Quebec Hires Legal Top Team to Fight Lie Detector Test In Court Challenge of Bill 62

BILL 62 Vote-FNT-Small.pngMONTREAL – With the upcoming constitutional court challenge over Bill 62 (the Quebec anti-face-covering law) the province has hired a top legal team to vigorously defend against the use of a lie detector in determining some facts about the legislation. The controversial law, which forces individuals to remove articles of their clothing in a public place, is an especially egregious affront to women.

Bill 62 also bans children from wearing Halloween masks on buses as well as people of all ages and genders from wearing scarves and balaclavas in January on ski slopes funded by the provincial government.

This new legislation, which FauxNews today believes has no place in any country that professes to call itself a democracy, will be hard pressed to stand up to a constitutional challenge, on purely religious grounds alone. But the province has enlisted the best legal talent that public money can buy to head off any possibility that witnesses for the defense might have to submit to a lie detector test.

The architects of Bill 62 have claimed that the law was conceived and constructed in “religious neutrality”, which any number of people and organizations in and out of Quebec have roundly pooh-poohed as being disingenuous.

A mechanic from Montreal, Marcel Vaillencourt, suggested to FauxNews Today that the claim of “religious neutrality” as the intent behind crafting the new anti-face-covering law was: ”… un grand gros contrevérité” [roughly translated as: “… a fully-loaded nose-stretcher with a turbocharged V-8 engine.”]

A spokesperson for the government who spoke off the record about Bill 62 said: “Tous ceux qui disent que nous avons dit un gros fausseté sur nos motivations, devra prouver.” [Anyone who says that we have told a whopper about our motives, will have to prove it].

Clearly there cannot be two versions of the truth, so a lie detector test would be the only fool-proof method of determining who is guilty of exaggerating, fabricating, fibbing or omitting facts in this matter.

The courts will ultimately decide the outcome of Bill 62, however without a lie detector test Canadians may never know the true intent behind its crafting.  However before he went back to work, Monsieur Vaillencourt from Montreal offered his opinion, as a personal critique of the political process behind the passing of the anti-face-covering law.

“L’hypocrisie en démocratie pue très mal.” [“Democracy tainted by hypocrisy smells like a dead fish four-days-old.”] Source: FNT Staff  

Photo credit: Original images at: Toronto Sun, The Montreal Gazette/Allen McInnis ,   American Eagle Investigations, and  Global News

Annals of Education: History Now Banned From Classrooms – Deemed “Offensive”

Classroom-Ban History-FNT-Small.pngOTTAWA – Following a recommendation from a panel of international “experts” in education, the federal government will now ban the teaching of history in the nation’s classrooms. The newly established orthodoxy has it that: “offensive facts must be banned, for the public good”.

A spokesperson for the federal government, Clive Knickerson, explained that the department of education drew up the innovative new policy in response to a “critical post on Twitter by an A-list celebrity” who had expressed concern that some history is not only offensive, but also might be dangerous for children.

The post had set off a tsunami of social media commentary and Knickerson said that in the light of this e-clamour and “for the sake of the children” the feds had “no choice” but to “be seen to be doing something about it.”

“So the department took action immediately,” he said. “It was too important to the public to delay, and it is the safest way to protect all Canadians.” He allowed however that “If a B-list or C-list celebrity or an ordinary citizen had raised the issue, it might have taken longer to come to a decision.

Knickerson was quick to officially rebuke a Facebook post from a concerned citizen who submitted that history should be exposed to the public, not buried, so that people could learn from the mistakes of the past.

“Remember that Henry Ford said ‘History is bunk!’ “, he texted back to the poster, referring to the industrialist who gave the world the mass-production fossil-fuel-burning automobile.

He also defended the move by government to ban history from classrooms as a matter, of necessity, to hold on to power. “We’re capitalizing on a current social trend in order to remain relevant to the voting public,” he said.

“After we remove historical statues from public view, change the names of schools and public buildings and ostracize the descendants of long-dead persons for long-ago transgressions, we have to take this to the next level. And banning things is what governments do best.” Source: FNT Staff

 

 

Photo credit: Original images by: Wikipedia, : Harshlight