Friday, February 14, 2020

Update on Francis Barrett being carded by Ottawa Police

"After watching me from across the street (in front of 65 Bank) they [the police] came across the street, stood behind me (see picture below), said nothing for a couple of minutes until I turned and said, is there a problem? That is when he [one of the police officers] said you're breaking the bubble zone law. I said your joking, can't you see the sign right beside me? Don't you know were the bubble zone is?" Francis Barrett
It is abysmal how pro-life people are treated in Ontario. 

First we were prevented from praying in front of the abortion site with the abortion bubble zone law. This forced Fr. Tony Van Hee to bring a Charter Challenge against the government for this discrimination

Now Francis Barrett has been carded

He first complained to the Ottawa Police about the treatment he and others received at the abortion site (outside the bubble zone). After multiple meetings, phone calls, emails, and four months of waiting, Mr. Barrett never received an apology for his treatment.

He then complained to the Office of the Independent Police Review Director (OIPRD). The OIPRD is an "independent" group in charge of complaints against the police:
"OIPRD is responsible for receiving, managing and overseeing all public complaints about municipal, regional and provincial police in Ontario. As an independent civilian oversight agency, we make sure that public complaints about police are dealt with in a manner that is transparent, effective and fair to both the public and the police." 
What did the OIPRD do with Mr. Barrett's complaint? They dismissed it:

Not 'transparent'. Not 'effective'. Not 'fair'.

Even though these peaceful pro-life persons, acting within the law, were asked for ID for no reason, and subsequently intimidated by the Ottawa Police, the appeal was dismissed. (The OIPRD reports to the Attorney General's office. How can an appeal board be independent when they report to a government bureaucracy?).

Mr. Barrett was also told that there is no other appeal, and that his only other recourse was to go to Judicial Review, ie, go to court. All he wanted was an apology for their behaviour. They wouldn't give him one.

(When I had my own Charter Challenge with the Attorney General, the judge who ruled against the AG for hiding abortion information actually noted that the only recourse a citizen has in these circumstances, is to go to court. That this was unfair. We see this exact same behaviour today: A citizen must go to court--at great personal expense--to get justice in Ontario against the AG and its army of highly paid lawyers.)

"the officers were acting in their authority in checking the permission of the group to be there." 
So I asked. What authority is that? They refused to answer my question.

"The circumstances outlined in his complaint do not suggest that the police were engaging in that prohibited activity at the time they requested his identification." 
The police were definitely engaging in a prohibited activity. It's called carding
"This regulation describes the limitations and duties of police officers when collecting identifying information (also known as “carding” or “street checks”).The regulation applies if a police officer asks a person for identifying information or to see an identifying document while:
  • Looking into suspicious activities
  • Gathering intelligence
  • Investigating possible criminal activity
During these interactions officers must inform the person of their right to not provide identifying information and provide a reason for requesting identifying information. The reason cannot be:
  • Arbitrary
  • That the person declined to answer a question or attempted to end the interaction
  • Based on race or solely because that individual is in a high-crime location"
None of these conditions apply here. Again I asked, which of these was Francis Barrett and his small group of seniors doing that required this harassing behaviour?

No answer.

To add insult to injury we have this:
"the police have a discretion as to the nature of the identification that they may accept, and absent evidence that police exercised the discretion improperly, it is unlikely that an investigation would result in grounds to believe misconduct occurred."
Except the police had absolutely no grounds to ask Mr. Barrett for ID in the first place. So the kind of ID they would accept is entirely moot. They weren't supposed to ask for ID in the first place. 

"it is unlikely that an investigation would result in grounds to believe misconduct occurred."
The OIPRD is actually admitting here that they didn't even bother to investigate Mr. Barrett's complaint. Presumably they just unilaterally decided it wasn't valid. Prejudice: 'preconceived opinion that is not based on reason or actual experience'.

And "lead to tensions"? What does that mean? The only tensions that day were the tensions caused by the police, not the peaceful senior citizens silently praying outside the bubble zone. They were intimidated for no reason. They were carded for no reason. They deserve an apology.

Peaceful protest in Ontario is only allowed if you are not pro-life.

Tuesday, February 4, 2020

Update from Fr. Tony on his constitutional challenge

The civil case challenging the constitutionality of the bubble zone law is taking longer than expected so we have agreed to delay the criminal case against me from July 2020 to July 2021.

With much gratitude for your support, daily prayers, and God's Blessing+,

Fr Tony

P.S. Something early for Mother's Day.

"The Most Important Person is a mother. She cannot claim the honor of having built Notre Dame Cathedral. She need not. She has built something more magnificent than any cathedral--a dwelling for an immortal soul, the tiny perfection of her baby's body... The angels have not been blessed with such a grace. They cannot share in God's creative miracle to bring new saints to Heaven. Only a human mother can. Mothers are closer to God the Creator than any other creature. God joins forces with mothers in performing this act of creation...What on God's good earth is more glorious than this: to be a mother." Joseph Cardinal Mindzenty

(From a prayer card with no further information)

Saturday, February 1, 2020

Pro-abortion Planned Parenthood Toronto received $11,448,591 from governments

Remember how the pro-abortions had their knickers in a twist about pro-life groups receiving $1.8 million from the Canada Summer Jobs Program? Well Planned Parenthood Toronto received over $11 million from governments. ($11,448,591 to be exact). That's one organization compared to 56 organizations.

Can you say 'Discrimination much'?

And look at what compensations are like for Planned Parenthood Toronto. Almost $3 million in one year. With the top pro-abort earning between $120,000 to $159,999. Compare that to say, the top gun at Toronto Right to Life who makes $39,999And receives no government funding.

What more can I say?

PLANNED PARENTHOOD OF TORONTO Reporting period ending: 2019-03-31

RIGHT TO LIFE ASSOCIATION OF TORONTO AND AREA Reporting period ending: 2019-03-31

Wednesday, January 29, 2020

Pro-abortion UNFPA received $390,680,202 from Liberals

Further to my previous entries (Part 1Part 2Part 3) on the tax dollars doled out for 'reproductive rights', I will now focus on individual organizations that advocate/promote 'reproductive rights', code word for abortion. Today's numbers are for the United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA).

UNFPA received $390,680,202 from the Liberals during Prime Minister Justin Trudeau's first term in office.

UNFPA says they do not promote or provide abortion services. According to ADF International, UNFPA does promote abortion.
'The discrepancy between the Agency’s designated mandate and actual activity is evident in the central focus of its programmatic and advocacy efforts—the fulfillment of ‘reproductive rights,’ which means abortion in UN parlance. Although the term is not explicitly defined as including abortion in any UN document, and appears in no binding instruments of international law, reproductive rights’ has been embraced by the pro abortion movement as the definitive term in support of a universal right to abortion. It was the ICPD that elevated the concept of ‘reproductive rights’ to international prominence and entrenched the term in the UN agenda. Even though it is not defined as abortion in the ICPD, and the document makes clear that abortion laws are to be decided by national legislatures, abortion activists were quick to co-opt the term, rendering it synonymous with abortion in the UN discourse. It is clear that ‘reproductive rights’ is considered the broad umbrella term under which all individual abortion-related terms fall, and as such is the most promoted phrase in the pursuit of the abortion agenda'
UNFPA also partners with abortion provider Marie Stopes:
‘[L]et me say that Marie Stopes International is one of UNFPA’s most valued partners in the great work we are doing together.'
And also with abortion provider IPPF:
'The relationship between IPPF and UNFPA is deeply entrenched and dates back to their founding. In celebration of the 50th anniversary of IPPF, a UNFPA representative speaking on behalf of the Agency praised the abortion conglomerate, stating, ‘IPPF is a true pioneer in our field and is rightly known for its brave and angry spirit and going boldly where governments have feared to go’—the reference to governments a not-so subtle nod to the Agency’s proclivity for defying State sovereignty.'
ADF International did a very thorough job in their analysis of UNFPA and it's abortion ideology.

It seems that when President Trump reduced funding to UNFPA, Justin Trudeau stepped up his. On our behalf.

Friday, January 24, 2020

2018 abortion numbers - are they going up or down?

CIHI has released 2018 abortion statistics. The numbers look like they're down from 2017, which is a good thing. But considering that CIHI doesn't report any abortions performed in doctor's offices; considering that not all clinic abortions are reported; together with the fact that an increasing number of abortions come from the easy availability of the abortion pill RU-486, we have no idea if abortions are really going down, or up.

NOTE: CIHI only reports the gestational ages of abortions for those done in hospitals, and not for those done in clinics, and not for those done in Quebec. This means that for the bulk of the abortions performed in Canada, we have no gestational ages.