Has it started already?

Perry has now spent 94 days in jail – for stepping up to the plate to protect children, and then daring to say he has lost faith in the justice system. This is the institutional response to allegations of childhood sexual abuse.

****

Hearings resume a 0930 hours (9:30 am) this morning, Friday, 23 May 2008.  Det. Sgt. Jeff Carroll will resume his testimony.  Today being a Friday hearings will run through lunch time and recess in the early afternoon.

****

Funeral arrangements for Merle Anderson (Perry Dunlop’s grandmother)

Visitation:

(1) 7 to 9 pm Friday 23 May 2008 (Brownlee Funeral Home, Maple St., Ingleside, Ontario)

(2) 1 to 2 pm Saturday 24 May 2008 (St. John’s Presbyterian Church, 28 Second Street East, Cornwall)

Funeral Service

Time: 2 pm Saturday 24 May 2008:

Place: St. John’s Presbyterian Church

Address: 28 Second Street East, Cornwall

At the request of the family expressions of sympathy to the Perry Dunlop Fund or the Cancer Society

****

Perry sounded good today. He really did. He had yard time and, while out discovered that the birds which of late had been nowhere to be see were obviously nesting! Apparently the little ones were chirping up a storm. The nest is built high up under the galvanized roof of the overhang. Perry couldn’t see it but could more or less sort out where it is.

Seems the birds found a tiny little spot in the mesh in mesh overlay through which they gain entry and exit. And there they are. In the backyard of Ottawa Carleton Detention Centre – momma and her babies, and the wee ones chirping like mad. For Perry it was a reminder that life goes on.

I have no idea yet if Perry can attend the funeral. But, he sounded good. And he sure did enjoy hearing those little birds :). I find Perry has become a good reminder for me of the small things in life which we overlook or so easily and often take for granted

****

I posted the other piece of info I referenced re Richard Hickerson. Did Leo Courville and Hickerson know each other? A big question now for me.

****

The following was emailed to me. I will pass it on:

Andrea Horwath is going to introduce Bill #88 again to Queens Park. It will be given a new bill #. We are currently gathering signatures to support this bill and the oversight of the Children’s Aid Societies by the Ontario Ombudsman. Please support us by signing our petition at the following link, or print out the petition and gather signatures.

www.ipetitions.com/petition/childrensaidoversight/index.html

To the Legislative Assembly of Ontario:

We, the undersigned, petition the Legislative Assembly of Ontario as follows,

Whereas, Ontario is one of the few provinces that does not have independent oversight of child welfare administration, and

Whereas, eight provinces now have independent oversight of child welfare issues, including child protection; and

Whereas, all provincial Ombudsmen first identified child protection as a priority issue in 1986 and still Ontario does not allow the Ombudsman to investigate peoples complaints about Children’s Aid Societies (CAS) decisions; and

Whereas, people wronged by CAS decisions concerning placement, access, custody or care are not allowed to appeal those decisions to the Ontario Ombudsman’s office.

Therefore, be it resolved that we support the Ombudsman having the power to probe decisions and investigate complaints concerning the provinces Children’s Aid Societies (CAS).

Return to MPP Andrea Horwath, Room 112, Main Legislative Building, Queens Park , Toronto, ON M7A 1A5 (416) 325-2777

Sheila White
Executive Assistant to
Hamilton Centre M.P.P. Andrea Horwath
Room 112, Main Legislative Building
Queen’s Park, Toronto ON M7A 1A5

Tel: (416) 325-2777
Fax: (416) 325-2770

www.andreahorwath.ca <http://www.andreahorwath.ca>

****

When I first launched theinquiry.ca I posted “About this Site” – there I made reference to my belief that most of the sexual predators involved in the Cornwall sex abuse scandal are homosexual paedophiles or pederasts. Nearly two years ago I blogged “Pederasts are tuned in to Cornwall.” Months before I blogged “Paedophilia is a sexual orientation?”

And here we go again…

First, the definition of pederast. The following from the Free Dictionary online

(1) pederast or paederast
Noun
a man who has homosexual relations with boys [Greek pais boy + erastēs lover]

(2) ped•er•ast (p d -r st )
n.
A man who has sexual relations, especially anal intercourse, with a boy.

(3) Thesaurus
Noun1.pederast – a man who has sex (usually sodomy) with a boy as the passive partner

child molester, paederast
degenerate, deviant, deviate, pervert – a person whose behavior deviates from what is acceptable especially in sexual behaviour

Now on….

Under cross examination today by Dallas Lee Det. Sgt. Jeff Carroll became quite passionate when asked if he believed Hickerson was a paedophile. Carroll said Hickerson was not a paedophile, he was a pederast. Asked if he considered Hickerson to be a sex offender Carroll responded that he considered Hickerson had a “particular sexual preference” and “sexual orientation”!!!

I will agree totally that Hickerson was a pederast. I believe in fact that most of the sexual predators at the core of the Cornwall sex abuse scandal are real or “alleged” pederasts. Indeed I made a comment in that vein when I first launched the website, explaining that I would use the word paedophile because that’s the word traditionally used and understood by the masses.

However, I am appalled to hear Carroll go a step well beyond and describe pederasty as a sexual orientation.

A sexual orientation?

Really?

Sexually molesting young lads is simply a sexual orientation? Like homosexuality, bisexuality and heterosexuality and transgendered and transsexuality?!!!!

Do people understand what this means? In Canada people receiving special protections and privileges based on their “sexual orientation.” People can not be discriminated against based on their “sexual orientation.” People can be charged for inciting hatred against anyone based on their “sexual orientation.”

What it means is that men who molest young boys presumably have a sexual orientation to molest. That means have no control over it. Can’t do anything about it. Perhaps they were even born that way. They have no choice but to molest

What it means is we should be saying ‘those poor misunderstood maligned pederasts. We should give them a break.’ And we should give them our children.

This is serious stuff. Scary stuff.

Dr. Wolfe, an “expert”witness who helped Justice Glaude “frame” his inquiry, described paedophilia as a “sexual orientation.”

Det. Sgt. Carroll describes pederasty as a “sexual orientation.”

Where does that leave the children of the nation? Prey?

Pederasts, paedophiles – makes no difference does it? Not to the child. Children are being sexually molested. That’s wrong. It’s wrong morally. It’s wrong legally. It’s sinful. It’s criminal. It’s wicked. It’s just plain evil.

Why the quibbling. Why the wordsmithing? Why introduce this novel notion that it’s a sexual orientation?

And why jump up and down and scream and shout if the word paedophile is used to describe a man who may be a pederast? Perhaps the paedophile is a pederast? Perhaps the pederast is a paedophile? It all comes down to definitions, and whose definitions we pick. There are countless. The only thing assured by the title pederast is that a pederast is a man who homosexually abuses a boy. Advocates of man-boy sex call it “love.”

That’s now a “sexual orientation”? A member of the Cornwall Police Service says that’s a sexual orientation?!

Do we say a serial murderer has an orientation to murder? Or a thief has an orientation to steal?

No. We don’t. But look what’s happening when it comes to men who sexually abuse children. It’s a sexual orientation. And if the abuse happened a few months ago it’s somehow downgraded to “historic” abuse and the predator is somehow no longer a risk to children.

A “sexual orientation”!

I remind people once again that this is how the gay rights lobby advanced it’s agenda. “Sexual orientation.” Those who fought that legislation begged to have the words “sexual orientation” replaced by “homosexuality.” Their argument was that if the intent was solely to give special protection and rights to homosexuals then at least let that be reflected in the choice of words – there were deep fears that with the use of the words “sexual orientation” the legislation as it stands will provide special rights, protections and privileges for those who molest children.

The concerns fell on deaf ears. There were assurances that the sole intent was to provide protection for homosexuals, and more assurances that the sexual abuse of children would never be referred to as a “sexual orientation.”

Here we are.

It’s happening.

Wake up people!

Look what’s happened to the laws of our land. See where we’re going:

In 1995 the Supreme Court of Canada ruled in Egan v. Canada that the term “sexual orientation” was to be “read in” to Section 15 of the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. This is the section that deals with equality rights.

Section 15 reads as follows. (Add the words “sexual orientation” to the list. They have been “read in.” )

15. (1) Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

(2) Subsection (1) does not preclude any law, program or activity that has as its object the amelioration of conditions of disadvantaged individuals or groups including those that are disadvantaged because of race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability.

In 1996 Bill C-33 passed Parliament. The term “sexual orientation” was added to the Federal Human Rights Act. The act now reads:

2. The purpose of this Act is to extend the laws in Canada to give effect, within the purview of matters coming within the legislative authority of Parliament, to the principle that all individuals should have an opportunity equal with other individuals to make for themselves the lives that they are able and wish to have and to have their needs accommodated, consistent with their duties and obligations as members of society, without being hindered in or prevented from doing so by discriminatory practices based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, disability or conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted.
R.S., 1985, c. H-6, s. 2; 1996, c. 14, s. 1; 1998, c. 9, s. 9.

In 2004 sexual orientation was added to the hate crimes list, making it a hate crime to do or say anything which would be construed as inciting hatred against anyone based on their their sexual orientation. Section 319 of the Criminal Code of Canada now reads:

Section 319

Advocating genocide

318. (1) Every one who advocates or promotes genocide is guilty of an indictable offence and liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding five years.

Definition of “genocide”

(2) In this section, “genocide” means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy in whole or in part any identifiable group, namely,

(a) killing members of the group; or

(b) deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction.

Consent

(3) No proceeding for an offence under this section shall be instituted without the consent of the Attorney General.

Definition of “identifiable group”

(4) In this section, “identifiable group” means any section of the public distinguished by colour, race, religion, ethnic origin or sexual orientation.

R.S., 1985, c. C-46, s. 318; 2004, c. 14, s. 1.

Public incitement of hatred
319. (1) Every one who, by communicating statements in any public place, incites hatred against any identifiable group where such incitement is likely to lead to a breach of the peace is guilty of

a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

Wilful promotion of hatred

(2) Every one who, by communicating statements, other than in private conversation, wilfully promotes hatred against any identifiable group is guilty of

a) an indictable offence and is liable to imprisonment for a term not exceeding two years; or

b) an offence punishable on summary conviction.

All I can say is if paedophilia and pederasty is, as Carroll and Wolfe and countless others say, how long before someone is in jail for presumably inciting hatred against paedophiles or pederasts?

And then, of course, there’s Perry. Perhaps …..?

Dear Lord above help us, has it started already?

Enough for now,

Sylvia

(cornwall@theinquiry.ca)