En Garde, or, This Is Our Chance to Bury Anti-Choice

NOTE: Sorry, but Blogger is screwing up. None of the links in this seems to be working. I'll try to fix it again later.

UPDATE: And now the links are working. I didn't do anything. Go figger.


Andrew Scheer, former and worst-ever Speaker of the House, has won the Conservative Party leadership. But as several people have pointed out, Michael Harris among them, Scheer has a BIG debt to pay. To social conservatives, aka, anti-choice, anti-gay, anti-trans, anti-assisted dying, anti-comprehensive sex-ed dinosaurs.

These social conservatives worked their hearts out for Stephen Harper for ten years. In return, they got nothing but strategic tokenism. The passion they invest in their cause never gave Harper so much as a palpitation — but it did lead him to calculate that he could bamboozle them ’til the cows came home and cash in on their political usefulness.

This time, the so-cons were wised up. They sold thousands of memberships on behalf of Trost and Lemieux. That support ultimately went Scheer’s way. Now they will expect him to deliver.

Brent Rathgeber makes a similar point.

And the Straight cites the fetus freak group fronted by Alyssa Golob as taking credit.

While Scheer has taken a page out of Stephen Harper’s book (“We will not reopen the abortion debate”), that’s going to be tough, given how many zygote zealots feel they are OWED.

But in order for him to pay his debts, he’ll have to get into power and I don’t see that happening anytime soon.

Until he gets his kick at the can, I have some suggestions for what pro-choice, pro-civil rights, pro-modern times people should do.

As I said back when the Liberals (*ptui*) got their majority, we have a historic chance in Canada to get this abortion dealie dealt with once and for all.

Canada is staunchly pro-choice (latest Ipsos poll shows 77% support) and there have been some encouraging developments over the last while.

In December, the city of Grande Prairie successfully fought off hateful bus ads with a judge’s decision that came very close to calling the ads “hate speech.” (As they are.)

In April, research done by Abortion Rights Coalition of Canada (ARCC) paid off big time when it was revealed that anti-choice gangs were getting federal Canada Summer Jobs grants. The feds promised that would end.

Continuing that work, ARCC is running a “Letter of the Week” campaign aimed at disclosing provincial grants given to rights-denying organizations like fake clinics.

Earlier this month, we learned that Health Canada has eased some of its idiotic restrictions on the abortion pill.

This year’s March for Lies in Ottawa was the smallest in memory. (RCMP pegged the number at 4,000.) It was so small that fetus freaks didn’t even *try* to claim that it was bigger and better than last year.

One of the side-stories to the March for Lies was the raising of an anti-choice flag at Ottawa City Hall. It was hastily taken down, but there was fall-out from it.

Notably, increased attention to the clinic harassers at the Morgentaler Clinic in downtown Ottawa. A result of that is today’s announcement that Ontario’s Attorney General, Yasir Naqvi, intends to craft a “bubble zone” law to protect clinics.

Also today we learned that a judge in New Brunswick has granted another injunction against clinic harassers.

These are all hopeful developments. Our job over the next couple of years is to continue and expand these efforts.

• Keep an eye on the federal government to make sure no more public money goes to anti-choice groups.

• Pressure provincial governments to spend money on women and children more wisely than on fake clinics.

• Support cities and towns targetted for hate-speech ads.

• Encourage healthcare providers to continue to press for more reasonable regulations on the abortion pill.

• Support bubble zones in Ontario and other provinces that do not have such protection.

I believe that anti-choice is dying in Canada — I mean, just 4,000 people arsed themselves to come out for March for Lies??!!? — and the election of Andrew Scheer is its last gasp.

We have the opportunity to move our laws, institutions, and media to the point where if and when Scheer’s owners try any funny stuff around abortion, Canadians will just point and laugh.

Because we are sooo beyond that here in modern, pro-choice Canada.

March for Lies 2016, Part 2: UMPTY-GAZILLION ATTENDEES!

There were great expectations for this year's March for Lies. First, its traditional organizer, Catholic Campaign Life, graciously invited all anti-choice groups to participate.

And second, Parliament is debating and will pass the tragically flawed medical assistance in dying act, which one would have thought would rev up the "womb to tomb" gang.

So the turn-out was going to be MASSIVE, yes?

In Part 1 of our annual Delusion Watch, we compared the size of yesterday's rally to April's 4/20 marijuana rally.

Doing this again. Compare rallies. 4/20 on left #MarchforLife #m4l on right. pic.twitter.com/7EXzGCzDhq

— Fern Hill (@fernhilldammit) May 12, 2016

So how many people were there?

The Ottawa Citizen had veteran fetus freak watchers, Kady O'Malley and David Akin, live blogging/tweeting the event.

This really doesn't look quite as big as last year. #m4" pic.twitter.com/qmQmBk4rRM

— kady o'malley (@kady) May 12, 2016

Kady reported that an on-stage speaker claimed 20K in attendance and added "I'd put it closer to 6K, but we'll see what the RCMP says."

What did the RCMP say? CFRA Radio:

Rough RCMP estimates indicate more than 10,000 people participated in the march.

But that's not what David Akin reported.

Also: my count of crowd - and I walk through crowd actually counting — is 4,500. Smallest #M4L I can recall pic.twitter.com/tiqZf9EjnE

— David Akin (@davidakin) May 12, 2016

He added in another tweet that "police" said 3,000.

We were still breathlessly awaiting LieShite's outrageous inflation estimate and today we found out.

22,000!!!

So, there you have it. Somewhere around 3,000 (RCMP officer to Akin), 4,500 (Akin), 6,000 (O'Malley), 10,000 (RCMP), 20,000 (from the stage), or 22,000 (LieShite) people attended this year's Futility Bunfest.

Akin made a 40-second Facebook video with this introduction:

Here's my March For Life crowd in 40 seconds. Smallest turnout I've seen at this event. I actually count myself - takes about 20 minutes -- and I got 4,500 at 1230 ET (and I might be a little generous) RCMP officer told me: 3,000. Organizers from the stage said there were 20,000.

We called it in April. The anti-choice movement in Canada is *snerk* dying.

Even with the widening of the tent and the extra impetus of imminent government action on assisted dying, the ranks of forced birthers are thinning remarkably.

But the bald-faced lying is as strong as ever.


ADDED: David Akin's report. He picked up on the comparison to 4/20. :-)



Last year's report.

Heal the RCMP or replace it.

Necrotic festering is bubbling up within the RCMP.  Its foul stench wafts from every part of the force. The infection is spreading: surgery and excision will be required.

The affliction known as flesh-eating disease "..is a misnomer, as in truth, the bacteria do not 'eat' the tissue. They destroy the tissue that makes up the skin and muscle by releasing toxins.."

RCMP Commissioner Paulson has to be removed, as soon as possible. The man is worse than gangrene; he spouts insincere platitudes and clichés in lieu of genuine commitment to change the toxic culture and behaviours that contaminate every aspect of the organization.

Recently Paulson attended an event where he was invited 

"to discuss national security in the wake of the Brussels bombing, and also what progress he was making on curtailing harassment and weeding out members who have sullied the force's reputation. [..] he was asked by a member of the audience, when was the last time he had written a traffic ticket to anyone. Instead of answering the question, the commissioner went on a "bon mot" diversion. He talked about speeding down B.C.'s Coquihalla Highway with some family members last year and being pulled over by an RCMP officer. Paulson got some laughs when he mimicked the horrified reaction of the member who suddenly realized he had just pulled over the big boss; an officer who faced the unenviable decision of whether or not to lay a fine on him. The tell though, came when the moderator said he wouldn't ask about the dollar value of the ticket. Paulson's expression went from a broad grin to 'oh-oh' in a flash as he seemed to realize he had stepped in it. [..] Later, talking to reporters, he was clearly not pleased when the speeding incident came up. At first, he said, "Aw, it was just a story I made up." Pressed further he changed course, saying, "No, I don't want to talk about that. I do not want to talk about that."

Paulson's casual Catskills routine is offensive, in light of the most recent developments and disclosures in the matter of interminable sexual harassment within RCMP ranks.

The harassment, [Linda Davidson] alleges in court papers, took many forms: unwanted grabbing and kissing; crude jokes, including the placement of ketchup-stained tampons in her locker; and constant questioning about her sexual orientation and abilities. “I experienced this treatment irrespective of my detachment, posting, rank or seniority,” she wrote in an affidavit. “I never felt that I could rely on senior officers to protect me.“ The Bracebridge, Ont., mother, who now runs a security firm, is the lead plaintiff in a proposed class-action lawsuit alleging systemic gender-based harassment and discrimination in the RCMP — the second such lawsuit to hit the force in recent years.

Last, but not least, is the ongoing RCMP mindset of collusion with rape culture and racism, which enables abusive practices such as this one.

Last month, Cody Durocher was convicted of sexually assaulting a 13-year-old girl in Hay River, N.W.T. It was his third sexual assault conviction. RELATED | RCMP botched N.W.T. sex assault investigation, documents say At that trial N.W.T. Supreme Court Justice Louise Charbonneau had some harsh words for the way that girl was treated after disclosing the incident to police, noting that instead of being taken to hospital, she was put in a jail cell for violating her probation, where she remained until the following evening. Durocher, 31, was convicted of raping two women in different towns in northern Alberta in 2010. He pleaded guilty to the first after DNA evidence linked him to the attack. He was sentenced to two and a half years in prison. Durocher was sentenced to three years for the second attack. In court, the 13-year-old Hay River victim said Durocher sexually assaulted her on January 11, 2014.

Here's an idea: appoint a royal commission to investigate the institutional roots of whatever pathology it is that maintains a "..nature of policing makes it ripe for behaviour that is _less than professional_" 

Name Marie Henein to chair that commission. She doesn't suffer fools gladly. Here's how she handled Peter Mansbridge's ham-handed attempt at interviewing her.

Buy popcorn.  Lots and lots of popcorn.

Not all harassment victims are viewed or treated as equal.

The journalist Ashley Csanady currently has a PostMedia piece that addresses Twitter harassment in general and in particular what happened when Michelle Rempel filed a complaint with the police.

Her excellent article provides a short account of the Rempel case as well as an overview of recent events, viz. the GAE trial.

It is factual and clear.

It doesn't editorialize or misrepresent as Blatchford is wont to do, when the demands of click-bait reporting or sob-sister sensationalizing gives her the cover she needs to champion the MRA cause.

Further to what Csanady wrote, there are points that bloggers and op-eds can raise.  This is where DJ! weighs in.

Last week I posted this about the sleazy grease of GAE's triumphant sneer.

The main difference between GAE and Damany Skeene is that the former oozes the slimy CONjob smarm that allow him and Ezra Levant to enjoy notoriety.  Their venal vituperation is widely disseminated and cheered by right wingers, racists, homophobe and misogynists.  In addition, GAE walks and talks the MRA/PUA philosophy. His entourage enables his narcissism and promotes him within the audiences of gynophobic orcs that slither at the edge of the world wide web.  He scored a point for Rape Culture!  His victims were not really victims because they had the NERVE to fight back against his vile invective!

Skeene, it would appear, is not supported or validated by any group.  In fact most people recoil from him.  One assumes the only compassionate attention he's likely to receive is administered by healthcare professionals.  He had used Twitter promiscuously to vent fury and hatred against a variety of targets.

The difference between Rempel and the women that GAE harassed, threatened, stalked and abused — online and "in real life" — is obvious. She was a Minister in the Con government when Skeene directed vile threats and verbal sexual abuse at her Twitter account.  Her complaint was legitimate and important because she was an elected official.  Police allocated the required resources to investigate, document, and prepare a case for the Crown to prosecute.  Her squadron of RCMP body guards was likely doubled.

But as Csanady points out, the trial unfolded under the media radar.

This gave me pause. Why did the PMO not seize this opportunity to demonstrate how their government was *tough on crime* and violence against women?

I suspect that if Skeene had been an individual who clearly associated with any left wing or progressive group such as anti-pipeline activism, or had expressed agreement with LPC or NDP policies, the PMO would have gleefully exploited the opportunity to smear the Harper regime's opponents.

But the truth is: deep down, Harper Reformist Cons never really gave a damn about Canadian women or even those prominent in their party. PMSHithead was a spiteful opportunist who attacked women who challenged him, and ditched or undermined those who became politically inconvenient: Deborah Gray, Belinda Stronach, Bev Oda, Helena Guergis, Beverley McLachlin, Cindy Blackstock ... a never-ending list, really.

Which is why Rempel was circumspect, and kept a low profile. There was no advantage then in using the criminal harassment trial to score political points for herself.  The PMO, or CPC HQ would have ground her into the dust.  She noted how the party destroyed Eve Adams because she wouldn't stick to the PMO script.

Nothing about Rempel's circumstances could be framed as a narrative that might enhance public sympathy in Harper's favour.  In fact, it was probably flagged as a potential nuisance and diversion from the grand election campaign plan.

But now.. Rempel is jockeying to gain an advance on other putative candidates for the CPC leadership.  I predict she will judiciously exploit the Twitter harassment trial, to establish credibility and to leverage whatever is beneficial to the image she is carefully crafting.

Update: As the tweet below points out, online campaigns that embolden threats of physical violence against Premier Rachel Notley in Albert keep escalating. The Wildrose Party leader has mildly spoken out against his supporters using these tactics that replicate the worst of US right-wing political dumpster fire rhetoric.

Alheli Picazo rigorously screen caps and archives evidence of online political incivility of all stripe. She documents what she has observed and caught before the thuggish authors delete them.  She regularly posts them in her Twitter line to remind partisans of that "people in glass houses.." thing.

Kathleen Smith has also noted and confronted those who instigate explosions of aggressive attacks against Alberta political figures.

Some journalists have reported on the scurrilous and terrifying threats expressed on Facebook, Twitter and in the comment threads at Levant's monetizing project, Rebel TV.  It is claimed the RCMP is investigating.

Yet NO charges of criminal harassment against the alleged RWNJ *rebels* have been filed yet, even though campaigns of online hatred against Notley have been encouraged and fed by Levant and his goons for over a year, now.

Anti-Choice Inflation 2015

Today was the annual March of the Feti, March for Lies, Anti-Choice Bunfest, Futility on the Hill. Whatever.

As regular readers know, we're obsessed fascinated by what we call anti-choice inflation. Every year, march organizers claim that this year is much MASSIVER than last year.

Recap of last five years:
2011: 15K
2012: 19.5K
2013: "up to 25K"
2014: 23K
2015: "nearly 25K"

Notice anything? Yep. Inflation seems to have stalled the last couple of years.

Here's LifeShite itself: "nearly 25,000 people marched on Parliament Hill."

Here's the Ottawa Citizen which first reported "some 10,000 pro-life supporters" then a couple of hours later updated to "an estimated 8,000."

CFRA Radio reported:

About 8,000 anti-abortion activists brought traffic to a standstill in the downtown core on Thursday afternoon, as part of the annual March for Life.

The event hosted by Campaign Life Coalition saw a large number of Catholic school students from the Toronto area, brought to the capital on buses.

(And we hope, as last year, some media outlet gets on the story of who paid for the bussing of Catholic kids.)

Kady O'Malley reported the RCMP estimated the crowd at between 8,000 and 9,000. Other seasoned eye-ballers agreed: around 8,000 or just about as usual.

But the lies never stop with these people.

"So, there are more than 25,000 of you!" the speaker tells the crowd. (No, there really aren't.) #m14

— kady o'malley (@kady) May 14, 2015

One can only conclude they bloody well know their numbers are stagnant if not shrinking. March for Life is dying.


BONUS: A topless protester stormed the stage again this year, along with what was described as someone dressed as a fetus. I hadda go looking for that.

Voilà.

ADDED May 18/15: Of course! Amateur statistician develops new delusion: she can estimate crowds better than seasoned viewers and RCMP. And note I have my own tag at her place, Fake Person. Dearie, I am pseudonymous, NOT anonymous.

Fascist C-51: Feet on the Street Time

I started collecting links on C51, aka the Jihadi Terrorists Under Every Bed Bill, a while back, but I was too appalled/depressed to blog about it.

The terrifying Angus Reid poll showing 80% approval of it.

There’s rarely been a bill before Parliament that was more popular. The public Conservatives’ new anti-terror legislation is filling a public demand for tough new measures aimed at a terrorism threat that Canadians believe is serious, and close to home, according to a new poll.

More than four in five Canadians – 82 per cent – back the new legislation to expand the powers of intelligence agencies and police, according to the survey of 1,509 Canadians conducted by the Angus Reid Institute. Far from seeing it as too sweeping, they tend to want more: 36 per cent say it does not go far enough.

And somewhat reassuringly, Press Progress's critique of the poll.

Now, a few of the myriad dissections of the bill and why it is VERY VERY BAD.

First, Legal scholars Forcese and Roach.

Three lengthy background papers by Forcese and Roach: one, two, and three.

Here is their essential website dedicated to the proposed act, where you'll find tons of useful information including an explainer video.

Unsigned Globe and Mail editorial.

Intimidation is the modus operandi. Well-documented are the smear campaigns and the undercover operations against opponents run out of the highest political office in the land.

If you think it’s bad now, be prepared for worse, as with the anti-terror legislation. The danger with ideological leaders of any stripe is that in the name of security, they can ramp up state authority without the usual degree of public challenge. It’s why we see Mr. Harper hyping the terror threats Canada faces, as opposed to allaying the public’s fears.

More fear means more power. He knows it well, and so should the opposition leaders. If they can’t build a strong case against this new kind of Canada, they should find another line of work.

The Star.

Read this by former CSIS officer Francois Lavigne and tremble (note bold).

Former CSIS officer Francois Lavigne is alarmed by the Conservative government’s new anti-terror bill.

He believes the measures proposed in C-51 are unnecessary, a threat to the rights of Canadians and that the prime minister is using fascist techniques to push the bill.

Mr. Lavigne started his career with the RCMP security service in 1983, before the CSIS was established.

“I was hired by the barn burners,” he said in an interview last week. “I went to work for the FIU unit, the foreign interference unit. And that was where the barn burners came from.”

The barn burners were the off-the-leash Mounties whose law-breaking ways led to the McDonald Commission, which led to the establishment of Canadian Security Intelligence Service in 1984.

Press Progress again on how the RCMP identify terrorist targets. (Spoiler: SUN columnists are key.)

Various luminaries of the Canadian political scene, including four former PMs, calling for greater oversight. (Yeah, right.)

Michael Geist.

And from today, Alison with lots more excellent links.

I'm not even getting into the Liberals' absolutely despicable position on it.

Because here's the point: We ordinary Canadians must get our butts out in frigid fucking February (or March) to declare THIS SHALL NOT PASS.

Who's gonna organize it?

Lead Now?

The NDP?

The Communist Party?

I don't care.

Organize it and I'll come out. And I'll bring every person I know with me.

Will you?


Image source: The anti-prorogue protest in Victoria.


ADDED: Reddit users and Anonymous and I are like this.

Did Crossroads Clinic Cross Its Fingers?

I'm confused. Is Crossroads Clinic pro-choice or anti-choice?

Or maybe, just, um, flexible.


Here they are trumpeting their involvement in The Sexual Assault Response Network.

The Sexual Assault Response Network (SARN) is a collaboration of seven partners including the Sexual Assault Response Committee (SARC), Crossroads Clinic, Cantara Safe House, RCMP, Southern Alberta Child & Family Services (Brooks Office), Victim Service Unit, and Alberta Health Services (AHS) Emergency, Sexual Health Unit, and Social Worker Unit. These agencies have banded together to address an overwhelming need of support for an estimated 3,400 victims of sexual assault in the City of Brooks alone.

Crossroads Clinic, the lead partner, was awarded a grant by the Community Foundation of Southeastern Alberta. This grant allows them to provide training for those working with the program from the various agencies, as well as purchasing a phone and phone plan for the Support Line. Crossroads Clinic staff mans the support line during the day and Cantara Safe House operates the phone during non-business hours.

I checked at the Community Foundation of Southeastern Alberta and found that yes, indeed, Crossroads Clinic Association (Brooks Pregnancy Care Centre) got a grant in Fall 2013 of $6,048 ($1,639 for Crisis Line Phone and $4,409 for Training for Crisis Line).

Since it is the standard of care to provide emergency contraception (EC, or Plan B) after rape/sexual assault, it seemed that this disclaimer sorted rather badly with Crossroads' new role as sexual abuse counsellor.

Note: Crossroads Clinic provides limited medical services. We provide free medical confirmation of pregnancy and Sexual Transmitted Infections screening and limited treatment for women. We do not provide ongoing prenatal care, abortions, birth control or contraceptives.

Kathy Dawson asked the Association of Alberta Sexual Assault Services on Twitter if Crossroads were a member. Nope.

@fernhilldammit @blueskies366 TY for the tweets. #CrossroadsClinic not an @aasasmembership service under our umbrella http://t.co/bQACkwa5SC

— AASAS (@aasasmembership) February 23, 2015

I emailed two of the legit-looking organizations in the "network," Cantara Safe House and the Sexual Assault Response Committee (SARC) of Medicine Hat, to ask a) is it true that Crossroads is a partner and b) WTF -- do they know that Crossroads is an anti-choice crisis pregnancy centre?

Then I found that SARC has a twitter account. So I asked.

@fernhilldammit SARC is prochoice all of our partners have agreed to refer to AHS Sexual Health for

— Sarcmedicinehat (@SARCmedicinehat) February 23, 2015

@fernhilldammit for options counselling, plan B and medical care

— Sarcmedicinehat (@SARCmedicinehat) February 23, 2015

They call it "options counselling," do they? And EC/Plan B too?

But but but, Plan B is an ABORTIFACIENT!!!!!! Well, according to fetus freaks it is. (Sane people understand how EC actually works.)

So, now we're wondering. If, for the purposes of reaching out to a new group of potential "patients" and/or the six thousand bucks, Crossroads has agreed to act as if it's prochoice, do its fetus-freak donors know? More importantly, does the Canadian (formerly Christian) Association of Pregnancy Support Services know?

If they crossed their fingers behind their backs when agreeing to the prochoice protocols, do the other organizations in the network know and how are they keeping tabs on them?

Crossroads, crossed fingers. . . what's the diff?

Christian Sexual Abuse Counselling from a Fake Clinic

Hoo boy, do I ever have a lot more to say about Crossroads Clinic, a fake clinic/crisis pregnancy centre in Brooks, Alberta.

From its Services page:

Sexual Abuse Support
Is sexual trauma part of your past? 1 in 3 women have experience sexual abuse. You are not alone.

Crossroads Clinic offers a 10 week DVD series that deals with sexual trauma and sexual abuse in a safe confidential setting - Steps to Sexual Health (see below).

…
Steps to Sexual Health
Have you dealt with sexual trauma, abuse, or misuse? Steps to Sexual Health is a 10-part DVD series by Doctor Doug Weiss, Ph.D. that encourages sexual healing and healthy attitudes toward sexuality. Available in safe, confidential sessions for groups or individuals. Call or email Crossroads Clinic to book your session.

So, their sexual abuse support/counselling consists of plugging in some DVDs and leaving clients to watch them confidentially?

Let's find out more about this DVD series, Steps to Sexual Health (bold mine).

These 10 sessions of sexual education with Dr. Douglas Weiss includes: 1. Going for Gold Sex 2. Sexual Expression 3. Roadblocks to Sexual Success (Part 1) 4. Roadblocks to Sexual Success (Part 2) 5. How I Coped 6. Perpetrators 7. Sexual Histories 8. Healing our Histories 9. Your Sexual Guard 10. Sexual Agreement These sessions were taped in front of a live audience. This is perfect for public or private schools, churches or pregnancy centers or to train your own children. This is a professionally presented program for youth to be more prepared for life as a sexual person. Package includes is 3 DVD’s and a workbook.

Crossroads Clinic splurged $95 on it.

Now, who is this Douglas Weiss? He seems to be quack of the first order, an expert on sex addiction, with a long suit in weird coinages, like intimacy anorexia.

He is also -- SURPRISE! -- a fairly whacked out Christian.
Watch this promo for one of his books. (It's mercifully short.)


He's also a regular on the Christian chat show circuit. (I actually watched "Lust Free Living" on that page and learned I'm doing it wrong.)

OK, this is all totally lame, but what would one expect of a fake clinic trying to branch out into other areas and suck in other vulnerable populations?

Not much.

But what would one expect of a fake clinic that has unaccountably gotten itself into something called The Sexual Assault Response Network, with some other legit (-sounding) players?

The Sexual Assault Response Network (SARN) is a collaboration of seven partners including the Sexual Assault Response Committee (SARC), Crossroads Clinic, Cantara Safe House, RCMP, Southern Alberta Child & Family Services (Brooks Office), Victim Service Unit, and Alberta Health Services (AHS) Emergency, Sexual Health Unit, and Social Worker Unit. These agencies have banded together to address an overwhelming need of support for an estimated 3,400 victims of sexual assault in the City of Brooks alone.

For now, all we have to say about this is WHAT THE FUCKING FUCK?

Researches are continuing and we'd be grateful for any leads or links.

h/t to Alison for the Dr. Doug video links.

ADDED: Scroll down to see the disclaimer.

Note: Crossroads Clinic provides limited medical services. We provide free medical confirmation of pregnancy and Sexual Transmitted Infections screening and limited treatment for women. We do not provide ongoing prenatal care, abortions, birth control or contraceptives.

So, a sexual assault counselling service that does not offer emergency contraception? How is that possible?

More Harper Lies

DAMMIT JANET! should have been doing this on a weekly, if not daily basis since Harper took power.

Since 2006, his regime has perfected the art of ideological spin to an artistic apex that surely has Goebbels clapping wildly in his grave.  Here's one wrap-up of obfuscations deployed by his thousands of communications flunkeys.

Remember Vic Toews' _line in the sand_ ...?

Boy, that sure was some hugely volatile speaking point, charged with insinuations that had previously worked momentarily for Harper in the 2005 election campaign.

Only it backfired again, this time with a MASSIVE pushback.

Here's the reality with regard to the Cons' disingenuous, desperate tactic.  It turns out that Harper's government isn't really all that committed to providing the RCMP with adequate resources to investigate, gather evidence, charge child pornographers and bring them to trial.

In fact, Harper and the RCMP dropped the ball as soon as it was evident that their regime could pursue other avenues for spying upon, harassing and destroying organizations and the lives of people who didn't agree with them, or openly opposed their policies as is allowed in a democratic country.

The CRA has been directed by Harper to audit specific organizations. The RCMP has been told to focus on First Nations, Métis and Indigenous resistance movement and its leaders, as well as environmentalists.  CSIS will be empowered to disregard constitutional rights as it spies on those identified as *terrorists* by Harper and MacKay.

And now, it appears that Harper/Kenney monstrosity, the _Monument to Victims of Communism_ might allow Nazis and Third Reich officials to be remembered, since the figures cited include these people.

[...]memory squares will be embedded in a series of ascending folded concrete rows, rising 14.5 metres at their highest point. Visitors will be able to walk among the rows and touch the memory squares to “viscerally experience the overwhelming scale of the Communist atrocities,” says the winning team’s statement of design intent.
At Thursday’s announcement, Kapusta referenced Josef Stalin’s infamous statement that “one death is a tragedy; one million is a statistic.”

As our friend Jay Watts III notes:

He also raises these valid points.

For the modest sum of $1000, folks who admire the work of Wilhelm Kube could have his name inscribed on one of the Memory Squares.  He is one of those "victim of Communism"... included in the statistics deployed by the Harper Cons.

The Contempt of Harper Conservative Reformists: enabling child pornographers, glorifying fascists and eventually jailing Canadians who disagree with them.

If things continue his way, Harper will be remembered for human rights abuses as egregious as those of Joseph Stalin or Robert Mugabe.

Respectability vs RESPECT: Part Two

This and this are connected.

Different women, separated by class, professional status, age, resources and geography.

The connection between these women: they shared an intimate and sexual space with men who did not respect them. These men, feeling unjustly deprived of 'their' entitlements,  deliberately and malevolently harmed and tried to injure them by exploiting the double standard about women's sexual expression that still persists in this 21st century.

In the case of *Nicole* and *Kim* in Halifax, the vindictive actions of a man who felt justified to impugn the respectability of his ex-lover, and to physically endanger her (and her house-mate) were documented by the victims.  Yet the crown attorney declined to pursue criminal charges for what *Adam* did.

As for Lori Douglas in Winnipeg, the first inquiry that thrust her into public view was dropped but a newly formed Canadian Judicial Council panel will be looking at her case - again.

There was one basic question that was never adequately addressed. Given that Douglas testified she had no knowledge of the proposition Jack King presented to his client — an 'invitation' for Chapman to have sex with her — nor had she consented to his initiative, was her spouse effectively trafficking her, and setting her up to be sexually assaulted as well?

It's a moot point now: King died last April, and that aspect of the complicated inquiry was dropped.

It appears to me that it is these women's respectability that is being judged, rather than the criminal actions of vengeful men.

Remember the Rehtaeh Parsons case?  Media attention put a spotlight on the reluctance of the RCMP to adequately investigate the multifaceted and unrelenting sexualized violence that led to her suicide. It forced the police to bring to justice those responsible for her harassment.

Once again, media attention has stirred the police into some semblance of action.  Kim and Nicole's criminal harasser may yet be brought to trial.

Douglas and her lawyers took legal recourse in order to expose the bullying tactics of the original CJC panel for what they were: unvarnished misogyny.

Last word: this exchange of tweets captures how women's respectability is viewed through a sexist lens and why women are challenging the double standard.

From @fortyfs' timeline, here.

Reminder: Respectability vs RESPECT: Part One.

"New" New Democrats: Ambition over Principles

You gotta wonder: WTF is up with the NDP?

There's this recent genius move from Niki Ashton, a motion for the House to "formally affirm" a woman's right to choose abortion.

Unlike the Woodworth gambit — which was ultimately defeated despite garnering the support of just over half the government caucus, including a half-dozen senior cabinet ministers — Ashton's motion could easily be interpreted as a criticism of current government policy, which would make even the most stridently pro-choice Conservative MP pause before giving a thumbs-up.

Such an outcome would almost certainly provide a major boost to the morale of the anti-abortion movement, which, despite taking centre stage briefly during the Woodworth and Warawa debates, has had little to no success in forcing the issue back onto the floor of the House of Commons.

That flagging political relevancy was apparent during last week's March for Life. According to police estimates, the annual Hill rally attracted just over 8,000 activists in 2014, which would put it at as little as half the RCMP estimate for the previous year, when Warawa's gender selection motion was still in play. Even the 23,000 claimed by march organizers was lower than their 2013 estimate of 25,000.

After formally affirming for years that abortion is a settled matter not open for debate, the NDP decides to take a swipe at the Liberals, kinda overlooking what ammo such a move serves up to fetus fetishists.

Well, we shouldn't be surprised. This isn't the first time the NDP has seen an opportunity to poke the Liberals by turning women's rights into a political football.

A couple of days later, the NDP brain-trust got a grip and decided to nix opening the abortion debate in favour of whinging about CBC funding cuts.

OK, then.

But here's Chantal Hébert's take (bold mine).

On the heels of Trudeau’s announcement that future Liberal candidates will have to toe the party’s pro-choice line on abortion, the NDP is seizing the House with a motion to force MPs to pronounce on abortion rights.

Since Trudeau is actually shoring up the pro-choice line in Parliament and not threatening to drive a tank through it, the only rationale for the NDP move is to sow embarrassment and division in the Liberal caucus.

A handful of its existing members are anything but pro-choice.

Not since Gilles Duceppe ended up having to take yes for an answer to his challenge to the House of Commons to recognize Quebec as a nation has an opposition party come up with as bad of a good idea.

The NDP has argued for years that the debate over abortion rights was closed, maintaining with admirable consistency that Parliament should not interfere in the reproductive choices of Canadian women.

On that basis, the party has mercilessly attacked the prime minister for not preventing his backbenchers from putting forward motions dealing directly or indirectly with abortion.

Its critics have repeatedly accused Stephen Harper of having the hidden agenda to restrict the reproductive choice of women.

But it is hard to square the notion that Conservative MPs should not be allowed to put their long-held convictions on abortion to the test in the House while New Democrats would be free to do so to score points on the issue.

The fate of the NDP motion — the text of which includes language pertaining to the government’s existing policy on maternal health in developing countries that could make it hard for pro-choice government MPs to support — is uncertain.

The vote might yet deliver anti-abortion advocates a rare victory on Harper’s watch in the House of Commons.

But whatever the result, it speaks volume about the current mindset of the NDP.

Dealing first with substance, the party’s eagerness to score easy points in an empty goal stands in sharp contrast with its gingerly-approach to more current social policy debates such as the one involving assisted suicide and euthanasia.

And here's her conclusion.

At this juncture, all is apparently fair in the NDP/Liberal war — including turning the issue of women’s reproductive choices into ammunition in the House of Commons.

This might be as good a time as any to remind both parties — but in particular the NDP — that if supremacy in the Caviar Left strongholds of downtown Toronto won elections, Harper would not be prime minister.

And here's where I bitch again about the fucking uselessness of the Fucking Useless Opposition®. They're arguing over the keys to Stornaway while the country goes up in flames.

Sowing embarrassment, scoring points, potting empty-netters. This is NOT why I -- and, I submit, millions of others -- voted NDP.

We voted for your principles, NOT your ambition.

And for this former NDP-voter, both federally and provincially, the party's rank and rancid ambition now outweighs any sentimental attachment I might have to principled social-justice warriors (ahem) like Dan Heap.

I'm done with the NDP.

2014 March for Lies: Anti-Choice Inflation

Yesterday, I suggested that the fetus fetishists have set their sights lower (targetting a particular method of abortion rather than the whole caboodle) for the annual March of the Feti because they know they are losing.

Let's have a look at attendance numbers for the past few years. This is a dodgy business, as anybody can and does claim any old number they pull out of their asses. And it's even dodgier dealing with the lying liars of the forced pregnancy industry who practice an art I call "anti-choice inflation," in which every year has to outdo the year before.

Going back to 2011, organizers claimed 15,000 attendees. Our pal Buckets (where the heck is Buckets anyway?) used some mathy-sciencey stuff to come up with 8,000. A very respectable number, everyone agrees.

In 2012, organizers counted 19,500 (note anti-choice inflation), while the RCMP put the number at 10,000.

Last year was notable for a wider than usual range. Organizers weaselled with "up to 25,000," RCMP said 12,000, and in a cruel knock to the nads from an erstwhile ally, QMI Agency via Sun News sniffed and cited 5,000.

This year, RCMP estimated the crowd at between 6,000 and 8,000. CBC Radio pegged it at 6,000. (I was scuppered in trying to do any guesstimation myself. The bloody Hill Cam seemed to be stuck on March 22.)

On Twitter, seasoned observers tossed figures around, but all agreed that the gang was diminished.

@josh_wingrove Anyway, even just using my eyeballs, it was clearly noticeably smaller. @pdmcleod @cmaconthehill

— kady o'malley (@kady) May 8, 2014

Lifeshite, citing whathisname who personally clicks his clicker for each body he sees, claimed 23,000.

Note the small climb-down from the "up to 25,000" of the year before.

What I find interesting: not only is the crowd shrinking year by year, but anti-choice inflation remains relentless. From fantasy numbers that doubled supposedly neutral observations back in 2011, they are now claiming a total that is nearly FOUR times what people's eyeballs tell them.

@josh_wingrove Yes, which is really not a good strategy, because... reality. @pdmcleod @cmaconthehill

— kady o'malley (@kady) May 8, 2014

Not only do bunfest promoters go with the bigger and bigger meme, they always trumpet The Youth.

Well, that's not difficult when one of your main supporters, the Vatican Taliban and its Ontario-taxpayer funded schools, can load bunches of kids onto busses for a day-trip to the capital.

It has long been rumoured that tax-payers are actually covering bussing costs. There was one report last year that $3,000 of our bucks were spent on the holy hootenanny, and this year Canada.com went after the goods.

Thousands of people gathered on Parliament Hill, Thursday, for the annual March For Life anti-abortion rally, many of them Catholic high school students whose transportation costs were covered by publicly-funded school boards.

Canada.com contacted all 29 English Catholic school boards in Ontario to ask whether students were attending and who was footing the bill. In at least three cases, school boards fully or partly funded the cost of buses transporting students to the rally. In other cases, students attended the rally with funding coming from either fundraising or local religious organizations.

You gotta wonder how the numbers could be contracting when Da Bosses can literally command the presence of a wodge of young bodies.

We look forward to next year with even more diminished attendance and even more inflated claims.

Because. . . reality.

Leveraging Laureen

Last night when the story of Laureen Harper first, hosting/sponsoring a cat video fundraising thingy -- in kitty ears to boot -- then dismissing a question from a young woman on missing and murdered indigenous women at that event hit the news, I was enraged but couldn't put my finger on exactly why.

Watch.



Then I read this:

Somebody needs to tell Laureen Harper that missing and murdered indigenous women isn't a cause... It's a national shame. #mmiw #cdnpoli

— Allison Fenske (@AllisonFenske) April 18, 2014

Yes.

True, I don't like cats. The time, attention, and money spent on them -- and pets in general -- makes me want to hurl. Laureen Harper is repeatedly referred to as a "cat foster-mom" though it's not clear that she herself does.

So, there's that on one side. People who go gooey over animals and whistle past a homeless person with a cap out on the sidewalk.

And on the other, the immense, ongoing national shame of at least 824 murdered and missing indigenous women in Canada. This government not only repeatedly and routinely dismisses any calls for action or inquiry, its treatment of indigenous peoples -- here and everywhere it or its minions have interaction with them -- is simply disgusting.

Laureen's callousness is not surprising then, but breathtaking nonetheless.

“We’re raising money for animals tonight. If you’d like to donate to animals, we’d love to take your money,” she said to lots of clapping, before suggesting dealing with the issue a different night: “tonight we’re here for homeless cats.”

So, now we come to Laureen Harper. I frankly don't give a rat's ass if she's living with her husband or the hunkiest RCMP officer -- of any gender -- in the land. I don't give a flying fuck what she wears, what she eats, what she says.

Because in Canada, mercifully, she is a complete nonentity, no matter what some sycophants would like.

Some commentators have tried to style prime ministers' wives as "First Lady of Canada", similar to the style of First Lady used in republics, but this is not a recognized title. Use of the term is based on the pervasive influence of American media and not a defined public role or title for the prime minister's spouse. In any case, both the spouse of the Canadian monarch and that of the Governor General of Canada take precedence over a prime minister's spouse, rendering the notion untenable.

We just do not *do* First Ladies in Canada (check the wiki link for some interesting people who have wrestled with the role).

Plus, there's that oh-so-Canajan thing of leaving families of politicians alone. "They weren't elected," the manners police sniff. "It just isn't done to attack them."

Unless, of course, the family members chose to become part of the political pageant. Like this.

The federal Conservatives have plotted a road map to a 2015 election campaign that counts on a massive donor- and voter-targeting effort, a communications onslaught, and a bid to “leverage” the popularity of Laureen Harper, the prime minister’s wife, according to documents obtained by the Star.

The simple fact is that Stephen Harper is perceived to be at the very least, a cold, controlling micro-manager, and at worst -- by a scarily increasing number of Canadians -- an outright psychopath.

In short, he has a teensy problem with that whole "human" shtick.

Enter Laureen, who it is hoped/prayed can if not "humanize" him, at least "demonsterfy" him.

It's been tried repeatedly, to little success, whether in an awkward kiss or in sketchy panda embrace.

But hope springs eternal in the CON sausage factory. They're at it again -- now with homeless cats.

Pro tip: If you're going to try to "leverage" someone with as little natural charm as Laureen, get her some fucking media/public speaking training. Try to get her to understand in advance that all "good causes" are not equivalent, and in particular that 800+ missing and murdered women are not a "good cause" just like spaying stray cats.

(Hm. Maybe the issues are analogous in such twisted brains.)

To sum up: Laureen is NOT First Lady. She IS fair game. She DID put herself in a totally frivolous situation. She DID fuck up. In CAT ears. (Imagine the withering look an aide would get with: "Hey, Mrs. Obama, we want you to wear these really cute cat ears.")

But maybe the whole exercise was not for naught. On the YouTube page with the Shit Harper Did video, there was this comment from someone named Paul Gillett.

Before reading about this in the news today, I wasn't aware of the problem of murder in the Indigenous community. Though I don't fully agree with this activists' tactics, I have to say, good job. I also think it is troubling that the conservatives would use the Prime Minister's wife to manipulate Canadians.

I end with this tweet. This was tongue-in-cheek from a friend, but I got many other similar ones -- not so cheeky -- last night.

@fernhilldammit “Shut up about #MMIW, we’re talking about homeless cats” - Laureen Harper’s legacy @Collyw0bbles

— Johnny B (@MayorJeebus) April 18, 2014

ADDED: Share your pet pic. From here.

Why PM's Security Costs Have Doubled

So nobody does this.

Source.

The cost of Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s RCMP personal security team has more than doubled since he took office, according to records obtained by the Ottawa Citizen.

RCMP numbers, obtained by the Citizen under access to information legislation, show the annual operating budget of the Prime Minister Protection Detail (PMPD) has increased 122 per cent between 2006 and 2014 — to almost $20 million annually.

There is a mightily growing number of Canadians who would love to "snatch him bald-headed."

I'm one.

So prophetic, so appropriate.

"Once the toothpaste is out of the tube it's going to be very hard to get it back in." - H.R."Bob" Haldeman

That is a Watergate reference.

Stephen Harper - ever the opportunist and at times, plagiarizer - deployed that quote when describing the political situation in Egypt during the Arab Spring when Mubarak stepped down, throwing his authoritarian regime into a tailspin.

We are reminded these days by the spectacle unfolding in the Senate and in the House of Commons, with regard to allegations of criminal fraud, corruption, collusion and subversion of the Parliamentary process, how perfectly appropriate that analogy is.

And we salute Corporal Greg Horton, one brave individual RCMP officer who has rigorously pursued this criminal investigation, interviewing many hostile or fearful people, and finally, sifting through hundreds of documents and an ocean-sized cesspool of obfuscations to shine the light of justice upon some very ugly CPC machinations.

At this point, some in the media are playing it coy, aware that the teflon-coated Harper may yet walk away unbesmirched by the volcanic eruption of shit his Con government has produced.

Le théâtre politique, Québec-style.

What is currently unfolding in La belle province is a spectacle.  It's not Grand Guignol yet, but given the inflammatory issues involved, it may yet descend to that.

The knives are certainly being sharpened, and they will be used judiciously to silence critics and opponents.

MP Maria Mourani was expelled from the Bloc Québécois caucus following comments she made about the proposed Quebec charter of values: la charte des valeurs québécoises.

In an interview with Radio-Canada on Wednesday, Mourani said Quebec's charter of values was a political miscalculation on the part of Premier Pauline Marois.

Mourani was making the comments as a spokesperson of a pro-sovereignist group in favour of secularism which calls itself "les indépendantistes pour une laïcité inclusive."

Bloc Québécois Leader Daniel Paillé said Mourani's comments are "irreconcilable" with the party's position.

The Parti Québécois claims that this Charter will unify all Quebecers within a secular state, one that is devoid of all image and symbols of adherence to religious beliefs.

Crucifixes prominently displayed on provincially funded public institutions are to be exempt from the Charter.  Its continued presence is defended as a valid historical and cultural artifact for the majority of Quebecers, in patronizing rhetoric uttered by Bernard Drainville.

Last year, PQ candidate Djamila Benhabib had the temerity to suggest, as a follow-up to the recommendations of the Bouchard-Taylor Commission, that the MASSIVE crucifix hanging in the National Assembly be taken down.  She was attacked and

... forced by members of her own party to recant, she was castigated as a foreigner with alien values and an unpronounceable name by Saguenay mayor Jean Tremblay. Her crime? Not having enough cultural Catholicism to know that the principle of secularism only applies to other religions.

The crucifix is a reminder of the oppressive, authoritarian and violent power that the Catholic church wielded.  Many First Nations people and descendants of the survivors of La grande noirceur do not wax nostalgic about the crucifix.

...Charles Taylor, the well-known academic who co-chaired a provincial commission into reasonable accommodation in 2007, describes the proposal as an “absolutely terrible act of exclusion.” So the debate is on.

Former Quebec Premier Bernard Landry has lashed out at English Canadian media for “Quebec bashing” while covering the matter. Landry told CBC Radio’s As It Happens that Quebec welcomes immigrants but wants them to join society. “When you change country, you change country,” he said. “And you have to get first the language, then the culture and integrate.”

In the same interview, Landry even goes on to ridicule the idea of police wearing turbans, which harks back to the Reform Party’s 1989 convention resolution stating that Sikhs should be barred from wearing turbans in the RCMP.

Landry’s comments on religious accommodation obviously shift quickly to immigration policy although individuals barred from wearing religious symbols would likely include native-born Quebecers.

From here. 

I have been reading La Presse, Le Devoir, Le Droit and listening to Radio-Canada with regard to la Charte des valeurs québecoises almost non-stop since last Tuesday.  My head hurts from the intellectual dishonesty and contradictions advanced by those who support and vigorously defend la raison d'être of this project.

Yesterday I had a long chat with a neighbour who wears le hijab about faith, spiritual devotion and cultural adaptation, while we were waiting on OC Transpo.  On the bus, I noticed a young man of African ancestry who may have been an immigrant — or born in Canada as my neighbour was.  He wore un chapelet around his neck. This rosary was made of fluorescent green plastic.  It was quite ostentatious.

It reminded me of cab-drivers who prominently display cross or large medallions that feature Catholic saints.  These objects are usually dangling from rear-view mirrors.  I have asked a few of them:  Do you put these in your taxi so that customers will know that you are not a muslim?  The answer is always an embarrassed yes.

And why is there a photo of Tonto, as embodied by Johnny Depp at the beginning of this blog?

Publicity, even negative, is considered by public relations flaks to be a *good thing*.  Which is why the PQ leaked information about la Charte to engineer a "crisis" ahead of its release, and to provoke a negative reaction from the Rest of Canada.  A win/win situation for the PQ.

Like Depp's costume, la Charte is a shallow, histrionic contrivance designed to create a furor, and to disguise the inherent racism and white privilege oozing from this political tactic.

So. Islamophobia exists. Christian and white privilege exists in Canada.  Religious fundamentalists are using the same tactics as the PQ, framing the *problem* to suit their ideology as well as exploiting people's fear and anger.

Violence against women occurs all too frequently; it seems it's only when a crime is motivated by fundamentalist muslim patriarchal ideology that femicide is rigorously investigated and prosecuted according to existing laws.  When the killing of women is fuelled by christian fundamentalism, only feminists feel that the media should equally denounce it.

Fortunately Tabatha Southey rescued me from feeling as gloomy and grumpy as Depp seems — and I don't even have to choose to wear (or not) head-gear for business, cultural, religious or political reasons. 

“The state has no place interfering in the moral and religious beliefs of Quebecers,” Bernard Drainville, the minister responsible for the charter, said in a bid to explain its stated rationale.[...]

Mr. Drainville’s voice remained remarkably steady for a man who, we’re asked to believe, understood himself to be addressing the confused population of a province whose citizens have been soldiering on through what he called “a crisis.”

The crisis, he clarified in a follow-up interview, stems from the “tensions” and “much frustration” caused by the “clearly unreasonable religious accommodations” that minorities in the province have been granted on occasion.

By “tensions,” was he referring, for example, to a case this summer when a newspaper reported that Muslim and Jewish groups were allowed to bring their own food into the La Ronde amusement park – which offers no kosher or halal dining option? The outrage caused the park to forbid the practice.[...]

Last year, my mum lost her hair to chemotherapy. She found wearing a wig too uncomfortable to bear and so played around with a scarf for a while but was unhappy with the results.

“I was trying to achieve the graceful look I’d seen on Muslim women,” she told me, “but instead I looked like Princess Anne at the races.”

Eventually, she called the Islamic Society of Guelph and asked if someone could help her. “I’ll give you my wife’s cell number,” the man she spoke to said. “She’s awesome.” The two women met at the rec centre it turned out that they both frequent and my mother was scarf-schooled.

 

Just a reminder: the head covering worn by La Piéta is a *traditional* garment. 

It seems quaint now, just as the babushka certainly was when hundreds of Ukrainian Catholic women immigrated to Canada, their scarves firmly knotted under their chins.

A much earlier DJ! post about women being solidaires with women who choose to wear the hijab, here.

March for Lies A Bust

I'm calling it. March for Lies was a huge bust. Look at all the weaselling.

LifeShite:

Up to 25,000 pro-lifers packed Parliament Hill today under threats of thunderstorms. The bad weather, however, held out, providing sunny conditions for the 16th National March for Life.

This year was another record-breaking year for the federal parliament's largest annual rally. Organizers estimated the crowd at likely near 25,000 given the evident substantial increase in numbers over last year, when the count was 19,500.

Because, you know, every year must be bigger than the year before. And 19,500 was a pretty large porky last year.

Other news outlets were a bit more cautious.

More than 10,000 people joined the 16th annual anti-abortion March for Life on Parliament Hill Thursday, with several Conservative MPs adding their support to the throng.  A small group of pro-choice advocates staged counter-demonstrations.

But the real knee to the nads comes from Stun News.

A count of the crowd by QMI Agency set the attendance of Thursday's rally at about 5,000.

The RCMP estimated a crowd of 12,000, while organizers said there were 15,000.

And now a note from the Martyrdom and Mail, aka Kicking Abortion's Ass:

Just heard from a friend of the family that the cops prohibited the last 2000 people on the Hill from marching. Probably couldn’t handle the numbers. Too many people. In the future, there will be so many people on the Hill, it will overflow to the Streets. There won’t be any room to march.

Buses carry, what, 50-60 people? So that's 35 to 40 buses diverted, cordoned off, or something by police?

Yeah, right.

And nothing says 'take us seriously' like a bunch of men in feathered hats.

ENOUGH KNIGHTS OF COLUMBUS TO BESIEGE A SMALL CASTLE. #MFLtwitpic.com/cpf2uj

— InfoAlerteBot (@InfoAlerteBot) May 9, 2013

The last word goes to veteran March of the Feti watcher, David Akin.

I say again: March For Life easily the largest annual protest on the Hill - and all to absolutely no effect. #cdnpoli #mfl

— David Akin (@davidakin) May 9, 2013

The real tell is that they're not even protesting the numbers very hard this year.

They know it was a bust.

Hill Cam shot from 1:15 yesterday. That look like even 15,000 people to you?