments despise is not truth, but loss of power. For those sitting in the big chairs, that is what all this unfettered access to “TRUTH” really means.

It means they have lost, or are about to lose some (or all) of their power.

One look at the protests around the world this past year certainly makes that clear, doesn’t it?


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

December 17, 2011

Tom MacLachlan: Bureaucrat’s Rule #1 sucks, doesn’t it?


Tom MacLachlan was just doing what I’ve personally done numerous times…  he was dropping coins into parking meters to prevent a couple of total strangers from getting a parking ticket.

I must admit, there is an odd pleasure that comes from knowing you’ve prevented someone from getting a parking ticket.  That feeling is enhanced, even more strangely, by the knowledge that the person you just saved from that ticket has no idea what you did, or even that you exist.

I, however, don’t believe I was ever the victim of Bureaucrat’s Rule #1 when I was dropping coins into meters for strangers, unlike Vancouver’s Good Samaritan, Tom MacLachlan.

For those poor souls not familiar with it, The Bureaucrat’s Rule #1 is simply this:

The Rules Are More Important Than People

City of Vancouver bureaucrats have managed to take this rule to new heights, or, as I would prefer to characterize it, they’ve taken it to new depths of bureaucratic stupidity.

Tom MacLachlan’s bizarre story began with one Vancouver City employee who was obviously having a bad day and felt the need to vent his ill temper upon anyone in his path.

Despite the meters in his path having time left on them, in part due to Mr. MacLachlan’s kindness, the miserable city employee ticketed at least one of the vehicles anyway.

Enter Bureaucrat’s Rule #1: The Rules are More Important Than People


If you enjoy the articles I write here on, how about buying me a coffee to show your appreciation?

Go To Top
Get Adobe Flash player