Tag Archive sd76

A response to the accusations of defamation against the Eminent Sire Williamson

As many across Medicine Hat are well aware, Chat News broke a story last evening, the 11 of July, 2017 that insinuated that Jeremy Williamson may have defamed someone in his writing. This came as a shock to the CPoSD76 as no one had ever contacted the CPoSD76 with a concern over the comments in the article. The first hint that anyone had issue with the article was in an e-mail the CPoSD76 received on the 11th at 9am, which stated:
“Good morning,

We’re looking to get hold of Jeremy Williamson for a comment on a story we’re working on for tonight.
Our deadline is 3:30 P.M. today, and it would be an on-camera interview we’re looking for.
The interview is in regards to some concerns raised by the school board about some of the content being posted on the CPOSD76 blog.
Please send me an email or give me a call so we can set something up for today (Tuesday July 11th.)

Thank you,
Leah Murray”

The message was of course passed on to Sire Williamson.

After the story broke, and it was revealed in the article, that no statement had been taken from Sire Williamson, we were curious as to why he had not responded to the Chat request, and we wanted to know his take on the article and what his response was.

A concerned parent had a conversation with Sire Williamson, and the following is a transcript of that conversation. Given the history of malicious and vindictive attacks upon concerned parents in the past, the name of that concerned parent has been replaced with that of our coalition’s name.

CPoSD76: Thank you Jeremy for taking the time to sit down and discuss this. I’m sure things have been quite hectic since the story broke.

Sire Williamson: No problem. It was a little crazy there for a while.

CPoSD76: Considering the post you made recently, I have to ask, what are your preferred pronouns, and what was that all about?

Sire Williamson: Yes, well that is to be expected. My preferred pronouns are sire or eminent/eminence. Those may sound ridiculous, but sire is simply another way of saying I have fathered children, and eminent simply means one of prominence, fame or infamy. I think you understand why that last one applies. Especially now. Both have well established history in the English language, which is more than I can say for some other people’s preferred pronouns. As for what is all about, well it is about equality. One of the criteria for a law to be just, is that it must be applied equally to all, without regard to race, creed, or gender identity. I’m paraphrasing there a bit, but C-16 amended the charter of rights to include identity. Those rights can not apply to only the LGBTQIA2+ that agree with the lobby groups, but to all LGBTQIA2+. I am a provably intersex person, and the law only requires self identification.

CPoSD76: So would you prefer I use those pronouns going forward?

Sire Williamson: No, for the purposes of this conversation that is not necessary, but I would ask that in anything published you use them appropriately.

CPoSD76: Thank you for clearing that up. The burning question now is, why didn’t you respond to CHAT’s request to do an interview?

Sire Williamson: Quite simply, I don’t work for them. I have a life, a family, and a job, and I don’t answer to their beck and call, nor am I accountable to them. They have my contact information from previous conversations, and despite their claim that they e-mailed me personally, I have received (as of the time of the conversation) no such e-mail. Frankly, they went about it in a totally unprofessional manner. Contacting anyone who has ever sneezed in my direction, from my Pastor, to my friends, to concerned parents who had nothing to do with the story. They told no one what the story was about, and wanted me to call THEM. The whole thing smelt of an ambush to me, and I guess I was right. The message that was sent to the concerned parents was the only one that even hinted at what the topic might be, and I was not about to drop everything and run to CHAT to help them in a hit piece. The fact that they used an employee whom I am friends with on facebook to get me to give them my personal e-mail again strikes me as particularly appalling. I will state it again, still got no e-mail on my personal address. Am I really to believe that they could contact all these other people, and try to get them to violate privacy law, but they could not send an e-mail to me?

CPOSD76: Did you have any idea that this accusation was coming?

Sire Williamson: Not in the slightest. Sure the School Board has expressed some dislike for some of the things I have said before, but never have they suggested I defamed them. They have accused me of disrespecting them, but that isn’t a crime. I have never received any letters or requests from their legal council on anything I have said. Well, besides what was presented during the petition appeal. Lets not forget that just last year when the board shut down recording of public meetings, they publicly accused me of tampering with video to make them look bad, and used that as an excuse to implement their ban policy. An accusation that I have recorded on tape, and I can easily prove to be false. I even tried to work things out with the board on that, but they didn’t want to talk about it.

CPoSD76: What are you saying? That the Board defamed you?

Sire Williamson: Well, yes and no. Yes I may have ground to accuse the board of defamation, but I don’t want to, and that is not my point. My point is, this whole thing is petty. What kind of a society do we live in, where anyone who criticizes a policy needs to be punished by the powerful? That is the kind of behaviour you would have expected to see in East Germany, or North Korea. This whole situation shows the sad state of affairs our province is in, and only proves my point that I have repeatedly stated, that Alberta Ed is operating under a culture of fear and threat. They can’t prove there methods empirically, so they have to oppress any dissidence. Besides all this, I think CHAT and NDP shock troops have more to do with this than the Board does.

CPoSD76: What do you mean CHAT and shock troops had more to do with this?

Sire Williamson:  Well, if you recall, James Wood at CHAT wrote a piece about Mrs. Prince to create ‘controversy’ out of two near identical tweets from NDP front groups. A similar thing happened just hours prior to the release of CHAT’s story. The CPoSD76 facebook group was inundated with new requests to join, but several people were clearly tied to ‘diversity’ groups and the NDP. Even had a request come in from the Communications Director for Southern Alberta Health Services. What he has to do with this is unknown to me. The fact that the board told me nothing of their ‘concerns’ over the post prior to the CHAT story, indicates to me that CHAT wanted to stir the pot again, and was encouraging the board to send the post up to Edmonton. Plus, it was James Wood who called my Pastor.

CPoSD76: Are you suggesting that CHAT is another of these NDP front groups?

Sire Williamson: I can’t make that statement definitively, but there are a lot of interesting coincidences. I can say that CHAT seems to have issues with getting the whole story, and portraying the facts accurately. It appears to me at least, that they don’t just engage in reporting the news, but also manufacturing it. It also appears to me that the NDP will do anything to silence those that disagree with them. Even if it means making something up. Doesn’t come off as very tolerant, and looks a lot like bullying.

CPoSD76: What are you going to do next? Do you plan on responding to CHAT?

Sire Williamson: As far as CHAT goes, that bridge is thoroughly burnt. Only communication I will have with them going forward is through a lawyer. As for the article and the accusation, I’m consulting with legal council on the matter. My focus right now is on holding the board accountable to the agreement that was made in court, and seeing the petition accepted. I’ll be posting more on that myself soon.

CPoSD76: Well, thank you Jeremy for sharing with us. Hope things work out.

Sire Williamson: Your welcome. Any time.

Tags, , , , ,

More Journalistic failure, and the petition amendment.

tl;dr – Why did the amendment fail? The Secretary changed the understood expectations for the 111 amended postal code signatures, and decided that there were more signatures in the original that didn’t qualify. Parents now know they are playing Calvinball.

Accurate Report on the Petition Amendment Rejection:

On June 20th, the CPoSD76 amended their petition. I received notice that a decision of the sufficiency of the petition had been made on or about 3:30pm Thursday July 6th. It was requested that I come and meet with the superintendent at 8:30AM July 7th. Despite the short notice, I informed the superintendent’s office that I would make the meeting.

I was informed that they had decided that the amendment was insufficient because they had rejected all 111 amended postal code signatures on the grounds that they we not re-signed each in their entirety, even though that was not a requirement discussed during the March 10, 2017 appeal. Even though the Justice said that even a photocopy would have been good enough, as the point of their rejection was that the secretary would have had to have exerted extra effort to ascertain the electoral status of the signature.

In addition to the 111 corrected postal signatures, I submitted 286 new signatures with the amendment. The secretary claims that 3 of those signatures have addresses outside the boundaries, and 1 was missing a character on the postal code. He further claims that 19 of the signatures are duplicates of signatures on the original petition. A claim that is currently being verified. Put simply,

Original Petition:

  • 1629 signatures were determined to be acceptable and uncontested through the proceedings by Court of Queen’s Bench.
  • 2000 are required to have a petition accepted.
  • 371 was the shortfall.

The Amendment:

  • 397 Total
  • 4 allegedly erroneous signatures
  • 19 claimed to be duplicates
  • 374 Remaining.
  • 374 > 371.

The Secretary claims to have done not the first, or the second, but the THIRD review of the Original petition, AFTER it was stated to the Justice that 1629 signatures on the original were not contested. In his third exemplary review of the original petition he claims to have found 30 duplicated signatures that had previously not been noticed by himself, his staff, or his legal council. 374 – 30 = 344.  344 < 371.

  • 111 – again rejected postal code signatures
  • 27 – Needed new signatures
  • 138 – What the board is asking us to get by July 21 (Which is the deadline for appealing to the Court of Queen’s Bench again, not entirely the boards deadline.)

The Grossly inadequate Articles in both Medicine Hat News & CHATNews:

I will not go into details on all of the errors in the two articles at this time, however I will state that neither of the news agencies attempted contact myself or the CPoSD76 prior to publishing their articles. An e-mail from MHN was sent to my personal account at 1:19PM, AFTER they published their article, and stating that they were “looking for a short, written comment to use”, to have it to them “before 4 p.m,” and criteria given by which the CPoSD76 comment must be framed. I did not know of the e-mail until 8pm. Both articles portrayed the numbers of the amendment inaccurately, and in a negative light.

Questions for your consideration:

Why didn’t they want to get a comment before publishing?

Why didn’t they ask the board why they needed to review the petition so many times if they had already done a thorough evaluation in Oct, 2016?

Why didn’t they ask the board why they would lead parents and the Justice to believe that all they needed to do to correct the postal code signatures was get the addresses, if that is not what they wanted/required?

Why didn’t they ask ANY questions of the CPoSD76, but simply want a statement?

Why  didn’t they report that board and admin question the legality of Justice Tilleman’s decision to allow an amendment, but choose not to pursue a challenge of it?

A reporter wanting to get the truth, and facts would have asked questions. None were asked.

Tags, , , , ,

Interphobia, Journalistic Malpractice, & The Smear Campaign Against CPoSD76


Last Wednesday, the 21st of June, 2017, Tim Kalinowski of Medicine Hat News(MHN) wrote an article about the CPoSD76 submitting an amendment after the June 2017 Board meeting, to their petition that was presented to the Board on September 19th 2016. There were two key problems with this article, one of which being a serious instance of journalistic malpractice, and the other being of a derogatory and disrespectful nature.

The two issues are intertwined both being the cause of, and symptom of each other. I’m going to try and make that statement make sense, but it is going to involve a bit of the history of who I am, and what has happened with the Board of SD76 since February of 2016.

Back in Feb, 2016 I attended my first ever Board Meeting, as my daughter had just started attending Kindergarten at a School within SD76s authority. Like thousands of other parents across Alberta, I was alarmed at the crass way in which Minister Eggen was bullying his agenda onto all the boards in Alberta. From the tone and tenor of the February meeting, I immediately knew I had to give a presentation to the Board, and be active in the fight to protect all children from the dangerous and reckless policies that were being brought in under the guise of ‘safe and caring’.

During the March 2016 regular Board Meeting, I gave a presentation on some of the concerns I had with Board Policy 621, and 622. Keep in mind, at the time, I did not know the final wording of the policy, nor did I know the procedures that would be implemented the following school year. My concerns have only expanded since then.

If you watch the presentation, you will note that I publicly came out as intersex. (Peggy Revell of MHN was there for the presentations, and reported on them.) Before I prepared my presentation, only 5 people (that I am aware of) in my life knew about my defect. My parents, my spouse, the doctor who delivered me, and one friend in my entire life that I felt comfortable enough with to share that personal detail about myself.

In the days leading up to my presentation I struggled with weather I should out myself like that.

In the days leading up to my presentation I struggled with weather I should out myself like that. I wondered at the harm it might bring to my family, what it might do to my social life. Would I be subject to the ridicule that the LGBTQIA2S+(LGBT) were saying was happening at epidemic levels. The harassment and discrimination that was sure to follow, as I understood it, was going to drive me to thoughts of suicide.

In the days leading up to my presentation, I shared my ‘family secret’ with a couple more people in order to test the waters, and see what they thought about me ‘going public’. Those people supported me in my decision to go public. They believed that no better candidate existed to raise the alarm about the policies, than someone who the policies were purported to protect.

After I came out, I did not receive the discrimination that the LGBT led me to believe would follow. No religious zealots screaming about how I was an abomination. I didn’t lose my job, or get calls from my mortgage provider. Yes there were a few very awkward conversations afterwards, more because of human curiosity, than because of aversion to who I was.

No, the discrimination that I have gotten, has been of a more sinister nature. It has been a concerted effort to demean, discredit, and erase and rewrite who and what I am, and the values I represent. This brings me to the first issue with Tim Kalinowski’s article.

During the interview about the petition amendment, Mr. Kalinowski specifically asked me about the “Christian Evangelical” values of the CPoSD76, and what mutual agreement the group could hope to achieve with the board. I made a clear distinction to Mr. Kalinowski between what my values may be, and what the values of the group may be. Despite this clear fact, and the fact that the article was not an opinion piece, Mr. Kalinowski decide to inject his opinion into the article in the midst of quoting me. He stated that “our particular (Christian) values” were what we were trying to convey. Despite me clearly stating that I was talking about the group values and not my own, he misconstrued what values the CPoSD76 represent.

The values that the CPoSD76 hold have been clearly evident for months, and can be easily found.

The values that the CPoSD76 hold have been clearly evident for months, and can be easily found. Our values cross religious and political boundaries. Our values are shared by over 30 different community organizations across Medicine Hat. Those values are Family values. They are community values. They are values that unite, rather than divide and isolate into ‘victim’ groups. They are values that joined groups together that have not worked together for over 100 years. They are values shared by Theists and Atheists. By many who identify as LGBT. Despite what the likes of David Eggen and Christopher Wells would have you believe.

As I’ve stated, the fact that the values of the CPoSD76 are shared by so many has been readily apparent for months. It was stated on the Petition Submission in September 2016. It has been stated multiple times in media releases. It has been stated on this website since it’s launch over 2 months ago, and it has been stated in our facebook group. In fact, it has even been shown on MHN’s own website. On the same day that Mr. Kalinowski published his article, MHN conducted a poll, asking if people agreed with the CPoSD76. The results of which was that 54% agreed, and 34% did not. (12% were unsure.)

Despite the numerous sources of information that could have been drawn upon to find out what the values are of the CPoSD76, Mr. Kalinowski decided it was better to re-frame them as Christian values. Why is that? Well, the reason is because my being an intersex person does not fit the narrative of the “LGBT” trade mark, which is a whole separate ‘group’ than the average LGBT person you would meet on the street, or for instance, the type that would sign our petition. Lets call this group the LGBT™ for the sake of clarity.

…they believe themselves to have transcended human understanding of ‘identity’ and ‘gender.’

The LGBT™ are a political group. They are a group that wants power, and wants all barriers and norms around sexuality completely abolished. They hate traditional family, and they hate religion. They hate the natural, common values of over 90% of the population, that have been held for millennia, and as explained in my “Trans-Hippo” post, they believe themselves to have transcended human understanding of ‘identity’ and ‘gender.’ As a result the LGBT™ believe themselves to be better than you or I. After all, they have a more divine understanding than you or I.

Naturally, since the LGBT™ wants power, they gravitated towards those of a totalitarian nature, in order that they might pass the laws that grant them such power and protections. This is why we have Bill 10, the Guidelines to Best Practices, PRISM, C-16, Bill 89. These all grant the LGBT™ the power to force the destruction of the long held family values, and by threat of imprisonment or the loss of your Children, force the acceptance of only the LGBT™‘s errant view. Even if a contrary view is coming from an LGBTQIA2S+ person. But like Icarus in his hubris flying to close to the sun, so has the hubris of the LGBT™ risen.

This whole hysteria started around a study from UBC that said Trans people were suicidal, and had ‘perceived’ to have been ‘bullied’ at some point in their youth. The study didn’t go into detail about who they might have been bullied by, or what that ‘bullying’ even looked like. I’ve written at length about this, but suffice to say, the case study wasn’t even random, which is standard practice in reputable studies.

The LGBT™ then latched onto this study and ran like wild fire with it. Completely ignoring decade old data that showed that ‘approving’ of the Trans life style, and societal acceptance of it made negligible (google “post opp trans still suicidal”) difference in the suicide rate of Trans people. Multiple sources, some of which I cited in my e-mails to the board before my presentation, were ignored in favour of pushing the LGBT™ agenda. Worse still, even post-op trans people have nearly the same suicide rate as pre-op.

The wax was beginning to drip from the LGBT™’s wings.

Team LGBT™ knowing these facts to be true, knew of the flaw in their logic. Que team LGBTi. The argument then went like this. “You know, some people are born with the wrong sex organs. Some even have both. These intersex people have had the wrong identity forced upon them by doctors and parents, therefor they should get to choose. Gender Fluidity, it’s a thing.”

LGBTi said they were just speaking up for those intersex people that were to afraid to identify with their ‘true’ gender. But then I spoke up, and roundly denounced their proposed policies, proving that the LGBTi were not in fact speaking for intersex people. So back to LGBT™, and now it was about the GSA’s. Then the Gay porn links were discovered. (Which I warned would happen only a week before, because it happened in the UK.) Then it was about outing the gays. Except that GSAs have gay and straight attending, and keeping extracurricular activities secret from parents is illegal. The wax was beginning to drip from the LGBT™’s wings.

Elsewhere, on a different front another battle was raging. You will remember I said, the LGBT™ knew of their flawed logic? While the battle Raged in Alberta, Parliament was lobbied by the LGBT™ to pass C-16. C-16 is “An Act to amend the Canadian Human Rights Act and the Criminal Code” to compel people to use the preferred pronouns of a persons self identified gender. On June 15th, 2017, C-16 became law. Each person in conversation, if told of the preferred pronouns of the other person, must use their preferred pronouns, or will be found to have violated their human rights, and may now be found to have committed a hate crime against the person who identified their pronouns.

This finally brings us to the second problem with Mr. Kalinowski’s article. That of the fact that he willfully refused to use my preferred pronouns. C-16 specifically protects my gender identity. At the very beginning of the interview, Mr. Kalinowski asked me to state my name into his recorder. I did so, and specifically stated my preferred pronouns, to which he chuckled.

Thinking that this may have simply happened because Mr. Kalinowski was unaware of the passing of C-16, I e-mail him and MHN on June 21, asking that he show me the respect I am legally due, and to correct the inaccurate statement of the Christian values of the CPoSD76. I asked that these simple corrections be done within 24hrs. As of today, the 25, I have seen no such correction, and received no response to my e-mail.

This is not the first time inconvenient facets of the the LGBT™ narrative have been ignored in order to silence, and oppress those that have not capitulated to it. In the 16 months that this safe and caring agenda has been pushed, I have been directly insulted by administration, accused of altering recordings to make the Board look bad, of violating FOIP laws, threatened with legal action beyond simply court costs, and I’m intersex.

If those are the lengths they go to silence and discredit an intersex person, what do you think they are doing and will do to people who have no claim to minority protections? Just how safe and caring do you think your ‘cis’ children are going to be from bullying and oppression by the LGBT™. When policies are written specifically to reject to even HEAR an opposing view, no matter the scientific evidence, as 622 is. What lengths do you think they will go to to impose their own form of bigotry? That is what it is after all, pure unadulterated bigotry. If you have a better word for an intolerance of any opinion other than your own being represented or even allowed, an intolerance of any other type or form of education, I would be happy to hear it.


 

Definition of bigotry

plural

bigotries

  1. 1 :  obstinate or intolerant devotion to one’s own opinions and prejudices :  the state of mind of a bigot overcoming his own bigotry

Tags, , , , , , , , , ,

A choice needs to be made.

Last week I gave a report on a meeting with members of the Board of SD76.

This week, a decision needs to be made on how we should proceed post petition appeal. If option (1.) is chosen, the date of the Meeting would be Saturday, May 27th. The end of the school year is approaching, and this matter needs to be cleared up before the summer break.

Below is a very quick form that would provide us with concrete information on how parents feel we should continue. This is your opportunity. The names and e-mail of those that provide feedback will never be shared publicly. We know first hand the kind of blow back you can get from having an opinion that is not in agreement with the mainstream, and we will do our utmost to protect you from any such blow back.



I certify that I am a Public School Board Elector, who resides within Medicine Hat School District #76.


Tags, , , ,