Gamil Gharbi (a.k.a. Marc Lepine) and propaganda


Thanks for pointing out that the proper and legal name of Marc Lepine was Gamil Gharbi.  It made me realize that I had never focused on the name of the perpetrator of the Montreal massacre in 1989.  However, there are other, far more important aspects of the Montreal massacre. One, of course, is that the Montreal massacre could well be regarded as a terrorist attack by an Islamic jihadist whose parents (most likely his mother) had converted him to Catholicism.

The redfems claim that Gamil Gharbi’s killing of the 14 women in Montreal in 1989 was motivated by his hatred for his father.  That claim requires a large stretch of the imagination.  After all, Gamil Gharbi’s suicide note mentions that,

I have decided to send the feminists, who have always ruined my life, to their Maker. For seven years life has brought me no joy and being totally blasé, I have decided to put an end to those viragos.

There has never been a satisfactory solution to a problem by only treating its symptoms.  The fundamental causes of Gamil Gharbi’s dissatisfaction were that feminists had always ruined his life, and that something happened seven years before his murder/suicide had caused him to lose all joy in life.  I don’t recall anyone ever exposing the fundamental causes of those two major problem symptoms.  After all, Gamil Gharbi was seven years old when his father left (allegedly left, that is. Gamil Gharbi’s father was more likely expunged from his family, the probability of that being on average about 85 percent for [divorcing or separating] families with children in Canada).

It is highly probable that what made Gamil Gharbi hate his father was not so much the father’s actions as it was the brainwashing that his mother subjected him to after his father had been forced out of his family.

However, that does not explain what happened to Gamil Gharbi seven years before he wrote his suicide note.  At that time Gamil Gharbi was 18 years old.  I doubt it very much that at that time it was that the vague, fuzzy and fading memories of a seven-year-old about his father suddenly began to control the life of the 18-year-old young man that boy had become during the preceding 11 years, so as to — out of the blue — prevent him from experiencing any joy at all.

Sadly, Gamil Gharbi was a very confused young man.  After all, in his hatred for feminists he falsely assumed that all feminists are women.

There never were two separate sorts of fascists, female and male, two separate sorts of communists, male and female. There certainly never was only a female variety of feminists. (Source: How to create a new social order, March 11, 2007)

Aside from that, the major moderating influence, the male role model of the father, was missing in Gamil Gharbi’s life.  Gamil Gharbi was raised without it and turned out to be flawed, predictably, just like many other assassins and mass murderers before him and for the very same reason: father absence, better but not quite correctly know as fatherlessness.

The preceding comments are very specific to Gamil Gharbi’s murder/suicide, but there is another aspect of the Montreal massacre that is important as well.  Far from being the worst mass murder in Canadian history, it is only a distant third in rank in Canada.

There were two other massacres in the not-so-distant past that were considerably greater calamities.  Both had women participating as perpetrators, and one, claiming 40 times as many victims than the Montreal massacre did, had women as the sole perpetrators.

The worst recorded mass-murders in Canada’s history involved women as perpetrators, such as the women guilty of causing the deaths of 400 to 600 small children, the case of The Butterbox Children in Nova Scotia, from the late 1920s through at least the late 1940s.There was another case that, even though it received much notoriety in the media at the time and actually involved more victims than the Montreal Massacre, is not ever being mentioned by feminist propagandists.

Joseph-Alberta Guay devised a plan to get rid of his wife. With the help of Genereux Ruest, an employee with a talent for mechanical work, he designed and constructed a timed bomb.On 9 September 1949, he convinced Rita (his wife) to fly to Baie-Comeau to pick up some items for the store and, at the airport, took out an additional insurance policy on his wife in the amount of $10,000. Before the Canadian Pacific Airlines DC-3 left the ground, Ruest’s sister, Marguerite Pitre, air-freighted a package containing the bomb and it was placed in the forward baggage compartment.

The bomb exploded 41 miles into the trip, killing all 23 people on board.

Pitre confessed ten days after the explosion while in the hospital recovering from a suicide attempt. Guay, Ruest, and Pitre were arrested and eventually hanged for their crimes. At the time, it was the worst mass murder in North America.
(More at: Barbara Kay about Marc Lepine (not his real name) and the Montreal Massacre, December 8, 2006)

The assertion, that crime was the worst mass murder in North America, is false, as false as the assertion that we hear very frequently that only men commit mass murders.

People like Jack the Ripper (he killed five prostitutes) are the stuff of movie after movie, book after book, headline-story after headline story in the papers.   People like Jane Toppan (an American nurse and contemporary of Jack the Ripper) who killed as many as or more than 90 patients for no other reason than that she wanted to set a record, and like Countess Elizabeth Bathory [1560 – August 1614, she killed, by torturing them to death, about 610 to 650 girls and young women –depending on source. –WHS] are forgotten, as is the fact that the vast majority of serious or fatal family violence victims fell victim to women’s violence as well as the fact that the vast majority of serial killers is female.
Yes, that is right, because the largest single group of victims of violence in families, children, is not even counted in the tally of victims of women’s violence.  We just don’t want to know, because we, that is, the feminists, want men to be seen as being bad and want women to have victim status.  That works well.  In propaganda, perception is everything, and the truth is nothing. (More at The Bloody and Deadly Countess Elizabeth Bathory)

The redfem propagandists forgot to mention all of that, so much so that all of the media have been flummoxed and their attention properly diverted to where the redfems point them, but that should not surprise anyone.  The redfem propagandists are good at what they do, and what they do is to have very selective memories. For anyone wishing to learn the truth, “herstory” is not a good substitute for real history, and, given enough time, all of the media will learn to recognize that fact.


(Visited 85 times, 1 visit(s) today)
This entry was posted in Feminism, Media Bias, Propaganda Exposed, Women's Violence. Bookmark the permalink.

6 Responses to Gamil Gharbi (a.k.a. Marc Lepine) and propaganda

  1. Hello Diogenes,

    Yes, Jane Toppan did have a disturbed childhood, like most mass murders on record, with most of them having grown up fatherless.

    Sorry about the wrong link to the story on the butterbox-babies. Good thing you higlight those problems. Few people point out required corrections to links. The correct link to that story is:

    At any rate, the main perpetrator was a midwife who also called herself an obstetrician: “William and Lila Young operated it [The Ideal Maternity Home]. William was a chiropractor and Lila was a midwife, although she advertised herself as an obstetrician.”

    Right, Sir James described that the double standard regarding the murder of children exists, and he did not explain what should have been done about it. All that happened in the end is that “infanticide, the category for child murder when women do it was created. That, of course, did nothing more than to absolve women from the crime of murder, so as to cater to the reality that average people will refuse to hold women responsible for murder.

    Yes, Adrienne Rich’s statement is creepy, but it, too, is nothing more than an expression that correctly describes the reality that women can commit murder with impunity. without any punishment.

    It all boils down to a double standard, reflected through thousands of stories in the media and in public discussions: When men murder, they are beasts. When women murder, it is nothing to worry about, and it is best not to mention it or to obscure the fact that they do and do it more often than men – by calling it self-defence or infanticide, or someone made them do it, or whatever serves the purpose of hiding the truth that women are at least as violent as men are (and that they are violent, like all bullies, against those who are weaker, defenceless or unsuspecting).


  2. Diogenes


    Jane Toppan had a disturbed childhood like Son of Sam, Dahmer, et al. But yes, most male serial murderers did have disturbed and parentless, fatherless childhoods

    wasn’t the Butterbox house run by a couple?

    the infanticide double standard is truly a shameful phenomenon, it boggles me how people ‘trivialize’ murder of babies just because the mother did it, truly astonishing. And the 18th century quote by Sir James whoever, what the hell is that all about? His quote isn’t a justification or rationalization at all, it merely DESCRIBES What is happening, that of “infanticide causes no alarm” “with regard to the public,” because “it’s a crime which can be committed only by mothers upon their newly born children”

    WHAT THE HELL IS THIS? He hasn’t justified this at all, he has merely said, “women mothers get away with murdering their babies because they are mothers of the baby.” I DON’T UNDERSTAND what this Jurist is talking about here, he provides no further explanation for this barbaric practice

    as for the Adrienne Rich quote, my god, this one is VERY creepy, truly a terrifying and loathsome and ugly quote, this is what feminism is all about, “mother power” aka the choice to get away with murder, truly the best example of self-destructive matriarchy

  3. Diogenes,

    You asked whether murder by women “occurs more often than say a Son of Sam, or Jeffrey Dahmer, Ed Gein, etc..”

    Firstly, I believe that those mass or serial murderers you mentioned were largely (perhaps exclusively) homosexual men (who moreover, largely grew up fatherless).

    If we consider that many murders involve weaker victims, especially true if one considers abortion to be murder, then without a doubt such murders are more often committed by women, often one after another.

    Aside from that, I already mentioned in my original article to which you responded the number of victims of Jane Toppan (a nurse and contemporary of Jack the Ripper), the butter-box children in Nova Scotia, and the 610 to 650 girls and young women tortured to death by Countess Elizabeth Bathory.

    In addition, there were a good number of serial murderesses that I did not cover. for example, some of those are described in the book “BAD GIRLS DO IT : An Encyclopedia of Female Murderers”, by Michael Newton.

    So, it seems that the answer to your question of whether there are more often murders by female murderers of the variety of Son of Sam, or Jeffrey Dahmer, Ed Gein, etc. must be: Yes, women murder far more often than men do.

    Patricia Pearson, in her book “when She Was Bad”, for instance, opens her chapter on infanticide (a euphemism and downplaying of the severity of child murder that is available only to women) with the following two quotes:

    1.) With regard to the public, [infanticide] causes no alarm, because it is a crime which can be committed only by mothers upon their newly born children.

    — SIR JAMES FITZJAMES STEPHEN, eighteenth-century jurist

    2.) The power of the mother … is to give or withhold survival itself.

    — ADRIENNE RICH, twentieth-century writer

    More at “Infanticide or ‘Post-natal Abortion’ ”


  4. Diogenes


    “Consider that as far as murder goes, women get almost invariably away with that, as long as they don’t do it more than one to three times and use bloodless methods or contract killers. After about five or six times over a period of a few years it happens that women may become suspects.”

    —this is true… However do you think this occurs more often than say a Son of Sam, or Jeffrey Dahmer, Ed Gein, etc..

    “Does life begin with conception? If so then at the very least about 50 million lives are being terminated by women each year in the whole world”

    —ironically, in the past 3 months I’ve begun to consider human life to begin at conception, so yes abortion is murder… Now, of these 50 million abortions we have to ask how much of them were due to mainly the male coercing or strongly pressuring it, though I doubt it’s the majority or even half, especially in the West

    finally, there’s another way to looking at this.. Looking at the number of murders due to abortion, we do see that women murder a lot, we then have to ask whether ‘serial’ abortion murderers are just as frequent as male serial murderers.. Of course the mechanics of abortion are much different than a serial murder, so that’s a good reason why there are fewer ‘serial’ abortion murders, but the Russian Federation example could be an exception to that

  5. Diogenes,

    The non-functioning link has been corrected. Thanks for pointing out that problem. The link should have been and now is to

    Children comprise the largest single group of family violence victims, far larger than either of the other two family violence groups, women and men, and even larger than both of the latter groups combined. Women comprise just about exactly 70 percent of the perpetrators of child murders in families. The other 30 percent are not comprised of men (for which reason self respecting feminists always present such statistics that the reader jumps to the conclusion that the other 30 percent are comprised of men, without that having been specifically stated.

    That is an old propaganda trick. It works well and misleads many — time and again.

    The truth about the other 30 percent of the perpetrators of serious and fatal violence against children is that it is comprised of all sorts of people that are relatives or friends of the families in which such violence occurs (for example, a very large proportion of them are boyfriends of the mothers or other biologically unrelated “father figures” that are somehow attached to the mothers of the children. Natural fathers who are the perpetrators of the tortured or murdered children in families comprise a group of perpetrators that is roughly one tenth the size of the group of the mothers who seriously hurt of kill children in families.

    You may wish to check the references provided at the bottom of the page at

    The Uniform Crime Report provides more information on the relationship between victims in Families and those that hurt or killed them. IN general, you will find that natural fathers live well up to their reputation as protectors and that women don’t.

    Consider that as far as murder goes, women get almost invariably away with that, as long as they don’t do it more than one to three times and use bloodless methods or contract killers. After about five or six times over a period of a few years it happens that women may become suspects.

    That is with respect to the taking of life that is generally considered to be murder, but there is another form of killing that is sanctioned and even paid for by governments. The question there is when life begins.

    Does life begin with conception? If so then at the very least about 50 million lives are being terminated by women each year in the whole world. Does life being after the second trimester of gestation, then the number of such lives terminated by women is considerably smaller than 50 million, but still substantial.

    Does life begin at the time that the last portion of a baby not yet fully born leaves the mother’s womb? If so, then partial birth abortions are fully legal, as are all abortions that occur prior to the anticipated birth of a child, with exceptions.

    When a woman decides to kill or have someone kill her unborn child, that is quite alright but not accepted by all. However, when someone else does so against the expecting mother’s wish, it becomes a crime against the life of the “fetus” and against the woman’s right to her body. The victims are in either case not around to complain or to participate in the discussion of the issue.

    When murder is sanctioned by governments, is is still murder? Is it murder when the government does so? Is it murder if women are given the permission to commit it?

    The only thing we know for sure is that many women in the world use abortion as a method of birth control and that many women do it time and again. In the Russian Federation, for example, women have on average six abortions (some individual women have as many as 21 abortions), before they permit their first child to live and carry it to term.

    Before I give you specific references that support what I described, let’s do things this way. If you assert that men are more often and more prolific serial killers than women are, let’s first agree on the definition of human life, and then you provide the evidence that proves that men are more likely than women are to take one life after another.

  6. Diogenes


    “as is the fact that the vast majority of serious or fatal family violence victims fell victim to women’s violence and also the fact that the vast majority of serial killers is female.”

    can you give me the evidence for these two statements? The vast majority of serial killers are female??? Where is the evidence for this?

    “the largest single group of victims of violence in families, children”

    your link for this is not working, the link actually directs to some nonexistent folder in my computer instead of the website

Comments are closed.