First Abortion Then Contraception or is it the Other Way Around?

Remember the Lil Rascals and their He-man Women Haters Club?  Well they grew up and helped to launch the conservative movement.

In the United States, in the 21st century, GOP presidential hopefuls, are now arguing over the legality of contraception.  Can you imagine?

Contraception?

It's being labelled a womens issue, but how many men out there support a ban on contraception?

If this was a decade ago, living in Canada, I would laugh and laugh and laugh.  But given that our own government has the same regressive ideas, I have little to laugh about.

In fact, in the United States, people are fighting back against the Religious Right.  Planned Parenthood is standing their ground, while in Canada, it is being knocked to the ground.

Prop 8, the California law banning same-sex marriage has been overturned as unconstitutional, and other states are slowly granting the right to equal marriage.  In Canada Harper is playing games through the back door.

He has been working hard and often secretly, to roll back gains made by Canadians in terms of social issues.  And while claiming not to have plans to  reopen several debates, he is doing just that.  He hates to lose and he has lost on so many fronts.

Now another pawn has made a move forward, in an attempt to move us backward.  Stephen Woodworth, Conservative MP for Waterloo.  We've seen them all from Brad Trost to Rod Bruinooge, pretending to be acting alone, when in fact they can't even choose their own tie in the morning, without risking the ire of the exalted one, if it clashes with the planned mood of the day.  (Thank you Dean Del Mastro for that bit of info)

Woodworth is not acting alone, but is just the latest mysogonist selected to "reopen the abortion debate".

He wants to declare that a fetus is a human being.  If this is passed then I hope that all mothers and pregnant women take the government to court, demanding retroactive benefits to cover the time from the date of conception to birth.  Nine extra months of universal child benefit and child tax credit.

And since it's womens reproductive rights that are being tampered with, why not extend the courtesy to men?  All males, once they reach the age of 18, must have a sperm test.  Anyone with a low sperm count would then have the letter "L" stamped on their forehead.

If women can get an extra nine months of benefits, why should they risk hooking up with a loser?

Rick Santorum is now leading in the polls for the Republican nomination in the U.S.  Pundits and comedians are having a field day with his views, and many are now mocking his sweater vest.  Apparently that is the uniform of the social conservative.

Santorum wants to wage war on Iran, killing innocent children, while claiming to be "pro-life".  He opposes gay rights, equal marriage and wants to legalize peeping into the bedrooms of Americans, but only by government.

And how exactly is he any different from our current government?

If you think this will stop at abortion, think again, and again and again.

They will not stop until we are a nation of gun totin', women hating, gay bashing, war mongering, narrow-minded Neanderthals.

Or what is more commonly called "conservatives".

Gloria Steinham Was Right. For Anti-Abortionists Life Begins at Conception But Ends at Birth

“These proposals included cries for billions of new money for social assistance in the name of “child poverty” and for more business subsidies in the name of “cultural identity”. In both cases I was sought out as a rare public figure to oppose such projects.” (Stephen Harper, The Bulldog, National Citizens Coalition, February 1997)

As the anti-abortionists rev up their protests, with signs showing images of aborted fetuses, and comparing abortion doctors to Hitler; they are missing a more important story.

A recent report from the World Health Organization and Save the Children, reveals that in the United States,  the infant mortality rate is on the rise.  Or perhaps more accurately, the infant mortality rate is improving in countries far less developed, making them 41 out of 45, in the study.

Gloria Steinham once said that for pro-lifers, especially those from the Religious Right, Moral Majority crowd, "life begins at conception but ends at birth".

They oppose social programs, public healthcare and sex education, all of the things that would help to improve and prolong the lives of children.

And we in Canada have no bragging rights, because we are not doing much better.

We rank 15 out of 17 peer countries.  According to the Conference Board of Canada: 

Canada gets a “C” and now ties the U.K. for 15th place out of 17 peer countries. Its infant mortality rate is shockingly high for a country at Canada’s level of socio-economic development.

Every year the "March for Life" protests, increase in number, though that doesn't necessarily mean that more Canadians are joining the movement.  Instead, as with everything else associated with Canada's Neoconservative/Religious Right/Tea Party, their numbers are bolstered by their American cousins.

This year there were representatives from both Silent No More and their parent organization Priests for Life.  PfL has spent tens of millions of dollars on ad campaigns and the promotion of candidates for public office, "who will devote themselves fully to the proclamation of the Gospel of Life.”

In other words, they are a political organization, associated with the Republican Party.

The founder of PfL is Frank Pavone, an administrative member of James Dobson's Focus on the Family.  From an interview he gave in Vienna:

Under Obama "a lot has been changed", says Pavone regarding the introduction of Universal Health Insurance. This is not per se bad, he foresaw -- like the American Catholic Bishops -- but there is the danger that in the coming foreseeable State provisions of government funds could be used for abortion ... the "Tea Party" at the most recent "Mid-term" - vote put the focus on the social questions, says Pavone. Principally, the "Pro-Life" movement is therefore "at home with the Republicans".

So while they are pouring millions into this Republican/Conservative campaign, their country and ours, is falling behind in providing adequate care to ensure that children are kept alive.  As we know, in the U.S. the Tea partiers fought tooth and nail to make sure that tax cuts for the rich went through as planned, while also making sure that food programs for those damn lazy poor people were axed.

Our man on the street and inside women's wombs, Rod Bruinooge, who spoke at the March for Life, again touted the same old line:  "Prime Minister Stephen Harper won't reopen the abortion debate in Canada."

Of course he won't.  A debate would suggest that we had input.  Instead he's using stealth, by cutting all funding to Planned Parenthood (just like the Tea Party) and women's groups (just like the Tea Party)

If these people really want to convince us that they are "pro-life", they might want to start acting like they really care about all life.

Poor people are human too.

The Canadian Manifesto 4: God's Army of Child Soldiers

"There does come a time when force, even physical force, is appropriate. The Christian is not to take the law into his own hands and become a law unto him­self. But when all avenues to flight and protest have closed, force in the defensive posture is appropriate ... The state must be made to feel the presence of the Christian community." Francis Schaeffer (1)

Faytene Kryskow Grasseschi has become one of the most prominent figures in Canada's Religious Right movement.

Her organization 4MYCanada, referred to simply as My Canada, hosts events called TheCry. Hours of emotional prayers, begging God's mercy for the horrible country that Canada has become.

Infanticide, sexual promiscuity, human trafficking. We're all going to hell in a hand basket.

I don't mean to mock, because she seems sincere in her beliefs, but what I find reprehensible, is the indoctrination of youth. Her bubbly personality and good looks are a definite draw.

I watched an interview of Kryskow (now married to Robert Grasseschi) with David Mainse on God TV, and it would appear that they are certainly trying to exploit her attributes. Mainse even requested that she do a pirouette for his viewers, and likened one of her TheCry gatherings to Woodstock (held on the anniversary).

She gets nothing near the 500,000 that the music festival did 40 years ago, but does draw in about 1,000, perhaps more.

Kryskow-Grasseschi is a regular figure on Parliament Hill, with coveted access to the Harper government. MP Rod Bruinooge is a regular at the TheCry events and often appears on stage with the little spitfire.

Conservative MP Ed Komarnicki promotes her organization on his website, sharing pics, including one with controversial senator David Tkachuk.

His colleague, Bev Shipley also makes the trek from his riding to cry with Kryskow in Ottawa. A fellow dominionist, on Canada Day 2009, he handed out bookmarks to his constituents (paid for by taxpayers?) urging them to pray for "godly" leaders who would govern "according to the Scriptural Foundation upon which our country was founded." (2)

However, the best endorsement came from the big guy himself. Not God, but the man who sees himself as such: Stephen Harper. When Faytene was on the Hill, whipping her disciples into a frenzy, he had a personal letter delivered to her, which she read to the crowd.

In it, Harper lauds her youth movement for cultivating "thoughtful, faith-filled citizens" and praises its political activism. "Faith has shaped your perspective on the world and strength­ened your resolve to make a political difference," he writes, signing off with a beneficent "God Bless."

What makes the letter noteworthy is that it arrived, unsolicited, from a politician who had spent years scrupulously avoiding any suggestion of coziness with the country's Christian right. (2)

His coziness with the American Religious Right was already well documented.

Jesus Camp and Lou Engle

David Mainse, when introducing Faytene Kryskow, compared her to both Esther and Deborah, from the Old Testament. Women warriors, though he didn't qualify his comparisons, because he didn't need to. His audience knew.

Esther was a young Jewish girl in the harem of the Persian King Ahasuerus, who is credited with saving her people from annihilation. Deborah, a prophetess, warrior and judge in ancient Israel.

However, Faytene prefers to think of herself as Joan of Ark, on the front lines of battle, who is spoken to by God.

But it is another voice that directs her actions, and one that we should be listening to. That of Lou Engle, a charismatic preacher in the United States, also seeking "dominion" over all, and replacing the constitution with the Old Testament.

In 2006, the critically acclaimed documentary, 'Jesus Camp', caused an uproar, as it revealed the Christian Right's indoctrination of children.  I watched it in its entirety and wept, wondering why child protective services didn't intervene.

At the camp, which was run by  pastor Becky Fischer, children are told to purify themselves in order to be part of the "army of God". Fischer strongly believes that children need to be at the forefront of turning America toward conservative Christian values, and that "Christians need to focus on training kids since "the enemy" (Islam) is focused on training theirs." She tells the children that Harry Potter is the devil and that had he existed in biblical times he "would have been put to death". They also pay homage to George Bush.  You can watch the trailer here, and follow the link for the entire documentary.

Fischer has closed down the camp, and now runs the group: Kids in Ministry International.

A regular speaker at the camp was Lou Engle, who created the trademark red tape across the mouth with the word 'Life'; a feature at Krystows TheCry. (He even co-authored a book on the subject)

Krystow's rallies are taken directly from Engle's TheCall. Her American mentor refers to Faytene as "his daughter" and has often made appearances with her, both live and by video stream.

In 2009 he put a call out to his American disciples to "Invade Canada for God", no doubt hoping to bolster her numbers.

Engle has also praised Uganda for its tough laws against homosexuality.

Both TheCry and TheCall are heavy on military terms, believing themselves to actually be the Army of God.

So does this mean that I expect Krystow-Grasseschire to strap on a gun and go on a shooting rampage?

Of course not.

However, her branch of Engle's movement can be dangerous just the same.

While most "born again" Christians are enlightened and change their lives around for the better, many simply use religion as a drug of choice.  Worse still, others are mentally ill and already vulnerable, so easily led to do unspeakable acts.

Like Scott Roeder, who murdered abortion doctor George Tiller. He was bi-polar and off his meds.

Or a more militant Army of God, who quote from Engle's The Doctrine of the Shedding of Innocent Blood, and view Roeder, and others like him, as heroes.

We need to have this conversation in this country.

These fringe groups have been around for years, but this is the first time that they have been allowed to dictate government policy. And they are just getting started.

Marci McDonald writes of how the U.S. media was oblivious to the threat, until it was too late, and it had destroyed U.S. politics.

When she appeared on Steve Paikin's program on TVOntario, Paikin dismissed her by suggesting that since it took 30 years for the American Right to do their damage, we had another thirty years before "late-term" abortion would be made illegal.

He was always a little right-wing, but I didn't peg him as being so naive. We don't need thirty years. The American Christian Right has not only inspired but financed the Canadian movement. It is on our doorstep and another TheCry is currently underway on Parliament Hill.

Says McDonald, when she was first asked to write a book on the rise of the Christian Right in Canada, a friend asked "Why would you want to do that? Surely you don't think that can happen here? This is a profoundly different country than the United States."

All I can say is that it used to be.

The media needs to start tracking this before it becomes our epitaph. "Here lies Canada. May she rest in peace."

Sources:

1. A Christian Manifesto, By Francis Schaeffer, Crossway Books, 1981, ISBN: 0-89107-233-0, Chapter 9: 'The Use of Force'

2. The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada, By: Marci McDonald, Random House Canada, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-307-35646-8 3, P. 16-17

What is Rod Bruinooge's Private Members Bill Really About?

I am now contributing the Religious Right Alert site. This was my first posting. Sites like this are very important to the future of our country. Not enough people are taking the threat of this radicalism seriously. They have an agenda, and not an agenda that most Canadians would support. Yet we allow them freedom to hate, simply because we don't want to be seen as attacking their religious beliefs. Despite the fact that they are attacking ours.

-----------------------------------------------

"Any country that accepts abortion, is not teaching its people to love, but to use any violence to get what it wants." Mother Teresa (1910-1997)

I find that quote used often on pro-life websites to equate abortion with violence. However, it doesn't ring true for most of these sites, that all too often support war and even the death penalty. Clear evidence of a nation using violence to get what it wants.

In fact, if I were to march in one of their "pro-life" demonstrations, carrying a sign with a picture of an Afghan child who was the victim of war, I would probably be called a "Taliban dupe". Or if my sign had the photo of a Palestinian child, who was an innocent victim of war, I would probably be accused of anti-Semitism and not loving Israel enough.

I might even be whacked with one of their signs suggesting that abortion is the "new Holocaust", complete with the most horrendous images.

Because there are several quotes also attributed to Mother Teresa, that I never see on a "pro-life" site, including this one:

"Please choose the way of peace. In the short term there may be winners and losers in this war that we all dread. But that never can, nor never will justify the suffering, pain and loss of life your weapons will cause."

For Mother Teresa, her anti-abortion beliefs were part of her overall message of love and peace, and while I would not find her arguments against abortion valid; I would respect her opinion.

However, this post is not about war, Mother Teresa, or even moral arguments. It's about Rod Bruinooge, the chair of the House pro-life caucus, and his new private members bill aimed at making it a crime to threaten or intimidate a woman into having an abortion.

He claims that his bill was inspired by the brutal murder of Roxanne Fernando, the Winnipeg woman whose life was taken because she refused to terminate her pregnancy.

However, at issue here is not that she refused to have an abortion, but the fact that she was brutally murdered. The motive is secondary. Had she been killed because she refused to give her boyfriend a loan, would we really need to draft a new law making it illegal to "coerce" or "intimidate" someone into giving you money?

We already have such a law. It's called extortion. And we already have laws making it illegal to coerce or intimate someone into doing anything. A threat of violence, is a threat of violence, regardless of what motivates it.

So what is this really about?

It's simple. It's about the need to equate abortion with violence. To plant that seed in our minds. 'Holocaust', 'murder', 'brutality' and even 'eugenics', all become part of their argument. And of course, it's made worse because the suggestion is that it's violence against children. Child victims of war are simply "collateral damage", but abortion is presented as a mother's war against her own child. This is why most pro-lifers will always go right to late term abortions, and never use the term 'fetus'.

I do question though, that if this is not about 'abortion' as Bruinooge suggests, but a woman's choice being taken away; then should it not also include intimidation to not terminate a pregnancy? What about the coercion of a parent who threatens to throw their daughter out if she has an abortion, using economic intimidation? Or a boyfriend or husband using emotional blackmail as intimidation, which is often not about the child at all, but control?

Has Rod Bruinooge or anyone else considered that?

I suppose it doesn't matter, because while the bill will probably be defeated, their cause has already scored a victory. Once again, they have brought "violence" into the abortion debate.

And of course, in the process Stephen Harper also scores a victory.

He took a lot of heat when Hilary Clinton was clear that any initiative to improve the maternal health of women in developing countries, must include access to safe abortion.

He can now posture that he disapproves of this bill, earning himself headlines like Harper won't support Tory MP's abortion bill, thereby appearing to agree with Clinton. And if this angers the fundamentalist groups, will he really lose their vote?

The fact that the Conservative Party is the only one willing to present bills of this nature at all, validates their loyalty, and provides meat for their fundraising letters.

If Stephen Harper really disapproved of his MP's motion, it would never have been presented at all. But he needs that bill to continue the facade of a moderate centrist, and the pro-life caucus needs that bill to plant the seed of violence to define abortion, and the Religious Right needs that bill to generate funds that fuel their "holy" mission.

Just another day in paradise.

A Compelling Argument Against Harper's "Secret" Plans to End Abortion

The young man in the video makes a very good argument against making abortion illegal in this country. If we were a Nation who cared about child poverty, and took better care of our young people, they MIGHT have an argument.

The poor are treated like criminals in this country, so men like Maurice Vellacott and Rod Bruinooge have no say in this matter.

The entire Reform Conservative caucus are hypocrites, because they want to dismantle the "welfare state", but still insist that women have no control over their reproductive rights.

Harper's anti-abortion propaganda team
By Antonia Zerbisias Living Columnist
December 2, 2009

Yeah, yeah.

Last year, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said he doesn't "intend to open the abortion issue."

But he has also promised a lot of other things. "Merit-based'' political appointments. No recession. More government accountability. No recession. Fixed election dates. No recession.

All those words about everything from the federal deficit to daycare spaces ... and nothing.

That's why I don't believe him when he talks about reopening the abortion debate. Not that it has ever really been closed.

His credibility isn't helped by Conservative caucus members who constantly harp on the subject by introducing private member's bills, making speeches, attending pro-life rallies and putting out news releases.

Which brings us to the member of Parliament for Saskatoon- Wanuskewin. Maurice Vellacott is past co-chair of the Pro-Life Caucus, an unabashed opponent of gay rights, and so vindictive in his attack on former Conservative-converted-to-Liberal MP Belinda Stronach that he used the "prostitute'' word.

Vellacott stepped in it once again last month when he put out a release commending local doctors for "reducing the availability of abortion in our city." It came in response to news that Saskatoon women had to leave town to terminate their pregnancies.

Now, as if this weren't unsympathetic enough to the plight of scared teenagers and desperate women, Vellacott added that "a growing body of research reveals significant health problems caused by abortion, including a greater risk of breast cancer, cervical lacerations and injury, uterine perforations, hemorrhage, and serious infection."

This is not only incorrect, it's pure propaganda espoused by those who would rather that pregnant women act as walking incubators for all those couples on adoption waiting lists.

Both the Canadian and American cancer societies dismiss the correlation between cancer and abortion. Furthermore, there is no "growing body of research" on the matter. And the Mayo Clinic debunks any connection between abortion and infertility.

It's not the first time Vellacott has made such claims: In 2006, he and Paul Steckle, the former Liberal MP for Huron-Bruce, promoted the idea that "the sexual revolution and the women's liberation movement are largely responsible for the rampant breast cancer we see today."
Whores and feminazis brought it on themselves.

Despite Harper's promise not to reignite the very hot abortion debate, last week there was no apology for Vellacott's claims by the Prime Minister or even Helen Guergis, Minister of State for the Status of Women.

Coincidentally, or not, all this happened just as the Ottawa-based "educational" LifeCanada issued its survey on attitudes toward abortion. "For the ninth year in a row, a majority of Canadians have rejected the status quo on abortion in this country," its statement said. "Over half say there should be legal protection for human life before birth and over two-thirds say abortions should only be paid for by taxpayers in medical emergencies or in cases of rape or incest."

But a closer look at the numbers reveals that only 30 per cent of us feel there should be no abortion rights. The rest say that abortion should be available only up to various trimesters.

As for who pays, the number has been virtually flat since 2002. (And, let's not forget, removing health care-funded abortion would only punish the poor.) As Dr. Delores Doherty, LifeCanada's president, told me, "Even though year after year people are saying they want some controls on abortion, they want some protection for the unborn, it still doesn't translate into action from the government."

There by the grace of a few more seats in the House.

So, according to polls, just how far from a Harper majority are we?

Pro-Lifer Dean Del Maestro

Before Rod Bruinooge There Was Brian Mulroney

Further to the story of Winnipeg MP Rod Bruinooge and his relationship with lawyer and businessman Gary Thomas Brazzell; we see that Mr. Brazzell was involved with Brian Mulroney several years before doing business with Bruinooge and his family.

Apparently in 1985, Mulroney fired the board at Via Rail and appointed his own cronies; including one Gary Thomas Brazzell.

In fact he fired the boards of many crown corporations, making it easier to grant contracts to friends and supporters, when it was friends and supporters who would be involved in the process.

What's interesting about this is that it actually sets the stage for the Sponsorship scandal, referred to as Adscam, that helped bring Stephen Harper to power.

Harper was in Ottawa in 1985, as chief aide to Progressive Conservative MP Jim Hawkes, the man he would later screw over when the National Citizens Coalition spent $ 50,000.00 to politically destroy him.

I'm not suggesting here that he was part of Mulroney's corruption, but no doubt rubbed shoulders with many of the people involved; and Gary Brazzell was given a patronage appointment in Harper's government, through Maxime Bernier.

In the case of the following story, an ad agency, with little experience, Publicité Martin, was granted a lucrative contact to run a campaign for VIA Rail, much to the shock of VIA employees, since there were many better qualified agencies who had submitted tenders.

We can see how Mulroney cronies engaged in a little arm twisting to make that happen, and later this same ad agency and at least one other Mulroney appointee, Marc LeFrançois, would be named in Adsam several years later.

"On the take": Gary Brazzell and VIA Rail
Stevie Cameron
On the take: crime, corruption and greed in the Mulroney years
Chapter Nineteen: It Pays To Advertise

André Verret couldn’t believe his eyes. A friend told him that if he sat in the Ritz-Carlton Hotel’s Café de Paris at breakfast any weekday morning, he could watch hotel manager Fernand Roberge hold court at a corner table for a stream of interesting individuals.

“Out of pure curiosity,” said Verret, a senior public servant who had moved from Ottawa in 1984 to work in the public affairs office at VIA Rail, “I went to have a look. Every morning around 7 or 7:30 people would spend about fifteen minutes with Mr. Roberge, well-known people, lawyers and the like.” Sometimes a dozen people in all would meet with Roberge over coffee, each person or group of two or three taking no more than twenty minutes.

“It was really like his office,” said Verret, adding that Roberge’s visitors would leave the table “with beautiful; smiles on their faces.”

Like pilgrims searching for the Holy Grail, hungry contract seekers had a number of choices during the Mulroney years. As we’ve seen, some were comfortable cutting their deals with Roch LaSalle over a power breakfast at Nate’s in Ottawa. Many Atlantic Canada businessmen found their way up the back staircase above the New Glasgow pizza parlour to try to humour Big Daddy. A few of the more sophisticated would book a table at Le Mas des Oliviers in Montreal to lobby Guy Charbonneau. And some, as André Verret discovered, preferred the Ritz-Carlton Hotel’s Café de Paris.

Advising on federal advertising contracts in Quebec was among Roberge’s pleasant duties, according to half a dozen well-connected advertising executives based in Montreal and Toronto. At least one senior official in the federal government’s Advertising Management Group, the agency set up to handle the government’s advertising, routinely received calls from Roberge—who was at this time a private citizen with no official authority of any kind. (He was later made a senator by Mulroney)

During the Mulroney years, Montreal’s advertising and public relations community made the Ritz coffee shop something of a hangout in the mornings. Perhaps they were hoping for the chance of a word with Mulroney, who always stayed at the hotel when he was in town, or maybe they were just making sure they had regular contact with Roberge. “There was a real clique there,” said one of the advertising executives.

One of the members was Marcel Côté, a partner in Sécor, who later worked in Mulroney’s office as his communication’s advisor.

One morning in March 1985 Verret was just finishing his breakfast when he saw an acquaintance, then a senior manager at a Montreal advertising firm called Publicité Martin, run by Montreal adman Yvon Martin, in an intense conversation with Roberge. A few minutes later the man rose to his feet, shook Roberge’s hand, and left, grinning broadly.

When he saw Verret, he came over. He spoke enthusiastically about landing the VIA Rail advertising account. Verret, who had been at VIA Rail since June 1984, was skeptical. “In that kind of contract there is always a call for a public tender,” explained Verret, and as far as he knew when the Martin official spoke to him, that process was still under way.

“Six or seven or eight firms were invited to tender, and we always tried in the past to be as fair as possible.” Back at VIA, several other people were just as incredulous as Verret. To begin with, although the company had been in business for fifteen years, Publicité Martin had not made the original list of potential agencies drawn up by VIA’s advertising department because the firm was not considered to be equipped to handle large national accounts, certainly not one as significant as VIA’s.

But Mulroney had just fired the old VIA Rail board and appointed a new one packed with cronies and party bagmen. It was a crew that was feeling its oats, and one of the recently arrived board members saw to it that Martin’s firm was added to the short list.

The final forming bidding process began in March 1985, just before Verret encountered his friend at the Ritz. About nine firms were invited to present their pitches over a two-day period to a committee of three new VIA board members, Gary Brazell (sic) from Winnipeg, Paul Norris from Edmonton, and Marc LeFrançois from Quebec City, and five executives from VIA’s advertising and marketing departments, vice-president Michael Kieran, Jim Warrington, Christina Sirsley, Preston Beaumont, and Nicole Alyot.

By the end, three firms had been dropped from the roster, and two of the nine firms needn’t have bothered to show up. One was MacLaren Advertising, the firm that had enjoyed a near-monopoly on advertising under the Liberals; a second was McKim, which was known to have backed Joe Clark’s failed bid to hang onto the Tory leadership the year before.

“They were treated like shit by the board members,” said a witness to the proceedings. “It was very embarrassing.”After the first day of proceedings, the VIA board members and staff went off to dinner at Montreal’s Atlantic Pavilion, courtesy of VIA, and feasted on seafood, everyone trying to guess what was in the minds of their companions concerning the day’s events.

Some members continued the evening’s festivities at the Ritz-Carlton’s bar where they quaffed champagne, again at VIA’s expense, until the small hours of morning. Others retired to their hotel rooms to prepare for day two of the presentations. This would be the day on which Martin would make his presentation, and Paul Norris and Gary Brazell (sic) had already made it clear they were strong supporters of the firm.

When Martin’s firm formally made its pitch, it seemed to overwhelm the board members and underwhelm the VIA staffers. “At best it was mediocre,” said one staff person who was there. Another former VIA official agreed. “The pitch was not very good, it was not strong,” the official said.

“If they had been innovative and understood the problems of VIA they would have done a better job, but they did not do their homework and gave a presentation that was somewhat silly, that was not up to the task. They did not understand what trains are about in Canada, they did not do the research to understand it.”

The next day, a Saturday morning, the eight committee members met at the Queen Elizabeth Hotel for a final review. The board members stated their admiration for Martin’s presentation but agreed that the one done by Cosette Communication-Marketing Publicité had also been excellent. The VIA staffers were of a different view. Kieran vehemently opposed Martin and said so, while his colleagues mouthed perfunctory platitudes about Martin’s pitch and then stated their preferences for some of the other agencies that had competed.

After hearing their remarks, Paul Norris looked surprised. “I don’t think we were all at the same party,” he commented. Kieran did not give up without a fight. He was relentless and persisted against the obvious will of the board members. “It was extraordinary that the board would involve itself with such matters,” says Kieran today. “It was not illegal, mind you, but it was extraordinary.”

About two weeks later the official decision was made at VIA’s head office and the committee members were duly notified. There were two winners, Martin and Cossette. Cossette had been high on everyone’s list and it won 50 per cent of the total contract, or $4.5 million. Known to spend lavish sums on its creative talent, Cossette was to handle VIA’s national advertising—everything outside the Windsor-Quebec City corridor.

Now an industry giant, in 1985 Cossette was still a small regional advertising agency, explained one advertising executive, “but it was known to be extremely tight with Roberge.” (1) Martin, an outfit that was reputed to place a higher value on its accounting department, was given the corridor and $4.5 million to do the job. Yvon Martin was disappointed with the results; he had hoped to land the entire package. But he didn’t need to worry, especially after the firm went on to win other excellent contracts.

To celebrate his good fortune, Martin, who had started the company in his own home and was still the sole owner, bought himself a new $70,000 Jaguar.

Another former VIA employee, a senior manager who was familiar with the contracts, agreed with Verret’s version of events and remembers what happened after the first ad campaign ran. “We did reviews of his [Martin’s] firm: how successful they were with our campaigns. The presentation the agency made to us was the pits.

They really ignored VIA. They took the contract for granted. They never assigned the right account executive to it and their ads were shitty.” The executive would complain to the VIA manager who deal with Martin and the manager agreed but could say only, “I can’t do anything. My hands are tied.” Martin still has the VIA Rail account, and he has it all: Cossette no longer has half.

Footnote 1Cossette was also supposed to get the Air Canada advertising contract, then split evenly between an English firm and a Quebec firm. “My marching orders are that it’s to go to Cossette,” said one senior Tory on the board of the PC Canada Fund to a friend. Only the intervention of Air Canada’s president, Claude Taylor, prevented the move. Cameron, pp. 316-320 ( Toronto: McFarlane Walter and Ross, 1994 WPL 971.064)

Rod Bruinooge: Prophet or Profit for the Lord?

Rod Bruinooge is the Conservative MP for Winnipeg South. His bio claims that he is a businessman, an amateur film maker and computer games designer. All true.

He is also a Metis and the Harper government loves to hold him up as an example of how enlightened they are. Drawing in aboriginal candidates helps them to shed their old image of being harsh toward Canada's First Nations.

Unfortunately, Bruinooge is not an aboriginal member of Parliament, but a Member of Parliament who happens to be of aboriginal descent. In fact the Native community has never endorsed him.

During the 2004 election, Bruinooge and party leader Stephen Harper were the targets of a protest by aboriginal activists, including David Chartrand of the Manitoba Métis Federation.

In 2006, though Bruinooge was a member of the Manitoba Métis Federation, that organization endorsed his Liberal opponent, Reg Alcock. He beat Alcock by just 111 votes.

At the First Nations General Assembly in Nova Scotia in July 2007, Bruinooge described the Paul Martin government's Kelowna Accord on aboriginal investment as nothing more than an "expensive press release". This statement was strongly criticized by Assembly of First Nations leader Phil Fontaine. The deal had been hammered out over five years, and one of Harper's first acts as prime minister was to scrap it.

Fontaine argued that the accord "was designed to eradicate poverty in First Nations communities and make Canada a better place."

William Davison of the Indian Métis Christian Fellowship, who works with urban aboriginals in Regina, said he wasn't surprised that the Tories chopped the funds. But he said the billions promised in the Kelowna Accord would have gone a long way to helping improve the lives of aboriginals in Canada.

"I work with a lot of hopelessness and despair within the aboriginal urban community dealing with traditions and cultures and dealing with those trapped in the streets," Davison told CBC News.

Hardly a simple "press release".

Instead, as a member of Canada's Religious Right, Rod Bruinooge has focused most of his attention on re-criminalizing abortion, validating feminist Gloria Steinem's claim, that the neoconservatives believe that "life begins at conception but ends at birth".

Child poverty rates are on the rise in Canada. In November of 2009, Vipal Jain wrote in the Toronto Star:

One in nine Canadian children, more than a million, live below the poverty line according to the 2008 Report Card on Child and Family Poverty in Canada ... “For many families, it’s very difficult to get out of poverty. There isn’t enough money to feed the children, clothe them properly, or even enough money to pay for the bus fare or to look for a job,” says Grant Wilson, President of Canadian Children’s Rights Council. It’s even harder for new Canadian children and aboriginal families as they are at a greater risk of living in poverty. (1)

UNICEF confirms the plight of many First Nations children. From their 2009 annual report:

Aboriginal children are among the most marginalized children in Canadian society. Despite some advances, in almost any measure of health and well-being, Aboriginal children – including First Nations, Inuit and Métis -- are at least two or three times worse off than other Canadian children. As children, they are less likely to see a doctor. As teens, they are more likely to become pregnant. And in many communities, they are more likely to commit suicide.

This disparity is the greatest children's rights challenge facing our nation.

The Canadian Press reported that:

... infant mortality rate for native babies in Canada, the United States, Australia and New Zealand is up to four times that of non-native newborns, says a groundbreaking new study ... Dr. Janet Smylie, a researcher who works through St. Michael's Hospital and the University of Toronto, says the international replication of startling native health gaps among such diverse populations suggests social deprivation – not genetics – is to blame.(2)

The Native Women's Association of Canada, post that "our infants are challenged right from the start, and that our infant mortality rates are equal to developing countries such as Chile, Sri Lanka and Fiji, and higher than Latvia and Lithuania."

If Rod Bruinooge was really pro-life and an "aboriginal" MP, he would be doing something for these children, instead of exploiting his heritage for political gain.

When First we Practice to Deceive

When Dr. Henry Morgentaler was slated to receive the Order of Canada, many in the pro-life movement came out in opposition.  It's a divisive issue.

Fortunately, the honour remained, and Morgantaler was rewarded for his work in offering safe abortions.

Most of the Conservatives didn't see it that way, but Rod Bruinooge went above and beyond.  He was behind a poll that appeared on Lifesitenews, suggesting that "56% of Canadians Oppose Morgentaler Order of Canada".

The poll was commissioned by Lifesitenews, and conducted by KLRVU polling.  But what they don't mention, is the fact that KLRVU polling is run by Allan and Katherine Bruinooge.  Rod's brother and his wife.

Prophet or Profit?

Canadian dominionist, Faytene Kryskow, has called Rod Bruinooge, a 'Prophet for the Lord', because of his opposition to abortion and same-sex marriage.  Her organization, 4MY Canada, threw their support behind his election campaign, and continue to endorse his political career. (3)

But just how righteous a man is he?

In an alleged shady deal with a former Brian Mulroney crony, Gary Thomas Brazzell, Bruinooge showed that he could play the game.

It began with a patronage appointment in 2007.  According to WaverleyWest:

There was a recent Tory appointment that the WFP [Winnipeg Free Press] missed, as they always seem to miss it. That man is the one Manitoban who got plum appointments from both Prime Ministers Brian Mulroney and Stephen Harper. That man is Ladco Board Member and former Rod Bruinooge lawyer Gary Brazzell. (4)

Ladco is one of the primary owners of  Waverley West development (35%).  Bruinooge lobbied hard for the Waverley underpass, which would be beneficial to Waverley West.

Less than two years after the Kenaston underpass finally ended traffic mayhem on one major south Winnipeg artery, the area's MP says it's time to do the same thing on Waverley ...  (Waverley West is a project of ladco) And Winnipeg South MP Rod Bruinooge says his government is prepared to pony up its share of the cash." (Senior Manitoba minister Vic Toews has signalled to me that should the province come on board, the federal government will be there," Bruinooge said.

"My interest now is in convincing the premier they should also come to the table." Bruinooge said the additional 30,000 homes in the Waverley West subdivision makes the underpass at Waverley a desperate need."A lot of people don't use Waverley because they can't count on it," Bruinooge said. "It's been a constant burden." (5)

But was Bruinooge really concerned with congestion, or something else?

Seems that the MP owed Brazzell a favour.  A Waverley West watchdog group provides a bit of background:

December 2, 1998 Lawyer Gary Thomas Brazzell is made a director of Abject Modernity Internet Creations.   Its president is Rodney Bruinooge (now the MP for Winnipeg South.)

December 23, 1998 Brazzell buys 25,000 shares of Abject stock.

December 23, 1998 Brazzell provides share certificates to Bruinooges’s step-brother’s co-worker.

February 1999 Brazzell provides share certificates to an uncle of Chantale Marion (Bruinooge’s wife). They had been backdated to December 23, 1998.

Brazzel had actually once been removed from the Ladco board for questionable business practices.

From a report by the Manitoba Securities Commission:

C1. BRAZZELL acknowledges and agrees that he acted contrary to the public interest in that he: (a) traded in securities without having been registered and without prospectus in contravention of sections 6 and 37 of the Act; (b) facilitated or permitted the purchase of shares by a number of investors under the sole name of one investor, so as to minimize the number of apparent investors in an effort to purportedly rely upon the private company exemption under section 19(2)(i) of the Act; (c) failed to ascertain whether the company in question was in fact a private company as defined in the Act, thereby causing shares to be traded in reliance upon such exemption, when the exemption was not so available; (d) facilitated or permitted the purchase and sale of securities in ABJECT in the name of one investor, when he knew or ought to have known that the shares were intended to be purchased by a number of other investors in addition to the investor so named. Brazzell will pay the Manitoba Securities Commission $3,000 plus costs for his actions.

Is Rod Bruinooge really a "prophet for the Lord"?

I'd say he's just another self serving Conservative politician.

Sources:

1. Rich Nation, Poor Children, by Vipal Jain, The Toronto Star, November 20th, 2009

2. Native infant mortality rate four times non-natives', By Sue Bailey, Toronto Star, March 30, 2009

3. The Armageddon Factor: The Rise of Christian Nationalism in Canada, By: Marci McDonald, Random House Canada, 2010, ISBN: 978-0-307-35646-8 3

4. Gary Brazzel gets federal appointment to the Intellectual Property Office (CIPO),  Trade-mark Agent, March 2, 2007

5. Time for Waverley underpass: Tory MP, By Mia Rabson, Winnipeg Free Press, June 16, 2008

Continuation:

What is Rod Bruinooge's Private Members Bill Really About?

National Post Columnist Weighs in on Rod Bruinooge's Convoluted Anti-Abortion Logic

Now that Winnipeg Conservative MP Rod Bruinooge's secret anti-abortion group, is no longer secret, and he can openly oppose a woman's right to choose, we are able to listen to his arguments and decide for ourselves.

I've decided that Rod Bruinooge is an idiot.

His convoluted logic that somehow the desire to sell our kidneys on Ebay, is the same as the desire to have an an abortion, is either drug induced or just insane.

He may have even trumped Conservative MP Cheryl Gallant, who when hearing the horrible news of the beheading of Iraq war hostage Nick Berg, claimed that we shouldn't feel sympathy because it was no different than abortion. Huh?

She's an Afghanistan War cheerleader, so what if I said that the killing of innocent children in senseless wars was no different than what Clifford Olsen did? I would never say that because it would be stupid. As stupid as her ridiculous comments and as stupid as kidneys for sale.

Sadly these social Conservative nuts also don't believe in providing teens with condoms, because abstinence is the only option they allow their children. This leaves them vulnerable to STDs and unwanted pregnancies, and not wanting to disappoint mom and dad may also mean only one choice. Destroying the evidence.

Colby Cosh: Rod Bruinooge and the pro-life absurdity
January 01, 2009,

National Post
Colby Cosh

For once, a pro-lifer has it exactly right. Rod Bruinooge, who claims to have been elected the new head of the multi-party Parliamentary Pro-Life Caucus — the group’s membership is secret, but no one has come forward to contradict him on the matter — told the Canadian Press on Tuesday: “In Canada you can’t remove your kidney, and put it on eBay and auction it off. That is illegal. Whereas you actually can end a beating heart of an unborn child the second before it’s delivered. Most Canadians would agree that is truly a poor bioethical position for our country to be in.”

I don’t claim to know what most Canadians think about kidney donation; my guess is they don’t think about it at all.

But the situation Mr. Bruinooge describes really is somewhat anomalous. Of course we should be able to have our kidneys removed and sell them on eBay. It is outrageous that the state claims the power to interfere in such a transaction; ownership of our own bodies is the paramount principle of bioethics.

Permitting donors to be compensated for human tissue would encourage sincere efforts to defray the costs incurred by those making gifts of it, and would give dialysis patients dying on waiting lists alternatives to black-market organ purchases in countries less-well-equipped to handle transplant surgeries.

The argument against it boils down to this: “Ew.”

It’s the same argument that was presented against transplant surgeries in the first place by people like Malcolm Muggeridge (One of Stephen Harper's favourite's), which may or may not rhyme with Bruinooge. It is also the chief basis for the ban that was imposed on compensation for sperm and egg donations and surrogate motherhood by the Liberal government of Paul Martin, which was proudly in favour of “reproductive choice” only so long as it was a code word for Henry Morgentaler’s business model.

There was no great public clamour to outlaw gamete traffic, which was already subject to safety controls, and its proscription has made life noticeably more difficult for childless couples pursuing in vitro fertilization. But this bit of bioethical nonsense is rarely if ever protested.

Of course, one of the key problems for Bruinooge is that no one actually makes a practice of performing abortions the “second before” the fetus is delivered. In the individual judgment of most doctors, including abortionists, such a procedure would be ethically questionable unless it were necessary to save the life of the mother — and if it were, few of them would hesitate. One presumes Mr. Bruinooge is prepared to acknowledge that most nominal pro-lifers are willing to make a “life of the mother” exception to otherwise total bans on abortion. This involves them in the same kind of supposed absurdity he is denouncing: putting one life above another.

Then again, it is equally absurd for pro-life mothers who suffer miscarriages not to go through full-blown funerals for their dead babies, complete with expensive coffins, a nice spread of sandwiches for the guests and the oversight of paid clergy. Do the victims of abortion by God, who is quite as busy with the job as Doc Morgentaler, deserve any less?

Funny thing: When it comes down to revealed preferences involving real-world costs, what we find is that the life of a fetus really does count for less than that of a paid-up member of the human race.

But then, that’s how everybody has always acted throughout all of human history. It has only been in the last 40 years that there has been any real controversy about the ethical status of abortion. Medieval thinkers generally considered that it did not become homicide until (at least) the first exterior signs of activity in the womb; England common law refused to punish even positive infanticide as a species of murder; and in Victorian accounts of abortion prosecutions, it is clear that the chief concern of the authorities was not with the fate of a child, but with unwed mothers using risky means, ones inimical to the family structure, to conceal evidence of personal misconduct.

I am amazed a hundred times a year that pro-life Christians get away with claiming that they stand on eternal principles when it comes to abortion, even though, if you prod them, they will start talking rot about DNA (whose existence and nature somehow went undisclosed through centuries of religious revelation) and will admit that it was the progress of scientific understanding which obligated them to suddenly promote abortion in the panoply of sins, circa 1968.

They faced a choice concerning which principles they chose to modify under the pressure of technological change, and opted for the direction that allowed them to signal resistance to modernity. Their stance is about as deserving of deference as the Western Church’s 12th-century ban on crossbows, and no more tenable.

Conservative MP Rod Bruinooge Insults Yukon Voters

The Conservatives are notorious for sending out partisan literature and charging it to taxpayers. In fact even when they were the Reform Party and later the Alliance, they were always being told that they were abusing the system, but scamming taxpayers is simply their way of life.

When Stephen Harper was running for Alliance party leader, he accused Maurice Vellacott of using his constituency office to promote Stockwell Day.

When Peter MacKay was leader of the progressive Conservatives, he accused Harper of targeting his riding with unwarranted 'junk mail'.

Now years later, the same people are actually promoting this tax grab that is costing taxpayers about 8 million dollars a year.

MPs are allowed to send literature to 10% of their riding, but these guys target opposition riding's instead, with personal attacks or Karl Rove style push polling.

Will they ever stop? Probably not. It's a sickness commonly known as the George Bush Syndrome. Why act professional when you can be immature and petty? And of course, why use your own money when you can use ours?

I'm fairly lucky in Kingston, having the Speaker of the House as my MP. He knows the laws inside and out, so the Conservatives don't dare abuse the system here. However, I've recently learned that their local candidate, Brian Abrams; has like Harper, hired a U.S. Republican pollster to run his campaign, so I expect to be getting some crap anytime now.

When Rod Bruinooge distributed his nonsense in the Yukon, residents were very upset. First off, he is a Conservative MP from Winnipeg, and secondly, the nature of the flyers was an insult to them. At least one resident wondered if they were trying to reach the elementary school crowd.

The Waxing Moon
Who the Hell is Rod Bruinooge, MP?
September 17, 2008
Rachel Westfall
Whitehorse, YT

Whoever he is, he has been blanketing Whitehorse with childish propaganda flyers telling us (in two mono-syllabic words or less) why we should vote Conservative in the upcoming election. I couldn't help wading in on this one. I sent this letter to the Winnipeg Free Press as well as to our local papers today.

Open letter to Rod Bruinooge, MP, Winnipeg South

Rod Bruinooge, as the MP for Winnipeg South, why are you spamming the Yukon with Conservative propaganda flyers?

Also, are your flyers aimed at a preschool reading comprehension level and attention span because you are operating under the misconception that northerners have a low level of functional literacy, and are easily swayed by two-word slogans?

If you looked at the results of the 2003 International Adult Literacy and Skills Survey, you would see that the Yukon had the highest average literacy score of all the provinces and territories.

The 2006 Census found that the province or territory with the highest proportion of post-secondary accredited residents was the Yukon. As well, if you visited the territory, you'd likely notice that many Yukon residents have a great deal of experiential learning.

Knowing this, would you have littered our mailboxes with your dumbed-down flyers?

Also, if you looked into what our priorities are here in the Yukon, you might have come up with some very different themes and slogans from the ones you targeted with your flyers. Just by looking at the local papers, a few or our priorities would likely jump out at you: for example, economic sustainability, affordability of housing, social justice, First Nation self-government, labour market demand, environmental degradation, quality of life, and the need to find a balance between residential development, resource extraction, traditional land use and wilderness preservation.

Can you see why your flyers are not being received well by Yukoners? Bluntly put, your flyers come across as overly simplistic, poorly researched, and even deliberately misleading.

You aren't doing the local Conservative candidate any favours with your propaganda campaign. As we, Canadian taxpayers, had to pay for your ill-conceived mail-outs, I must ask you in good conscience to please stop wasting valuable resources on these flyers.

Conservative Rod Bruinooge Heads Secret Anti-Abortion Group

While Parliament was prorogued in December, there was a group working behind the scenes to draft legislation that would make abortion a crime.

This group, headed by Winnipeg MP Rod Bruinooge, was attempting to fulfill this Conservative priority that came out during their last convention.

The abortion issue is a contentious one at best, but is not as black and white as those on both sides of the issue believe. It is also not confined to Conservative MPs though they clearly have the most members who are anti-choice.

First off the arguments from the so-called pro-life groups, are supposedly based on the Bible, but that's not true. The Bible clearly states that life begins at birth, and prior to that only a woman can decide the fate of her unborn. People like Cheryl Gallant will pull out "Thou shalt not kill', and yet she is very pro-war, so again that it not a legitimate argument.

What they don't understand is that pro-choice does not mean pro-abortion. It just means that only the woman can decide whether to carry the fetus to full term or terminate her pregnancy, within reason (not late term unless a threat to the mother). If pro-lifers want to work to offer her more choices, that's fine; but it can't be arbitrary.

Canada had decided two decades ago that this was the way it should be, yet the Conservatives are determined that they will reverse those decisions come hell or high water. By mandating that life begins at conception, abortion would then have the legal definition of murder.

Prudently, Stephen Harper put an end to the abortion debate, because while he tells his followers that abortion is wrong, it's all about keeping his job, and he knew that opening this up now, would be political suicide. If he ever got a majority though, it would be a different matter.

Abortion debate must wait
The Winnipeg Sun
By PAUL RUTHERFORD
December 31, 2008

The year 2009 is already shaping up as hot one in Ottawa.

Nobody can deny we all feel more engaged in federal politics thanks to December's turn of events. Now, on the eve of the new year, comments by Winnipeg Conservative MP Rod Bruinooge threaten to resurrect the divisive and explosive abortion issue. He and others are vowing to rekindle the issue and bring "more value" to the lives of unborn children.

"Very few Canadians appreciate the fact that essentially until a child takes its first breath, it has less value than a kidney," Bruinooge told The Canadian Press this week. (how ridiculous)

Bruinooge chairs a secretive pro-life all-party Parliamentary caucus determined to get abortion on to the political agenda.

This after Conservatives voted at their Winnipeg convention to bring in proposals which would see criminal charges against suspects who kill or injure a fetus during a crime -- that bill died when October's election was called.

Bruinooge says Canadians need to be better educated about Canada's position on abortion which he says puts Canada in a "class of its own." Pro-choice advocates say they are ready to fight if the Conservatives do take the risky step of opening the abortion can of worms.

So both sides seem to be taking their respective corners, prepping for a major bout. But it's likely a lot of talk resulting in little action.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper wants no part of this debate -- and this time Harper is doing exactly what we need. With a minority government in place and the economy the major issue everyone should care about, we need to forget about a debate on abortion.

"It's working well," says Joyce Arthur of the Abortion Rights Coaltion of Canada, referring to the now 20-year-old Supreme Court decision.

Maybe. But there are millions of Canadians re-energized by Bruinooge's call to arms.

This issue can't lay dormant forever, but in 2009 there's way too much on our plates. Nice try but it's a bad idea.

Ironically, Conservative oppose social programs, and have a very poor record on helping the poor. They want these fetuses brought to full term but then just wash their hands of them. Get killed in war, starve to death. They don't care. Just don't raise their taxes.