Wednesday, August 31, 2005


We have completed our first week in Britain and while I will write a larger Dossier on it when I return, I must share some initial thoughts. Those of you who have been here will understand…My God…the majesty…the history…the respect for things of the past and understanding of how they affect our present and future. This is the main reason why Toronto is not and will not be, in our lifetime, a world class city. It cares nothing for its history…even denigrates it…and only embraces the modern, the fads, and the trends.

We have seen Warwick Castle, Coventry Cathedral, Kenilworth Castle and had a pint of beer in The Lamb and Flag (The Blood and Buckets) which is one of the oldest pubs in London. Charles Dickens used to work nearby and perhaps even drank there amid other literary figures.

Today we toured Parliament (Westminster Palace) and Westminster Abbey. Westminster Palace must be seen to be believed-and I almost did not get in because I was carrying a metal cross of nails that I bought from Coventry Cathedral. I was searched for about ten minutes because security thought it was a dagger and could not find it in my carrying bag. My wife and relatives began to get worried. Security were very kind however and once the search was through we all had a laugh.

Westminster Palace is a testament to the origins of Western Democracy. Decorated in classic Gothic Catholic art, it is truly a place designed to feel important. It is one of the most recgonized places on earth. Its architecture informs you that this is a place of true reverence. Everyone of every political stripe would benefit by experiencing it.

We stood in the same steps where William Wallace was convicted of treason and where one of my personal heroes, Sir Thomas Moore, was tried and convicted to death because he would not agree to the King’s redefinition of marriage. It felt very relevent and indeed very humbling. During a break in the commisary, we sat down and were joined by a high ranking offical. He was a wonderful man who took us on a private tour of the new offices of the members of parliament and we were able to see where all of the members have private meetings, discussions etc. Their own versions of ‘The War Room(s)’ if you will.

We also visited Shakespeare’s childhood home and I was amazed at learning of the amount of persecution Catholics faced in Britain during the reign of Elizabeth I and on.

It is amazing that the West is so quick to throw away all of this history, religion and art for the sake of the shallow, the crass and the base. I could be proven wrong but I seriously doubt that in 400 years anyone will care to stand in the footsteps of the dingy room in City Hall at Toronto where Bourassa and Varnell were ‘married’.

In Westminster Abbey we saw the tomb of Henry V, Elizabeth I, Mary I, Richard II, Lord Byron, Sir Lawrence Olivier, Robert Browning, The Chapel of St. Paul and countless others figures of history. It is humbling. That my generation cares not for it…saddens me. Yet it does exist, and those who come do appreciate and learn. That gives me hope, joy and inspiration that I will draw on for the rest of my life.

Next week, France, Abbey Road and ‘Guys and Dolls’ with Ewan MacGregor (one of my favourite actors). Getting the tickets to this show will be a Dossier in and of itself.

Until next time…

Tuesday, August 23, 2005


Please note: As I am about to embark on a three week vacation to Britain and France for my honeymoon, regular Dossier’s on The War Room will not resume until I get back on September, 14 2005. Nevertheless, please keep checking as I will try to post smaller observations from café’s while I am gone. All the best.

The Sunday before last, my wife and I took a drive to St. Jacob’s, a small town about an hour and a half outside Toronto. It has a large Mennonite population and plenty of farmer’s markets, crafts shops, broom makers, glass spinners, fresh cheese etc. We sat by a river, ate food and talked of the future.

St. Jacob’s is perhaps as lovely a town as one could find in Ontario, filled with warm hearted people, fresh foods and an earthy spirit. Many of the crafts vendors were replacing their summer products and one could see more than a few black witches and orange pumpkins in anticipation of the season to come.

It made me think of some of the ironies or contradictions of our ‘modern’ culture.

Now with what follows we will be making more than a few generalizations about small town life vs. big city life. I was raised in the former and currently live in the latter. I hear many comments from both sides and more than a few of the attitudes each has towards the other.

We constantly hear big city ‘evolved’ Torontonians call small town Ontarians (or Westerners) bigots, racists, homophobes, unintelligent, arrogant farmers and various other terms said with a derogatory or pejorative tone. And yet look at the irony;

‘Liberal’ or big city folk are constantly trying to get cleaner and purer air for their environment; the kind of air one routinely finds in a small town or the rural country.

They vehemently oppose the war in Iraq and all sorts of international violence but they will do nothing of merit to try to curb the very real violence happening in their own cities if it might mean asking tough questions of themselves and various demographics.

They ridicule small town people for being ‘inbred’ and ‘redneck’ while they themselves try to stave off their own ‘sophisticated’ children from getting pregnant by or impregnating a 14 year old.

Big city ‘yuppie’ types are health obsessed; they will pay top dollar to get ‘organic’ foods that are free from chemicals or corporate logos; the very same type of food that is grown in abundance and sold independently by rural farmers at the types of small town markets they look down their noses at.

Big city 'intellectual'/media types say or infer that they want a more Marxist form of government that is free of big business and allows the government to take after all. The same type of culture that exists in many small towns, free of government interference where help is usually a doorstep away and a free cup of milk or an egg is there for the asking.

They cry out for a multi-cultural, integrated society, but then culturally encourage their minorities to live in segregated parts of the city which they then visit for dinner on a Saturday night to show their friends how ‘diverse’ they are. In a smaller towns, all demographics are forced to live with each other. There are no ‘minority ghettos’.

They say they hate globalization and big corporations yet their economies and lifestyles are dependant on both and they tax small business’ to points of absurdity where only a big corporation or wealthy individual can afford to start a business. In many smaller towns, independent shops still outnumber large franchises or corporations.

Now I am not naïve, things are not all rosy and ‘Little House on the Prairie’ in many small towns, either. In some rural areas, there is a great need for more sophisticated forms of medicine and scientific treatment.

I recently went back to my hometown and as we drove along the main street, a young ‘punk’ with a clichéd mullet cut circa 1986 pulled up to us with his pick-up truck, music blaring and drove off with the tires screeching and probably fracturing at least three municipal driving by-laws in the process. I cringed. I hate it when stereotypes are true.

Obviously there can also be cases in small towns where kids who might be more eclectic are misunderstood and perhaps could better be served by living in a larger urban center. There can unfortunately also be a wariness or cruelty imposed on those deemed as ‘other’ in some small towns.

Certainly, when I was growing up, I couldn’t wait to move to the ‘bright lights’ of the big city. Now, a decade out of university and with many of my friends having children, more young families are fleeing Toronto for the suburbs or small towns in search of a community with proper values to raise their kids. Many of my friends are doing this…even ones who call themselves ‘liberal’. Only my most die-hard of New Left friends have verbally expressed a vow to raise their kids in Toronto.

Just as the last one-hundred years saw the industrialization of the cities take hold and people leaving small towns for the large urban centers, the next one-hundred years will most likely show a reverse trend. As big cities become more and more hostile to families, religion, property ownership, education and children, more people will flee them for the increasingly harder to find independence and safety of the small town.

Even if laws are passed federally to regulate them, the further from the cities people get, the harder it will be for governments to influence the lives they lead.

The main flaw of the New Left is a colossal misunderstanding of human nature.

Most people don’t want government imposed ‘equality’; they want the government to remove as many obstacles as they can to aspire.

Most individuals want a health care system that is not only about availability, but about quality and efficiency. They don’t just want free health care…they need it to be good health care. Sometimes, that can be the difference between life and death.

Most families don’t desire that their children be taught graphic depictions of sexuality as young as grade one because well-financed, special interest groups dictate it to be so; they want a school system that teaches what some might call ‘traditional’ notions of morality, decency and education.

Parents are concerned with whether or not their four year old is shot or abducted across the street when they are not looking; not whether or not President George W. Bush is the great Satan of the Western World.

Most folks desire to own their own property; not to live on property owned by the government. Similarly, the urban notion of living in cramped condos thirty stories high surrounded by concrete increasingly seems unnatural to many.

Most people believe marriage is about family, children, love and biological lineage; not property rights and tax breaks for cynical adults.

Contrary to our media culture, most people see God and Christ as a form of wisdom and guidance for the world; not as entities to be abolished, ridiculed and destroyed.

Also…and this is perhaps the most damning misunderstanding of the New Left. Most folks when left to their own free-will, actually do get along.

True racism, misogyny or homophobia-as opposed to the way many just throw around those words to silence- will always exist.

So will hatred, war, inequity, strife, poverty and hardship; but these are not values that consume the average person. No amount of government interference or social programs will ever be able change that. In fact, there has been no more horror in the world started then when governments try to pursue utopia.

That’s because it doesn’t exist…at least not in this life.

But that is one truth that many-of all party affiliations-increasingly do not want to talk about.

Tuesday, August 16, 2005


One of the purposes of The War Room is to not just talk about political views but to try to demonstrate the link between art, culture and politics. How ideology and subtext in pop-art, more than just its text, can and does influence our popular culture which then goes on to influence mainstream culture and then politics.

In the modern era, no other ‘art’ form influences more than film and television. Not books, not music, not magazines, not literature. Camille Paglia has wonderful writings on this subject. So too does the great Catholic Canadian philosopher Marshall McLuahan. His writings on the medium of television are revolutionary and unparalleled. In filmic form, David Cronenberg made a picture about this subject matter entitled Videodrome starring James Woods.

James Woods, aside from being a brilliant actor, is also a member of Mensa. He is also part of another very rare breed, a Republican in Hollywood. In the days immediately following 9/11 he helped the American government with information he had regarding suspicious types he had encountered. He also is one of the few people in Hollywood who will tell it like it is.

While recently promoting his new film Pretty Persuasion, Woods let loose in a room full of reporters about the nature of contemporary Hollywood films and why he appears in fewer studio projects. Here is the link to the article in

A taste:

"In this politically correct era, the middle-aged heterosexual white guy gets to play one part, he gets to play the asshole in the suit," Woods grouses. "That's the only part they make anymore. That's the only part there is for a white heterosexual guy. Sorry, but it's the truth. Even when he's the hero now: Like Tom Cruise in 'War of the Worlds,' he's the hero, right? Steven Spielberg, Tom Cruise, H.G. Wells, how do you top that? They do a remarkable job of how the make the movie and so on, but he has to be a father who's a lousy parent, a terrible ex-husband, blah blah blah."

After the desire for oxygen temporarily kicks in: "You can't be a heterosexual white guy and be a hero anymore. You've gotta be really flawed and really bad and a piece of crap. Otherwise, the marketing department says, 'You can't have white guys be decent people. They're the enemy. They only put a man on the Moon and wrote 'Hamlet.' Why should we let them have any cred?'"

After the wild success of Mel Gibson’s brilliant The Passion of the Christ, many suspected that Hollywood would take heed and we would start to see a change in the type of films that permeate our culture. Of course, this has not happened and will not. Hollywood knows full well that the power of film and television in our culture is the best way to normalize people’s attitudes towards beliefs or behaviors that they would otherwise intellectually disagree with, especially amongst the young.

Film and television traffic in emotion, not logic and thus make an easy route to convincing people of a specific worldview.

Try telling a young person who has just watched Rutger Hauer as a Catholic Bishop eating human flesh in Sin City that not all Catholics are evil or pedophilic.

Try telling a young student who has just watched the romantic vision of Che Guevara in The Motorcycle Diaries that communism has oppressed more than capitalism.

Try telling someone you are opposed to same-sex marriage after they have just watched the lavish series Angels in America.

Try making an argument that not all military soldiers are simplistic idiots and not all poor people are rednecks to someone who has just watched Fahrenheit 9/11 or Bowling for Columbine.

Now these are just individual examples but as a whole, the entertainment industry has been in a virulently left-wing paradigm for almost three generations. These stories help shape our culture more than any other medium and are the prism through how our culture will be viewed to future generations.

Christians and conservatives must understand this…and more than a handful of them must go into the arts and pick up a camera or a brush or a pen.

The notion that all artists must be leftists or gay or addicted to drugs or atheists or involved in Kabbalah is a fallacy. Several of my good friends are a testament to that. Conservatives/Christians must also begin to fund art that reflects their worldview ideologically.

I am not talking about propaganda or poorly developed stories.

I am not talking about Kirk Cameron’s Left Behind series. I am talking about picking up the ball that genuine artists such as Mel Gibson and James Stewart before him have passed you. Understand that art is about telling human stories from the whole range of the human spectrum and that your stories are worth telling…artistically and passionately.

Do not wait for Hollywood to tell the story of the 100 million slaughtered in the name of communism in the past 150 years.

Do not wait for Hollywood to tell the story of Jane Roe who is now pro-life.

Do not wait for Hollywood to tell a story sympathetic to America in 9/11.

Do not wait for Hollywood to tell the story of how Evangelical Christians and Catholics are responsible for the majority of the missionary work being done in AIDS or famine ridden Africa.

It will never happen. Period.

Here is a brief list of some of the major 'wannabe' Oscar contenders this year and a synopsis:

The Family Stone: a sympathetic view of gay adoption; with Clair Danes and Dermot Mulroney

V for Vendetta: a fascist government takes over Britain and the hero is a terrorist who bombs the London underground; from the Wachowski brother (and sister ?) team

Jarhead: A view of Gulf War 1 which shows the soldiers as misled, confused and brainwashed; with Jake Gyllenhaal.

Syriana: Another view of Gulf War 1 which is intended to show how America itself laid the ground work for 9/11 and is ultimately to blame; apparently has a sympathetic portrayal of a suicide bomber; with George Clooney and Matt Damon

Transamerica: The odyssey of a transsexual in America; with Felicity Huffman

Brokeback Mountain: A gay cowboy love story that its star Heath Ledger has called the defining love story for our generation; with Heath Ledger and Jake Gyllenhaal

The New World: depicting how the first Christian settlers who landed in America were nothing but violent explorers who destroyed the native way of life. It will not deal with the persecution that other early pilgrims experienced before they came to the new world; with Colin Farrell

Good Night. And, Good Luck.: how Hollywood and others were persecuted by McCarthy during the communist ‘witch hunts’ of the 1950’s: directed by George Clooney.

Now ask yourself…do you see yourself in any of these stories? Are these the only stories you desire to speak for our culture long after we are gone from this planet? Do you have a story to tell? What are you doing to see it get told?

Until more conservatives and Christians take heed and commit to financing, encouraging and creating more valid art that takes a sympathetic portrayal of their worldview, they will continue to be viewed as the villains of history.

Monday, August 15, 2005


The War Room has written much about the topic of freedom of speech and thought in education over the past several weeks and we will continue to make this a recurring topic. Warwick has posted a link to this editorial in The Washington Times concerning a study entitled: "Politics and Professional Advancement among Faculty," by Stanley Rothman, emeritus professor of government at Smith College; S. Robert Lichter, a professor of communications at George Mason University; and Neil Nevitte, a political science professor at the University of Toronto”.

This is perhaps one of the most serious issues facing young people currently studying at any level of education. Some of them sadly do not even know it. Even more to the point, many parents (even conservative, Christian or libertarian ones) have absolutely no idea what their children are being taught, how they are being taught and the pressure that many of them face to believe things that in many cases are not true and contrary to what should be taught in a country which many believe aspires to be a functioning democracy.

This editorial at least shines a small ray of sunshine onto what has been a very dark period in the Western educational system. A taste of the editorial:

“ In some of these classrooms, conservative students are intimidated into silence, ignored or occasionally ridiculed. Accordingly, although belatedly, the June 23 "Statement of Academic Rights and Responsibilities," led by the American Council on Education, may finally awaken college trustees and alumni to the degree of indoctrination instead of free inquiry that characterizes much of higher education, particularly in the more elite institutions.”

Again, at my university, Queen’s at Kingston, Ontario, even worse happened than ridicule with some students being framed for crimes they didn’t commit because of their views. Lives were threatened and careers destroyed.

This editorial and the study it refers to is a small start but alas…it is a start. The War Room will try to find the complete study and discuss it at a later date. Thank you to Warwick for bring our attention to this article. Thanks also for those that shared personal stories in the comments sections of our last posts.

Thursday, August 11, 2005

Nicol in the War Room Posted by Picasa

Wednesday, August 10, 2005


Our hard-working audio lab technicians in the basement of The War Room have been able to decipher, decode and transcribe yet another conversation that our courageous agent taped while on assignment behind enemy lines. Codenamed Agent Starr, she is currently undergoing extensive training so that she can infiltrate further the Toronto academic, cultural and social scenes after Labour Day.

Again, these tapes show first hand evidence of the types of discussions that citizens are engaging in within the battlezone. This conversation, recorded at approximately 15:45 hundred hours eastern time on June 21, is again between the formerly heard CBC employee and his son, named Billy, who still sounds about 6 years old.

It was recorded somewhere on Carlton St. just east of Yonge.

Billy: Dad, what’s a separatist?

Dad: Son, I dreaded the day this conversation would come. Well …those are people that come from Quebec. They love our country and just want to belong. They are largely misunderstood. We have to do everything we can to make sure they feel welcome…like running advertising programs in their ‘belle province’ that promote unity; or appointing one of their own as the Governor General.

Billy: Quebec? Johnny O’Malley said they came from Alberta.

Dad: Oh. Those ones. You don’t want no part o’ that.

Billy: Why?

Dad: Because they are intolerant, Christian bigots who tend to discriminate against homosexuals, unions and domestic animals. They also believe Hooters have good wings.

Billy: Better than Woody’s on Church?

Dad: They think so. Why do you ask?

Billy: Well, Johnny said if Alberta seper…septual…

Dad: …separates…

Billy: …right! Johnny said if Alberta separates than the country would be plunged into a downward spiral from which it might not recover; he also says that the average Albertan easily pays more to fund the country than the average Torontonian. Is that true?

Dad: No, our money comes from the government. Remember, Albertans aren’t that smart. They wouldn’t know a separatist from a supremacist; which explains a lot. Also, even if they did…well…we don’t really need them anyway.

Billy: Why?

Dad: Because they foster a vision of Canada that we no longer believe in.

Billy: Johnny said they believed in things like family, freedom, God and respect for our veterans. Don’t we believe in those things?

Dad: We believe in new Canadian values like tolerance, diversity and equality. They’re also largely white.

Billy: We’re white.

Dad: But we feel guilty about it and let others know it. They also don’t tolerate same-sex marriage.

Billy: Well…are we tolerant?

Dad: Of course.

Billy: Then why don’t we tolerate them?

Dad: We do, we just want to enlighten them.

Billy: Enlivennn…

Dad: No, enlighten. That’s when sometimes you force people to do things they might not really want to do but its better for them in the long run.

Billy: Do they have a choice?

Dad: In a democracy such as ours, people always have a choice. They can become enlightened or pay the consequences.

Billy: Pay the consequences? Sounds like what Miss Radley said to Johnny after he spoke up in class the other day. Golly, we didn’t see him for a whole two hours after that. Doesn’t that mean that they don’t really have a choice at all?

Dad: No. It just means that through the force of our government, courts and legal system, we can ensure that they make the right choice. Kind of like when I tell you to eat your French fries with miso-gravy.

Billy: So…we do want Alberta to stay.

Dad: Of course.

Billy: And we do tolerate them.

Dad: Certainly.

Billy: …but we want to enlighten them for the sake of equality or they will pay the consequences.

Dad: Now, you’re getting it.

Billy: And in a democracy such as ours those consec..consec…

Dad: ...consequences…

Billy: …are given out by government, lawyers and judges.

Dad: You got it!

Billy: I think so. Johnny O’Malley taught me a word yesterday that sums up all of those things.

Dad: Excellent! What is it?

Billy: Communism!

Monday, August 08, 2005


In response to our last Dispatch entitled, Teachers Intimidate Students…
reader Eugene wrote,

“The allegation that professors are so are ideologically sadistic is silly. I went to a very left wing university and not a single prof ever docked marks or penalized a student solely because he/she disagreed with the tone of the class. In one poli sci class I took (of which the prof was openly Marxist), we had to write a book review of "The Wealthy Banker's Wife" by Linda McQuaig, and guess what, our prof told the class that those who tended to disagree with McQuaig did better than those who did! The key is how well one defends their arguments in essays and tests etc. Perhaps conservative students just aren't as articulate as their leftist cohorts? So much for bias. “ (please see comments section for Eugene’s complete post)


Thank you for your comments. The War Room welcomes posts by those who disagree. Now, read back what you wrote:

"Perhaps conservative students just aren't as articulate as their leftist cohorts? So much for bias."

Do you not see the irony in this statement? This is exactly the bias that every conservative student must go up against.

I must say in my experience it was quite the opposite. Conservative students had to be smarter/more articulate than the rest because they knew they were going to suffer consequences somewhere down the line for their views. Most 'left' students on the other hand would merely parrot back whatever the professor said to them. They were also the first to get flustered in a debate and would more often than not respond with baseless accusations of racism, misogyny or homophobia in order to intimidate and silence.

Unfortunately, academia, like culture, art, music and science is also susceptible to trends. Right now, for reasons we have discussed in The War Room before, the trend in academia is for virtually every subject to be filtered through the philosophical prisms of Marxist Oppression Theory and Radical Feminist Gender Identity Theory. Put in simple terms, to question these theories-and it runs through every faculty from arts to politics to economics to law- is like an employee at McDonald’s questioning why there needs to be beef patties in the Big Mac. It is quite simply unacceptable.

Now there are of course oppressed people in the world; children dying of starvation or AIDS in Africa; Christians and Catholics in communist China; innocent Israelis or Palestinians caught in conflict in the Middle East; innocent victims of war. All of these could be considered as legitimately oppressed.

Middle to upper-middle class white students at a North American university are not oppressed.

Unfortunately, a good many-way too many- think they are. They are taught that they have been ‘oppressed’ at the hands of a white, Judeo-Christian patriarchy and they are responsible for righting the wrongs of two-thousand years of history. They are also taught the nexus of this ‘oppression’ is capitalist America. In some courses the Vatican also weaves it’s way into this ‘theory’.

Now, when you drill this into young people non-stop for four years (or more), they get it into their heads that people who disagree with them are ‘evil’- and I use that word with all the force that it is intended.

At my university, Queen’s at Kingston, one incident saw a young man running for student council accused of rape. His accuser finally admitted she was cajoled into saying this by campus feminists who believed someone had to pay for this ‘oppression’. Extreme cases like this were very common at Queen’s University when I was there in the early nineties.

Teachers routinely downgraded students who disagreed but even worse…threats were made against people’s lives, careers were threatened and in some cases destroyed.

Eugene, I understand this is hard for you to comprehend. I am sure you are a decent person and mean well. Many older conservatives or libertarians do not understand this phenomenon either. It really is a Gen X and Y experience. Again, this goes back to Marxist Oppression Theory which is why I took the detour to talk about it. The New Left (I do not call them liberal because true classical liberalism is a good thing) defines itself by its ‘oppression’. They see themselves as liberators of the weak…defenders of the poor…upholders of justice if not law. To accept what we are saying would mean two things that they and you cannot fathom;

1) They are not oppressed. If what I (and many others) are saying is true, the New Left holds the power in our culture.

2) If they have the power in our culture then they must recognize that they may be abusing it because they are hard-wired to believe that power and oppression are synonymous

The New Left cannot accept either of these. These stories happening on our campuses will be the legacy of the New Left. And they will come out.

These stories are neither trite nor incidental.

Real damage has been done.

Lives have been threatened and careers destroyed on university campuses to New Left ideology. Now as my generation becomes elementary and high school teachers, this mentality and abuse (and it is abuse) is finding its way to younger students as well.

I have witnessed and experienced it first hand. At Queen’s University, in the early nineties getting docked grades for disagreeing was commonplace…you worried about the big stuff.

Would your name be scrawled in paint on the wall of the campus library for all to see as a ‘rapist’ because you made a comment in your political science class that someone didn’t like? Would your future be destroyed because of it?

Would you be in a class that all of a sudden got held ‘hostage’ by a bunch of balaclava wearing lesbians and feminists trying to make a point to the administration (who ironically enough were on their side)?

Would your professor that you liked find himself before a tribunal because he made an ‘incorrect’ comment that someone took out of context?

You see Eugene, these stories are real. They have scarred many and they will be told. Indeed in modern North American society those who claim ‘oppression’ hold the most power of all. A good rule of thumb is that if you are taught in school that demographic xyz is oppressed, it’s a good bet that demographic xyz is not oppressed. Oppressed people do not have university curriculums based around their lifestyle. That’s why they are oppressed.

For further reading on this subject matter I recommend a website called which is linked to on the right side of this web page. I also recommend a book called
The Shadow University by Alan Charles Kors and Harvey A. Silverglate. I also recommend anything by David Horowitz. The War Room will also continue to make this topic a recurring theme.

All the best.

And to all of those students out there past and present who have experienced what we are talking about…have courage.

Friday, August 05, 2005


What else can we say about this story in the Toronto Sun. More gun violence in Toronto. Last week I wrote extensively in two Dossiers about the rise of random gang violence in Toronto. Sadly, this story continues to confirm what I wrote and I suspect nothing of substance will be done. This time an innocent four year old boy was shot and the cycle of violence and denial, violence and denial, violence and denial will most likely continue. Meaningless statistics will be cited, America will be blamed and more will be killed.

This next story is just part of a larger series of Dossiers I am preparing on how our educational system at virtually all tiers now has been co-opted by individuals who are more concerned with left-wing political ideology than teaching our children how to think cogently for themselves.

According to the Vancouver Sun via (Neale News)

“Teachers have the right to post politically charged notices in schools and criticize the provincial government over school funding during parent-teacher interviews, the B.C. Court of Appeal has ruled.

In a judgment released Wednesday, three judges upheld by a two-to-one margin a labour arbitrator's finding that ordering teachers to stop talking politics in the schools was a violation of the Charter of Rights and Freedoms.”

Now when it comes to free speech I am fairly libertarian. There is not too much I do not think one should be allowed to say in public. And in theory, one might even say I agree that a teacher should not be legally reprimanded for saying political views in the class.

But what of the rights of the students to disagree?

What of the intimidation factor of a student who wants to question the beliefs of a teacher clearly beholden to their union and ideology?

Will they be chastised? Will they be docked grades?

Worse…will they even think to question in the first place?

Similarly what types of politics are allowed to be talked about in the classroom? Bill C-38 is a political topic; could a teacher put up a sign and question it? Dr. Chris Kempling knows the answer to this. He was suspended for telling his opinions in a public newspaper unassociated with the school system outside of class. Our sympathies lie with him.

That a teacher in any school system would want to use his/her students or the forum of parent teacher interviews to pontificate about their political views tells something about the quality of the teacher themselves. It betrays someone who cares more about their own ideology than the welfare of their students.

The fear and intimidation of a teacher or professor bringing their views into the classroom is something I know well too much about and I do not like it. Not at all; especially when there is a double-standard as to what political views are even protected by our so-called Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

What is ironic about this case is that it was a Liberal government that the teachers were speaking up against. Of course because the teachers were obviously further to the left of the Liberals, it was permitted.

There is something plainly pathetic about a teacher who is so beholden to their union that they would exploit the presence of children or teens in a classroom to put forth views that could be intimidating and counter productive to the educational process. Teachers have an immense influence and responsibility over our young. They can inspire one student to the greatest of heights or destroy the hopes and dreams of another with poor teaching and petty politics.

At the university level this turns into something else entirely where for well over two decades now, our institutions of higher learning have been turned into a virtual central nervous system for left-wing indoctrination. It is not done as blatantly as one would think at the higher level, but on the other hand, to go against it can lead to repercussions that can be quite severe. This story written by Wendy McElroy courtesy of The Fire is one of too many examples we could cite.

My own experiences and those that I witnessed at Queen’s University led to some horrifying examples of censorship and intimidation at best and at worst, incidents where students were charged with crimes they did not commit merely for being known to have views that were ‘incorrect’ or being in the wrong places at the wrong time.

Unfortunately at this level, many students also have to take the blame for being co-conspirators and working diligently to intimidate their peers (or professors) with whom they disagree. I do not believe any ideology should be dominant in a school, right or left, but sadly, all of the tyranny-and I use this word with the full intent of its weight- I encountered was at the hands of the New Left.

On American campus’ students are gradually waking from their slumber and some are fighting back. In Canada…for most, the hibernation continues.

Tuesday, August 02, 2005


"Civilizations die from suicide, not by murder." Arnold Toynbee

Here is a link to an excellent interview (via in the Wall Street Journal with Italian journalist Oriana Fallaci. In this interview she mourns what she sees as the Fall of the West. This concept has been talked about by many but reported by few, certainly in the mainstream Canadian media which doesn’t seem to see the cliff in front of the golf cart that our country has become. Oh well, I guess all those sweating naked bodies from Pride covered in masts of gangi smoke is obscuring the view.

Fallaci talks about what both Pope John Paul II and now Pope Benedict XVI spoke extensively about. The fact that the West has grown obsessed with hating its own past and history and is obsessed with only focusing on its wrongs and nothing it has done right...not even its arts, literature or model for democracy. The fact that she is an atheist who admires the Pope says much.

I agree. Ask most university students. They are taught very little about Western European history or WW I or II…unless of course they are learning about how the West created slavery, misogyny and homophobia and tried to colonize the world in the name of Christianity and Catholicism.

On the other hand, they have consumed hours of literature about Latin American politics, South American regimes, communist revolutionaries in third world countries and some even about liberation theology (another form of Catholic bashing, which also plays a big part in their philosophy).

Again, this has much to do with the influence of Marxist and communist writers on the politics of the New Left and how it ties in with Marxist Oppression Theory.

To study Europe’s past is to study a testament to the abject failure of the communist/Marxist social and economic model. One cannot study Europe in the 20th century without encountering the stories of the millions starved, tortured and murdered in the name of communism.

Contemporary Latin/South American culture however, is rife with the stories of communist ‘revolutionaries’ and the cult of ‘Che’ which lives on in the hearts of too many middle class white university students and their professors. This gives modern day neo-communists like Naomi Klein and Avi Lewis a huge market and by ignoring European history, no one challenges their thought process.

They also tend to ignore the horror, torture and censorship in modern day Cuba.

Give the article a read if you have the time. Fallaci has much to say.

Also give this article a read if you want a laugh. It is by Globe And Mail columnist Leah McLaren. As a creedo we try to stay away from personal swipes in The War Room but...

...because I know people that went to school with Leah McLaren...

...because I've heard how she got her job...

...because I've met people that dated her...

...because I saw her about a year ago fawning like a simp on one of those youth pop-culture shows saying how 'hot' John Cusack was...

...I found it verrrrryyyy funny indeed to read a column written by her detailing how Jessica Simpson and George W. Bush are stupid.

Leah McLaren calling George W. Bush and Jessica Simpson stupid.

Funny indeed.