As promised, here is my breakdown of the policy changes in SD76 that came as a direct result of Bill-24.
And in Part 2, I walk through in detail the complete judgement on the Bill-24 Injunction.
As a bonus, have a listen to John Carpay and what he thinks of the judgement. Suffice to say, they WILL be appealing.
“One of the most shallow judgements I’ve ever seen” – Carpay
In this episode of the “Eminent Sire’s Pontifications” I discuss the June 20th Court Injunction against Bill-24 heard at the Medicine Hat Court of Queens Bench
Some other info you might be interested in.
The Justice in the Bill-24 Injunction made reference to the TWU decision. The link below is an opinion piece from a non religious person on that decision.
The following video is about a man #Walkedaway from being a liberal. Interesting watch.
I’ve decided the best way to convey my concerns with the curriculum rewrite is through video, and for those that just want the highlights, I’ve included the outline I used to make the video. Not as much is conveyed, but you get the basic idea of where I am going with the video.
Curriculum meeting opened with a first nations land acknowledgment.
Host spoke of a process to nominate ‘experts’ who helped write the curriculum. No details on who or how were given.
The draft was divided into 5 sections. Math, arts, science, health, and social(ism).
Each section was essentially set up to show goals of concepts conveyed, what vague general items they were trying to convey for those goals, and what the students were supposed to take away from those conveyed concepts.
Arts and Social(ism) were clearly the focus, and Math and Science appeared to be the smallest. (I may be wrong on Math, but it was a small section of the wall, and I didn’t have time to go over it.)
The entire process seemed to indicate to me that they were not really interested in changing anything substantial, just that they wanted to gauge how well it would be received, and change some of the wording to be “more positive” and acceptable when they come out with the next draft.
The intent of the new curriculum seems to be focused on 3 main points:
The meetings were not set up for you to have any sort of reasonable amount of time to give proper feedback. I went to both sessions, and was only able to cover a “Cole’s Notes” overview of about half of it. Each 1.5 hour session had .5 hours of introduction (,including the first nations spiel,) and explanation of what it was they were allowing us to see.
Here is what I got from the individual groups:
Didn’t have time to cover it. Appeared to be small, and given what I know of the “new math,” did wish to waste what little time I had on it.
Clearly their main focus. Massive section. Outpaced all the other groups by several pages of objectives. What better section to incorporate culture and traditions than in the arts. Didn’t go over it.
I had the least issue with Science, and the answer I got to questions were direct and refreshing. No attempts to deflect or imply that I was reading into it things that were not there. The main issue I had was a section on energy, and interconnections between all living things, and a deliberate injection of first nations traditions in the ‘science’.
Health is where you really see their focus on becoming parents. I was surprised a potty training session wasn’t on the list. Issues of consent are in every grade. Implicitly in K and explicitly in 1-4. There is also crazy ideas of personal space, and parents needing to get permission from kids. (Even for hugging.) Lot of focus on identity, and mental health. (The kids knowing mental health, not the adults.) And there was something about Digital Citizenship responsibilities in grade 1. Not a fan of the sex ed/puberty talks in grade 4 either. Ya, that was in the old curriculum, (or so I’m told,) but just because it was before doesn’t mean it should be there now.
Global citizenship was a goal in every section, every grade. It was the one thing they wanted kids to believe. They also encouraged kids to be activists, and to set their value based on their identity group. Social Studies had zero history, and the only group that wasn’t included was white people. Social Studies was clearly written by the dangerous people peterson is talking about in the below video.
Other links referenced in the video:
On June 1st, I wrote a post drawing attention to a character assassination piece written by Collin Gallant of MHN. That unethical piece was a response to a still unpublished “letter to the editor” and sanctioned by the MHN’s own editors. At least one of the three editors, Bruce Penton, Kerri Sandford, or Scott Shmidt would have had to approve it. While publishing an article attacking a private citizen of Medicine Hat seemed pretty bad, and highly damaging to the credibility of the MHN, I never expected that they would attempt to dig ‘up’ out of the situation. I specifically stated that I was being hyperbolic when I said that MHN was putting on their inquisition credentials. It appears they missed that line, and took it as an outline of how they should proceed.
Today, June 12th, MHN published a “reply” “letter to the editor,” from a Karen D. LaHay. An employee of the Medicine Hat Public Libary (MHPL), who wanted to make sure you knew LaHay is a man who identifies as a woman. I will get into LaHay’s sanctimonious attack on a private citizen through a media platform that refuses to give the same courtesy to the man being attacked, in a moment. Right now I’m focusing on MHN’s complete lack of any integrity, ethics, or moral decency.
Through the obstinate refusal to publish Mr. Johnston’s letter, MHN displayed there complete lack of integrity, but it was the bias and discriminatory action of publishing a letter in response to the caricature of Mr. Johnston that Gallant shamelessly fabricated, that exposed their complete lack of ethics or ethical standards. Not, only that, but they published a letter that clearly besmirched, if not defamed, the identity of Mr. Johnston, and any of his “like minded followers.” That alone shows the moral depravity of the media organization. It also shows flagrant bigotry to opposing ideas and/or religious beliefs. MHN has clearly shown themselves to be intolerant hypocritical bullies, and like all bullies, they are also cowards. For only a coward would attack a man, let others attack that man, and refuse to allow that man to defend himself, and only a spiteful bully would encourage a mob to go after defenseless person for having the wrong opinion.
It is for those reasons that I feel I am compelled to call upon all the free thinking, religious, liberal, and falsely maligned people of Medicine Hat to boycott MHN news. I do not say this lightly, but it seems evidently clear that they can’t be trusted to be impartial in their reporting, and they appear to take a fair amount of glee in belittling the people of Medicine Hat, if they dare to disagree with the fascistic tactics of the LGBT™. Tolerant only of those who agree with them.
So, if you have a subscription, cancel it. If you advertise in the MHN, stop. Write letters to city council demanding that they no longer advertise with them either. Inform them of what MHN is doing. The only way the bullying will stop is if you stand up to them, and you do that, by refusing to give them your (lunch) money. I provided the e-mail addresses of the editors with their names at the top of the post. Write and demand an apology. Stand up, take courage, and defrock the inquisition.
Only a sincere, front page apology by every individual involved in the Gallant piece would sooth my outrage at the crass actions of the MHN. In the meantime, I doubt anyone boycotting them would actually miss them. Now, LaHay and the MHPL, that is a different situation altogether. How to handle that, is little different.
LaHay’s letter in response to the unseen letter by Mr. Johnston immediately jumps into mocking Mr. Johnston’s “two minutes of fame,” despite having had no moment of ‘fame’. LaHay then immediately gets the facts wrong, and says Mr. Johnston was given a platform to spread his alleged hatred. I see no platform that was given to Mr. Johnston, and I dare LaHay to actually state what exactly Mr. Johnston is alleged to have said that was so full of hate. It looks like LaHay has insider knowledge of this alleged letter, and if that is the case and the letter was given by anyone other than Mr. Johnston, that only makes LaHay out to be the unethical one. LaHay then claims that Mr. Johnston was engaging in a personal attack, but provides zero evidence of such. LaHay concludes by using revolutionary language stating the intolerant self-righteous arrogant crowd are here to stay. Then invites you all to come down to your tax funded public library to hear more condescending indignation about how special and worthy of praise they are and oppressive you are.
Now, I can’t speak for everyone else, but I for one don’t care to darken the doors of the MHPL ever again. Not to mention I don’t even need to know the details of the whole “social media policy” of the MHPL. It is plainly obvious that they have a set of values that they have chosen, and if you have other values, you are not welcome. Why anyone would want to be part of that toxic environment is beyond me. To employ a person who slanders a man in a public paper, and to double down by inviting the public to come and hear that employees life story as something empowering and to strive for is just shameful. If that is the kind of ethics they stand for, I would never wish for my children to learn anything from them. I want my kids to grow up valuing every person equally, not spitting vitriol and disdain at people who disagree with them. “Pride goes before destruction, and a haughty spirit before a fall.”
Earlier today, Steven Crowder did a second segment on there only being 2 genders in his “Change My Mind” discussions. I found this session particularly interesting as he had a conversation with both a transgender person, (Male to Female identity,) and an intersex person who says they were born with a Y chromosome and a vagina. (A very real type of intersex defect.) There were a number of things in the conversation that struck me.
I’ve consider doing my own “There are only 2 Genders” but do it “I’m intersex, and there are only 2 genders. Change My Mind.” Maybe Canada day… we will see. I took particular exception to the intersex person using their defect to ignore the facts in front of them, and presume to speak for all people with the ‘spectrum’ of intersex defects. There actually is a cluster, not a spectrum. A spectrum requires there to be no defined steps. Each intersex defect has a name, and each has different genetically identifiable characteristics. One might even call it biology and science.
Today, Medicine Hat News (MHN) published an article by Collin Gallant laced with typos, about local man Sheldon Johnston’s letter to the editor of MHN. As of the time of publishing this, two independent residents have not been able to locate a posted full text copy of Mr. Johnston’s letter, anywhere on the MHN website.
Gallant purports that Mr. Johnston was not pleased with a social media post by the Medicine Hat Public Library, (the Library) which, according to Gallant, Johnston said was favoring one view over another. Without the full text of Mr. Johnston’s letter, we are left to accept Gallant’s word alone on the matter.
From a printed piece, one can expect to have to look up referenced material one’s self, but with a web article, linking to relevant material is exceptionally easy, as I have already shown. Gallant mentions the Library’s social media piece which allegedly sparked Mr. Johnston’s letter, but does not give the text of it, and no photo reference is given anywhere in the piece. We are told of the Library’s program called “Human Library Catalogue,” but are not even given detailed info on that.
As a matter of full disclosure, Mr. Johnston and I have in the past worked along side each other in CPoSD76 matters, but more than a year ago myself, the CPoSD76, and Mr. Johnston parted ways because of irreconcilable difference in approach to certain matters. Yet, despite our disagreements, I can not abide hit pieces by media groups against private individuals in the community. Make no mistake, this was a hit piece.
1. Gallant and the MHN do not give you the full context of what Mr. Johnston wrote, nor the full context of the social media conversation that Mr. Johnston allegedly referenced. I am no lawyer, but it looks to me like Mr. Johnston has ample room to pursue libel against MHN. The only reason I know that, is because of research I was forced to do on libel when CHAT News did a hit piece against myself. A news agency with it’s own sordid history of poor reporting and attacking those they don’t agree with.
Without the full text of Mr. Johnston’s letter, we, the public, are unable to verify the veracity of Gallant’s claims as to the content of Mr. Johnston’s letter. We have no context to the statements Mr. Johnston allegedly made. Was Mr. Johnston being sarcastic in any of his statements? Did he give multiple examples of the bias he allegedly believed the Library was displaying? Did he give suggestions on how to thwart the alleged bias? Was he just ranting, as is common in letters to the editor? We will never know, because MHN didn’t deign to tell us. In so doing they have potentially defamed the character of a private resident of Medicine Hat, who holds no public office or position of authority.
2. Gallant opened the piece by describing Mr. Johnston as “A Medicine Hat man with a history of commenting on gay and transgender issues”. Shortly there after also stating that Mr. Johnston, “… has been a vocal opponent of gay-straight alliances in schools as proposed by the Alberta government.” Immediately and willfully painting Mr. Johnston in an anti LGBTQ light, before even getting into the alleged details of the as yet, unproven letter to the editor. Neither statement being necessary to the topic at hand. If we can not know what it is that Mr. Johnson is supposed to have written, what is the point of Gallant’s piece, other than to belittle a man for having an opinion? Are we to presume that there was sufficient evidence in Mr. Johnston’s claims to warrant a follow up by MHN, without even showing the public what led them to dig deeper and seek out the Library’s response? A response, I might add, to something no one has seen.
As I referenced in my post about the Solidify prong of the C.P.O.S. plan, MHN news has it’s own pro LGBT™ bias. No more clearly evidenced than the statement by it’s official social media account that “it’s a pretty straight line from strict social conservative to those who back conversion therapy groups.” It is common knowledge that the public understands “conversion therapy groups” as those who employ such tactics as beating, electro shock therapy, and self-abasement as legitimate tactics to ‘force’ the conversion of a homosexual individual. Gallant even mentions one commenter on the Library’s alleged social media post, that allegedly makes that connection to forced conversion therapy. It is clearly evident that MHN knows well the public connotations that go with “conversion therapy groups” and they are all to happy to promote that false narrative.
Laying aside the fact that this was a hit piece, one has to consider a few other facts. In order for this piece to have been written, the editor of MHN would have to have received Mr. Johnson’s alleged “letter to the editor,” the editor would then have to assign the piece to a writer, the writer would have to submit their piece for approval, and a copy editor would have to correct any mistakes. Given the number of malformed sentences and punctuation errors in the piece that I have archived, it would appear that this piece did not get properly screened. We can not lay the blame solely on Gallant, as a number of senior staff members would have had to be in the know on this piece before it was ever published.
If you take into consideration the social media statement on social conservatives by the official MHN account, the fact that a letter to the editor sparked Gallant’s piece, the multiple miss-characterizations of the Concerned Parents in the past, and the ridiculous understanding of the United Conservative Party’s founding AGM policy proposal that MHN encouraged, I can only conclude that the MHN has systemic anti conservative bias. In my opinion, they have lost all credibility to report impartially, and as such, if I can not take them at their word on social issues, I can not trust them on any topic.
As to the other point of Gallant’s article, whether or not the Library was showing bias against religious groups in favour of the LGBT™ dogma, I can not go into great detail. I am lacking sufficient facts to form an opinion. All I can say is, while concerned parents and business owners were being harassed and threatened during the petition period, for refusing to kiss the ring of any and every self-proclaimed pontiff of the LGBT™, MHN news and other local media were nowhere to be found. Some media were even participating in the disparaging attacks. But the minute a private citizen dares to resist the LGBT™ doctrine, MHN is there to slap on their inquisitor credentials and burn them at the stake. I’m being hyperbolic of course.
So, on the Library situation, ask yourself this. Would a publicly funded library be OK with a Christian employee proclaiming their Christianity at work, and would the Library suggest that patrons go and ask that employee what a Christian’s believes are and life is like, as they did for the trans employee? If you can’t see the answer to that being yes, than the Library is absolutely anti-religious and bias in it’s policies. And hey it’s been widely publicized that I’m intersex, so I can expect my invitation to participate in the “Human Library Catalogue” to arrive any day now. … Any day now.
This is the 4th and final post on the C.P.O.S. plan going forward.
The last prong of the plan is to:
Solidify the Family and parental authority into public education and culture through policy proposals for both provincial government and school boards, and the lobbying of political parties to establish and recognize those principles. To do this via all legal avenues available.
Never before in the history of our country has the family been so thoroughly and unabashedly under attack. We are surrounded by socialist thugs, cowardly conservatives who do not believe principles are worth standing on, and brutal death worshipers who think giving our kids over to predators, abusers, and pedophiles is in the best interest of ‘normal’ development. We must stand against it, and refuse to follow their narratives. Refuse to accept their irrational rationales.
The last prong of C.P.O.S. is about making a stand for the family, and refusing to compromise. Refusing to accept the lies. Refusing to back down because someone might call us a mean name. We must be the men and women that refused to stand by while evil succeeded.
Three weeks ago, I had the pleasure of attending the United Conservative Party founding AGM. There I was able to participate with other like minded Albertans, and see several policies passed that enshrined protections for the family into the party constitution and mission. (To be completely honest, I was there as part of this prong of the plan.)
You need look no further than the UCP AGM to see just how badly the family is under attack, and for an explanation as to why this prong of the plan is necessary. No sooner had the party been lectured by a minority cabal of members, clearly ignorant of the reasons and intent of the policy being voted, then a separate(?) cabal of castrated cowardly media virtue signalists were quoting the same ignorant members back to the leader and asking how it felt to be the leader of such a massive amount virulent bigots.
Every media outlet from CHAT to Global was wailing into the interwebs about how conservatives wanted to out gay kids, and let their parents beat them to death. So foolish and inaccurate was their musings, that we had a local bakery think they needed to send a tray of rainbow donuts to their MLA, telling him how it was OK to be gay. Medicine Hat News even openly told me that they think it is a straight line between being conservative and supporting “Gay Conversion Therapy.” (Just so you know, that is code for electrocuting gays, yes, MHN thinks if you are a strict conservative, you want to electrocute gays.)
So what was the policy that had journalists curled up in the corner of the tub showering with their clothes on? A policy asking that the UCP affirm the Family as the foundation of good society, and that parents be informed if their kids are being exposed to explicit sexual or religious content at school. Let that sink in. Stop and pause after the next sentence to really fully understand where we are at as a province and country. The media had immediately leaped from a policy about protecting the family unit, and informing parents if their kids were at risk from sexual and/or religious predators, to “they want to out gay kids, and put them at risk to being beaten by their parents.”
The leader of the UCP didn’t help the situation any either. While thousands of delegates were still debating and passing several other pro family and education policies with 75-90% support, the leader was throwing all their hard work under the bus. Saying that the 100s of hours, and thousands of viewers of the policy, had quote “poorly written” it. Like all the lawyers and professionals that helped write, had no idea what they were doing. Not to mention the leader gave zero mention of what part specifically was “poorly written,” or problematic.
The UCP leader went further down the rabbit hole talking about how Bill 10 had overwhelming support, (by the government that got ousted at the next opportune moment,) that parents don’t have to know if your kids join a chess club, and that he never supported mandatory informing of parents. Immediately falling into the clutches of the ridiculous media narrative that knowing if your kid are going to a GSA somehow outs their sexuality. That is a trash argument. What is the mechanism by which kids are outed? Tell me specifically. In order for that to be true, the GSAs would have to be a bigoted group, ONLY for gay people, with straight people not welcome.
Now, I’m going to go on a bit of a tangent here, and express a view that is wholly mine, and not supported by several other concerned parents. I do not agree with withholding ANY activities from parents, unless they can categorically prove telling the parents would be putting the child at risk. A parent has the RIGHT to know who their children are associating with, and what activities they are up to. What if your child joined a video game club at school, but you only allow them an hour of games a day? They are circumventing and undermining your rightful authority as a parent to raise them as you see fit.
What if the local chess club is a front for the local gang? Used to recruit children. Would it be OK for the admin to keep that a secret from you? GSAs are a front for exposing your children to explicit sexual content. That is a fact. The GSA Network has been repeatedly caught having explicit sexual content linked to their network. The admin across this province were completely oblivious to it. Some, like our SD76 Board Chair even convinced themselves that the network was hacked, rather than admit that it happened. Bill-24 made GSAs exempt from having to let you know if explicit sexual content was being shown in the club. Still trust the admin to make good judgment as to what you need to know about and what you don’t? I sure don’t.
So, back on point. With the UCP AGM being clear evidence, among a mountain of other examples I can’t go into here, that the current media, government, and LGBTQ™ have a hatred and fear of the family, (some might even call it familyphobia,) what specifically can we do to enact the Solidify prong of the C.P.O.S. plan? We must take this one opportunity at a time. There are two events in the next 2 weeks that you can participate in, that could help solidify the family to our government, schools, and courts.
The Concerned Parents of SD76 will be at both.
On June 6th the Alberta School Councils’ Association will be presenting the draft curriculum for K-12, specifically focused on K-4.
Details of the session are as follows:
DATE: Wednesday June 6, 2018
TIME: 1:00 pm – 2:30 pm (or 6:30 pm – 8:00pm)
PLACE: Grant Henderson Learning Centre,
Medicine Hat School Division Central Office
601 – 1st Ave SW,
During this session you will have the opportunity to:
learn about how the curriculum is changing
see the draft K-4 curriculum documents
provide feedback on ways the draft K-4 curriculum can be strengthened
This is an opportunity to have a say in the development of Alberta’s future provincial curriculum, and we are pleased you can participate!
You can register for the event here. I have registered the CPoSD76 for the 1 – 2:30 session. If you have not been able to register, but wish to attend, you can come out to the 1pm session, and I’ll attempt to get you in under the CPoSD76.
The JCCF Bill-24 court injunction is an all day hearing, that is open to the public. Bill-24 is a tyrannical law, that strips parents of their rights, and puts our children at risk of physical, psychological, and emotional harm. Stand with me and other parents at the court house on June 8th at 10AM
We the people of Medicine Hat stunned the justice when we had the petition challenge, with 100 people in the benches. Lets come out in massive respectful, peaceful solidarity for the solidification of our rights as parents, and for the protection of our children, and the family from tyrannical intrusion by the state.
That concludes the series on the CPOS plan. As additional events and activities come up, I will be posting them, and indicating which prong of the plan applies to them. In the meantime, I will close with a somber warning from Wilders, on what happens when you refuse to stand up for your rights, and for your family. Before you know it, you may be arrested for trying to protect someone from a Muslim rape gang, that is being protected by the police, because you are not allowed to criticize any action of the government. That is the consequence for not solidifying the family in government. Government becomes your ‘family,’ with the right to raise you as they see fit.
“Orate” is the third in a series of 4 posts about the Concerned Parents of SD76 C.P.O.S. plan going forward. In case you missed the first and second, you can read Create and Protect by clicking on their titles.
I’m a couple weeks later than I was planning on this one. In general I try to keep to a schedule of how I post, but I also need to keep watch of the ebb and flow what is going on in culture. In the two years since I’ve started doing this, writing things for public view, I’ve noticed that their are opportune moments to share about any given topic. I’ve also come to understand what writers block and inspiration really are. Something I’ve never really comprehended before.
In preparation for writing about what the “Orate” prong of the plan was all about, I decided I should make sure I orate it very well. As the day approached for my intended post, I was at a loss as to how to open it. How to really hit home the importance of this prong of the plan, and what the CPoSD76 were doing about it. Then Michael Knowles released this video through PragerU, and I had it. Please watch/listen to it in it’s entirety, and then continue on with this post. It’s less than 5 minutes of your time.
Did you watch/listen to it? I mean it. All of it. It is important, for the rest of this post, and for understanding the “Orate” prong of the plan. OK, I believe you. I have faith that your attention span is long enough to get to the heart of what I’m saying. Can I make one more request of you? Keep track of how many times and at what you scoff, or roll your eyes at in what I write. It’s relevant.
Were you slightly offended by my previous paragraph? It’s OK if you were. I didn’t mean to insult or offend, but it was intentional. I needed you to be incited enough to pay attention. That is how officials see you though. They think of you as too stupid or lazy to bother concerning yourself with the issues of the day. Informed Public vs. Mass Population. Politicians, bureaucrats, administrations, friends, acquaintances, associates. They have all thought this, or said it (behind closed doors.) I too have thought this at times, though I tell myself that those people are fewer in number than the stereotype makes it out to be. You may be saying to yourself, “no, I don’t think they believe that.”
Do you remember Mitt Romney saying that 47% of Americans are lazy moochers? The number of people in positions who have said something similar to me, or in my presence would shock you. The Evidence is all around you. You’re to dumb to be trusted to get help breast feeding your children, so we have to have government programs to show you, and the school district should be in charge of that. After all, early learning is crucial to proper child development. Can’t be trusted to do that at home yourself though, got to have day care and pre-school programs, again run by the government, to make sure they get the “skin on skin” and “social skills” that they would never get from the negligent (publicly educated) philistine parents at home. Worst one of all, you can’t know your kids are ‘trans’ or homosexual, and they must be sent to a secret government sex club, because you are more likely to beat them with jumper cables as backward bigoted hicks, than guide them as compassionate, caring, mature adult parents. Do you see just how low of an opinion of you they have? Equality of the ‘commoner’ is so deeply ingrained in their thinking, that they think of you as being on par with the extreme minority of parents who are abjectly abusive morons.
At this point you are questioning how this is going to tie into “Orate.” Well, here is the connection: How do they orate with you? How do they communicate their intentions, their policies. What words do they use? How do they use them? How have you understood them?
Deep down, subconsciously, they know the masses are not as stupid as they are made out to be. They know that their agendas and intent would never fly, if they communicated, or ‘orated’ them using plane language that everyone understood. They must twist and subvert, lie and deceive. They must propagandize. Did you know that the Nazis and the Soviets had official branches of government, wholly dedicated to this art of deception? North Korea has painted store fronts to deceive visitors into thinking that they have a thriving economy. Propaganda is never about what is best, it is about manipulation and power.
I’m reminded of a scene from an early episode of “The Simpsons,” where an alien monster has inhabited the body of Bill Clinton, in order to become President. During a debate ‘Kang’ says:
“My fellow Americans, as a young boy I to dreamed of being a baseball. But tonight I say, we must move forward, not backward. Upward, not forward, and always twirling, twirling, twirling towards freedom.”
Afterward the crowd showers him with adulation. Great for a chuckle, but the reality of the nonsense being spewed in politics and culture is not all that dissimilar, and to our utter shame, perfectly applicable to today. Today you can be a baseball, as long as you identify as such, and everyone must affirm it. We truly are twirling upward, not forward in our thinking, in a dizzying psychoses of freedom, defined through slavery. Which, by the way is how that episode ends. With the enslavement of humanity under the aliens.
This is what the “Orate” prong is all about, unpacking and revealing the deceptions replete in today’s politics and culture, that are being poured into education. The hope is to open a few eyes, draw awareness, and maybe even change a few minds, or understandings of what is actually going on. What is the actual end game.
Throughout my writings, musings, or rants, however you choose to perceive them, it has been my goal to give you objective truth. Aside from trying to ‘activate’ you, as they say, I have not been trying to manipulate you into thinking like me. Yes, I’ve said some startling things. Yes, I’ve been course, and yes, I’ve maybe not done it in the most affective way, or you have taken it in a way I did not intend, but it has always been with the hope of making education better for our children, protecting them from harm, and revealing the objective truth.
I will always welcome honest criticism and feedback on what I write, and as the primary voice for the Concerned Parents of SD76, I understand the gravity of the words I use on perceptions of the group as a whole, and so I welcome feedback, and corrections. One thing I will never change or apologize for though is the truth.
In conclusion, the “Orate” prong of the plan is to continue to write and share important info with you on this site. To set up public events in which specific topics can be unpacked and discussed. To educate the public on the rhetoric being used against them to both placate and agitate, and to indoctrinate. So please read up on what is available here, as well as, I highly recommend unsafeschools.ca. What is written there will educate you to some of the true motives and intentions of the actions taken by Alberta Education.
The second prong of the CPoSD76 C.P.O.S. plan that I will be going over in this post is the “Create” prong. It seems fitting to go over it the day before Board of SD76 has their Monthly board meeting. I get to give you a pre-Board meeting run down, but also show how this portion of the C.P.O.S plan fits in with policy development.
The purpose of the “Create” prong of the C.P.O.S. plan is to:
Develop and create policy for SD76, Alberta Education, and provincial government that we believe would satisfy the requirements of current legislation, that also addresses our concerns, and present it as an alternative.
The goal is not to rewrite every policy, but to provide the School Board with what we, the parents, would like to see implemented in the areas that they are concerned about. As we all saw with policy 621 & 622 the Board was unwilling to trust the public to select a committee to put together policy recommendations on their own. Instead, according to the Chairman of the Board, they chose to allegedly blow $25,000 to prevent parents from being heard. The Coordinating Committee knew best.
That is why the first action of the “Create” prong will be to develop the Safe & Caring policy that ‘could have been.’ (Minus the provisions of the illegal post 622, Bill-24.) The exact process of the creation of this policy recommendation will be posted on the “Create” page most likely early May. The process will suffice to say include an opportunity for general public input, and the selection of a committee to compile that input into a cohesive policy recommendation.
Other than the rejection of public input by the Board for 621 & 622, this prong of C.P.O.S. and the resulting policy recommendation is necessary because the current process in SD76 is flawed. It is an overly bureaucratic top down system, that limits dissension and independent thought. Select administration, who many in the process chain are beholden to, (who have already proven have no qualms with lording that threat of authority over them,) must play politic in order to keep their careers on track, and are not free to give honest policy recommendation based on their own personal conscience believes. This intimidation and suppression of freedom of conscience has infested the ATA, ASBA, and Alberta Education.
I could regale you with all the proof of the cracks in the system, and the lengths they are willing to go to suppress parental input, but I won’t. You can read through the history to find that. No, instead I’ll just leave this screen shot of an ATA official, on Friday the 20th, 2018, attempting to discredit the #SexEdSitOut. As well as a break down of this month’s Board Meeting agenda and how it’s format has changed over the last few months to limit your knowledge of what is going on in this district. If you are not interested in that, you can stop reading now. I will not be writing anything further on the C.P.O.S. plan in this post.
On the Agenda for April 2018’s public (remember that word, public,) Board meeting is some thank you correspondence, Roy Wilson National Winners for the “My Parks Pass” contest, another field trip application, Connaught School attendance boundaries, the final approval for a field trip to Florida, and the presentation of the minutes to the Coordinating Committee (CC), before moving to in-camera “Committee of the Whole.”
The CC minutes contain a brief list of all policies being reviewed, and any new, or amendment recommendations to the board. The CC meetings are not open to the public, and how a parent is supposed to get a change recommendation actually brought forward at one of these meetings is unknown even to most parent councils. (Your concern, or recommendation needs to be approved as ‘valid’ by your parent/school council, and then approved as ‘valid’ at the council of councils. Attendance at which is by invitation.)
Now after the minutes of the CC are seen by the Board, they are given draft proposals of the policy change. In the past, they could be viewed by the public, as attachments to the meeting’s documents. Curiously, I don’t see those this time. No mind, I’m sure they will be available at the May Board meeting, as the drafts have to be presented before they can be voted on. So if parents hope to know what may very well become policy, before it actually becomes policy, you best attend the May meeting.
But this process with the CC isn’t the only curious thing happening with the Board in the last 2 years. In 2016, some events that showed an embarrassing lack of knowledge of FOIP and what exactly ‘public’ meant at a meeting, had the board institute a no recording policy. The policy was instituted under the ridiculous pretense that they couldn’t “execute their duties,” unless those people recording were friendly and favorable to the board.
The no recording policy also lead to more ‘discussions’ going on during in-camera, “committee of the whole,” portions of the ‘public’ meetings. These discussions, though I’m not privy to them, seem to include a lot of talk that has not to do with the public meeting, or if it does, then the Board is violating the School Act. Well, either way, they are still violating a technical detail of the Act. Something, from the petition challenge, they supposedly care a great deal about not doing.
The Board, for as long as I’ve followed/attended the meetings, has been giving reports on how the Trustees have been involved in the activities of the districts. These reports have been on the minutes and the agendas of the meetings for the last couple of years. February 2018’s public meeting had it on the agenda. The minutes state that no reports were given. Curiously, the minutes don’t talk about a motion to discontinue this practice. March’s meeting did not have the reports on the agenda. So I am to assume that they stopped giving them. Now here is the funny thing, the Board can’t simply change it’s practice without discussing it, nor can they do so without informing the public. It’s written right in the School Act.
Now, that practice may have been only for a designated time frame, but that isn’t noted in the minutes. No discussion or decision about whether it should be continued or ceased is recorded. The reports were simply not given in February, and then no longer there in March. So what happened? I can surmise two possible explanations.
One, it was discussed, but it wasn’t recorded in the minutes. If so, that is a failing of the minutes taking. Since the board must vote on the adoption of the previous meeting’s minutes, that means they knew about the error, and chose to keep it out anyway. Thus showing the board willfully violated the School Act and intends to keep decisions on district governance and agenda secret from the public. What else are they not putting in the minutes?
Two, it was discussed in the in-camera session, after the specified period in the agenda, and a decision was made to stop giving the reports. Yet, they did not inform the public, or at least record that they informed the public. Thus violating the School Act once again, and willfully keeping pertinent information from the public.
You see, the School Act very carefully outlines what in-camera discussions are meant to be used for. The in-camera sessions, according to the School Act, which is the actual law, states that they are to be used to discuss confidential matter such as budget decisions, land use, discipline, and employment negotiations. They are given some latitude with respect to other ‘confidential’ matters. Given the track record on understanding FOIP, I’m not entirely confident they believe the word confidential means what we believe it means.
Regardless of how the Board defines confidential, the School Act further stipulates that ANY decision of the board, made in-camera, must be released to the public, and that at any public meeting that has gone in-camera must be reopened to the public, and the decision disseminated. Not a single meeting that I have gone to, has done this. Not one. Yes, they re-opened the meeting to the public, but they never told the public it was reconvened, nor what their decision was. You only ever had vague reference to it in the minutes. I waited for nearly an hour at more than one meeting to see if they would open it up to the public again. Never happened.
According to the March minutes, the public meeting was 25 minutes long before going in-camera, and then 93 minutes later it was allegedly opened up to the public and a decision of approval was made on “Property Matter #2018-04.” What Property Matter #2018-04 is, I have no idea, but no reasonable member of the public could be expected to wait outside the room for 93 minutes, hoping to be let back in to witness the conclusion, nor what an approval of the property matter even means for the district. Given the established pattern, of not letting the public know the meeting was re-opened, I’m doubtful they even attempted.
We are only 6 months into the new school board, and between the lack of recording, the limits on documents provided regarding the CC, the generic and incomplete minutes, the unreasonable wait times, and unreasonable expectations of confidentiality, I’m not hopeful that this board is going to be anymore accountable or transparent to the public than the last. I highly recommend people attend tomorrow’s April 24th Board Meeting. Something smells, and I intend on getting to the bottom of it.
In my last post, I stated that the CPoSD76 were working on a plan to help combat the clearly insidious intentions of Alberta Public Education to indoctrinate and sexualize our children with their twisted idea of ethics and sexuality.
The plan is being called CPOS. Create, protect, orate, and solidify. … Over the next Month, I will be making 4 separate posts about what exactly each prong of the ‘4orked’ plan is, and how the coalition hopes to implement it. For now though, there are two prongs you can get started on yourself.
This post is the first of 4 that go into detail of what the collaborative plan of the CPoSD76 is. As also mentioned earlier, this is a forked plan, with multiple facets happening simultaneously. Although the acronym, C.P.O.S., may be in a particular order, the execution of it may happen in a different order.
Today’s post is about the “Protect” portion:
As was noted in my comment in the last post, “Life Site” News published an article (Mat Walsh at The Daily Wire also published about it) about how parents are pulling their children out of school to protest the grotesque sexualization of children from k-12 in public education around the globe.
Protect: April 23rd, 2018 is international walk out day to protest the obscene, abusive, bigoted, and abhorrent sex education that is being forced in schools around the world. (Bill-24 provides no limits to the material that your child can be exposed to at school.) I encourage every parent, who’s children are not home schooled, to pull their child out of school on April 23rd. Explain that you do not support the sexualization of our children for the satisfaction of adults with unhealthy obsessions over the sexual development of other people’s pre-pubescent children, that Bill-24 is an unconstitutional violation of human rights, and that parents have first discretion and authority over their children and their education, not the government. Do this whether your school has supported the family or not, as a show of solidarity to those who have not had the ability or choice to send their children to a school that supports their rights.
For the U.S., it is “Comprehensive Sex Education,” for Australia it is “Safe Schools,” for British Columbia it is “SOGI 123“, and of course for Alberta it is the Sex Clubs with ultimate power, the GSAs. The details of the #SexEdSitOut are available here, and you can add your city, and sign a petition etc. I fully endorse this sit out, and the goals are in line with the essential intent of the “Protect” phase of the C.P.O.S. plan. I intend on keeping my kids home on the 23rd, and a generic outline for an e-mail you can send to your child’s principal is available here. (Be sure to CC any other administrative officiall that would need to know of your child(ren)s absence.)
Although my child’s school is not currently supporting the sexualization of minors, they are under the thumb of SD76’s jurisdiction, and that can be forced to change at any moment. I am however pulling my child out in an act of solidarity for those who’s children are being exposed to this obscene material and teaching, and as an act to draw awareness to the actions and intent of Alberta Education. I encourage you to do so as well.
Another action you can take to “Protect” your children from the errant direction of Alberta’s public education, that is also inline with the principle of CPoSD76 C.P.O.S. plan, is to support the challenge of Bill 24. On April 5th, the Justice Centre for Constitutional Freedoms filed a court application challenging Bill-24. Bill-24 gives GSAs the power to form and operate without any oversight, and with the power to teach literally anything. Not only without your consent as a parent, but without even your knowledge of it. You can protect your children from this malicious law by spreading word of it and it’s challenge in court.
I heard directly from John Carpay, that media is minimizing coverage of this in an attempt to keep the public ignorant of the facts, and the challenge. You can counter this be sharing the links provided in the Parent Watch Forum, and by telling as many people as possible about what is going on. One of the groups on the court challenge is Parents for Choice in Education, and you can find out more and support their efforts here. The CPoSD76 are also working with the JCCF to support in any way they can, and may be playing a more active and intentional part in the challenge going forward. One final action you can take is to make a donation to the JCCF to aid in the financial burden of challenging the law in court.
The stated goal of the “Protect” prong is to:
Protect our children from current curriculum, policy, and legislation that undermines the family, and the security or safety of our children through; legal and peaceful protest and/or walkouts, whistle blower or accountability procedures, and assistance for parents and students to navigate the bureaucratic educational system.
The “Protect” page will have a list of current protective actions that the CPoSD76 are undertaking. (Including the two listed above.) The details of how you can participate in those actions will vary depending on action being undertaken.
Some things that are in the works, besides the two mentioned above are:
This list is not exhaustive, and is subject to fluctuations. The CPoSD76 is of course open to feed back and improvement, and if you wish to help or participate in any way, please feel free to contact us for more information.