Emails obtained under freedom of information laws reveal Canada’s most prominent environmentalist, David Suzuki, has more than just a glad eye for schoolgirl Lolitas.
Investigative journalist Donna Laframboise may have opened up a can of worms after appearing on Sun News Network (February 7, 2013) to denounce the mainstream media’s “cone of silence over these revelations about David Suzuki.” New email evidence exposes 76-year-old Suzuki’s sick demands upon the nation’s teachers requiring they ply him with an endless gaggle of impressionable young women to serve him whenever he is guest of honor visiting Canadian schools.
Laframboise describes the story as “an amazing paper trail of emails” (including one dated October 18, 2012) that expose how college teacher Mary Milburn and her Department Head, Jim Anderson, among others, ingratiate themselves with Suzuki’s PA by submitting to Suzuki’s sick requests. Specific demands were that the school surround him only with nubile “young ladies” and “dressed to impress,” “not dressed like butch security guys but dressed ‘nicely.’”
“That is not a request the college should have considered seriously” fumed Laframboise. She characterized this affront as a clear “Feminism 101 issue.” Laframboise lambasted schools across the country that indulge Suzuki in his apparently lascivious taste to have young girls to order, dressed to his taste and at his beck and call.
“It is not appropriate for any man visiting a school to ask for female bodyguards,“ says Laframboise. The investigative journalist emphasized her point in the eight minute news interview by declaring that if the prime minister or any regular guy pulled such a stunt feminists would be up in arms screaming “what rock did you crawl out from under!”
She laments, however, when it comes to a left wing icon idolized by the north American mainstream media the press appears to have surrendered it’s conscience to all things “green” and double standards come into play.
Across the pond in Britain this story eerily echoes the recent tragic case of the depraved Jimmy Savile, another media celebrity who duped the press into believing he was also holier-than-thou and thus above suspicion. It turned out that while Savile was being lauded – a media celebrity knighted for his services to charitable causes – he was secretly an opportunistic pedophile raping and abusing children under the noses of their teachers and carers.
The David Suzuki emails provide no hard evidence that Suzuki has molested anyone and certainly no girls have made any allegations against him. But at the very least, impressionable young girls should not be objectified and demeaned to become nothing more than eye candy prancing about in Suzuki’s shameless cattle call.
Thus Laframboise is entirely correct to question where these teachers’ (and media) heads are at if they are failing to apply due diligence to protect children from what may be the grubby paws of yet another deluded egomaniacal celebrity who believes he can do no wrong.
johnosullivan 
Take away your editorializing and you get these actual words attributed to Suzuki: “young ladies” “dressed to impress,” “not dressed like butch security guys but dressed ‘nicely.’”
Everything else in your rant from linking Saville’s paedophilia to Suzuki to women being treated like cattle was spun out of those few words.
You are truly amazing Mr O’Sullivan
Drewski, I reported on Donna Laframbroise’s analysis. If you bothered to watch the video Suzuki specifically demanded only females “dressed to impress” escort himm- an utterly sexist demand. Please tell me how that is appropriate behavior for an alleged role model?
Pingback: Exposed: David Suzuki Uses Cult of Celebrity to Procure Young Girls « Skeptics Chillin'
The video did not mention paedophilia or cattle, but you did.
As well, Dr Suzuki’s personal assistant’s reason for choosing females may well have been as benign as choosing security that was “discreet and less intimidating” as Mary Milburm, the College representative, stated. It was Ms Milburn, herself, who requested 2 or 3 female Police Tech students who had a level of “maturity and professionalism” for the job. Hardly the “female student eye candy” as Donna Laframbroise alleges in the video.
However, both you and Donna Laframbroise leap top the conclusion that Dr Suzuki is a lecher. You both have gone well over the line to pervert reality and do a hatchet job on a man simply because has opinions different to your own. Heck, the video even tried to create a parody of Suzuki by putting a halo over his head.
Tabloid trash.
And what actually happened at the college that day? Suzuki ended up being escorted by both males and females.
Drewski,
Are you now trying to censor what I can and cannot say in my analysis of the inappropriate conduct of David Suzuki? If you actually believe it is not sexist and demeaning for Suzuki to specifically request only young female students dressed to his specifications to accompany him then you’re one sick puppy. Stop being a pathetic apologist for that hypocrite when we all know your real agenda is promoting Big Green climate fraud.
Mr O’Sullivan,
How is it even conceivable that I can censor you on your own blog? What I can do, however, is to point out the intellectual chasms you have jumped in creating a connection between paedophilia and a guest speaker’s SUPPOSED request that his body guards be dressed appropriately.
I say supposed because we never actually get to see or hear what Dr Suzuki said on this issue, or for that matter, the actual words attributed to his personal secretary. We only get to see what Ms Milburn said in her emails which, btw, also mentioned a request for mature and professional students from Police Tech to be used.
Your attack on Dr Suzuki of using his “cult” of celebrity to “procure” young girls is outlandish and based on nothing but the imaginations of you and Donna Laframbroise . the same imagination that has accused me of supporting climate fraud and of inappropriate behaviour towards young girls.
If this article is your typical fare, than I expect readers will know who the “one sick puppy” is already.
Drewski, There’s an old saying “where there’s smoke, there’s fire”. As John said in the article, “whilst there’s no hard evidence…” (although personally I would have left out the “hard”, to be absolutely clear) to an actual crime, to even make such a request is highly suspicious, and Donna Laframboise is entirely right to ask why the teachers complied.
The Jimmy Saville analogy is a fair one, as for years, no one questioned him despite many having serious reservations. His case should teach us that we need to have suspicions like this addressed at an earlier stage, so hopefully David Suzuki now knows that the world is watching, and has hopefully prevented any actual offence.
Which teaches us another lesson, that when we bring up kids, we place restrictions of their behaviour, actions and even morals, for very good reason, to *prevent* later incidents that would transgress the law. We now know that such boundaries cannot be the preserve of just children.
The article may hint of tabloid journalism, but who are you trying to protect, David Suzuki, or these children?
Who am I trying to protect?!? I guess the readers’ sensibilities from authors like your self who want to link a scientist to paedophilia because he asked to use less intimidating female security for an event he was invited to speak at..
Drewski,
Clearly it is you who is being intellectually dishonest when time and again your comments conspicuously fail to acknowledge that Suzuki specifically requested ONLY young females accompany him and that they be dressed to his specific requests. If that doesn’t seem sexist and inappropriate to you then you and I are never going to agree on this issue.
Mr O’Sullivan,
Please point out the exact time on the video where Dr Suzuki, himself, speaks about young ladies and what clothing they should wear. If you are unable to do that, then please point out where on the video I can find an email written by Dr Suzuki regarding young ladies and clothing.
If you can’t do that, then perhaps you could produce Dr Suzuki’s assistant either by image or email talking about young ladies and their clothing.
What you have are emails that don’t even come from Dr Suzuki’s assistant much-less Dr Suzuki himself. And what words are actually in those emails? We find words like “women” and “ladies” but not the words “young” or “eye candy” — those words can only be found on the lips of Ms Laframboise and the TV presenter. And you, Mr O’Sullivan, added the words “paedophilia” and ‘cattle”.
Generally, when someone attempts to makes mountains out of mole hills, as you are clearly trying to do here, they don’t start with a hole and then try and make Mt Everest.
Drewski, what comes around goes around. Huffington Post and Suzuki funded desmogblog published an attack piece on me to infer I was a pedophile despite the fact I had been cleared of any such charge 10 years ago both by a court of law and a year-long investigation by the Secretary of State for Education of England and Wales.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/brendan-demelle/affidavits-in-michael-man_b_1711581.html
Hypocrite Suzuki should not throw stones in glass houses. To have the affront to put in writing to schools that he should only be escorted by a coterie of attractive young females is sexist and demeaning. The three males out of the 21 students who escorted Suzuki actually ‘gatecrashed’ the stupid blanket ban allowing only feminine eye candy. That you think it is appropriate to condone teachers and Suzuki treating impressionable teenagers that way is staggering and reprehensible.
And you continue to lay it on.
There is absolutely no evidence that Suzuki specifically asked for a “coterie of attractive young females” and “feminine eye candy” or that three males “gatecrashed” the event. You invented all that from a reasonable request to dress appropriately.
And somehow from my previous comments you concoct a fantasy in your head that I condone inappropriate behaviour towards young women. Now I am flabbergasted to discover that it is YOU who are staggered by MY reprehensible behaviour.
Utterly mind blowing..
Drewski,
Watch the video. Laframboise provides the details. I’ve made nothing up. Just accept it – Suzuki’s behavior is sexist and offensive. Stop being an apologist for the creep.
Mr O’Sullivan,
I did watch the video and not once was paedophilia or cattle mentioned, so your assertion that you made nothing up is yet another thing you have made up.
That is not to say that Ms Laframboise didn’t make things up herself (I also understand her book is also mostly made up). However, what struck me about the video is what was left out. For example, David Suzuki is never actually quoted, In fact, either was his personal secretary. All we get to see are emails from the university which never mention “attractive young women” or “feminine eye candy”. Ms Laframboise also never mentioned that the university requested body guards to be mature and professional and come from the student Police Tech.
In my opinion, the video was an amateurish hatchet job that tried to make vast intellectual leaps from incredibly little evidence.
Apparently, the poster mocking Suzuki which was prominently displayed throughout the video didn’t have the same effect on me as it had on you.
John…John……this represents a new low even for you. You seem to have some fetish for child molestation stories (real or imagined) and linking them to anyone you disagree with…you attempted the same cheap trick with Michael Mann and Sandusky at Penn State..Its so obvious that when you have run out of reasonable and legitimate arguments (which, in your case, doesn’t take all that long) you resort to sliming people all the while lamenting the ‘ad hominem’ attacks on yourself. I really felt better when I thought you were being paid for this rubbish. But now that you have admitted to me that no one is paying you I’m at a loss to explain your real motivation.
I forgot to mention the ridiculous headline..”Exposed: David Suziki uses cult of celebrity to procure young girls…” Obviously anything written after this lurid and purple prose will be forgotten or ignored. The damage is done with those first dozen or so words which are complete horseshit.
It can be damaging if they were false but we know that he is indeed a celebrity and a very public figure who has made many statements that have been shown to be false.
Why are you defending this man anyway?
Here is some background from Donna’s blog about Davids weird interest in female escorts as shown in the e-mails:
David Suzuki, Dirty Old Man
Doesn’t matter if you are “left” or “right,” or whether or not you think Dr. Suzuki has made important contributions to our country (I think he has).
There’s little doubt that when it comes to a fondness for pretty young chicks, he’s just another old perv. It’s nothing really unusual, and sadly, a lot of the people writing on this website might even have a Dad or Grandpa cheering DS on.
Steve Mennie and Drewski can kick and scream until their face turns blue – it’s pretty hard for the fanboys to spin the basic facts of this one. The email plainly states that Suzuki wanted tarted-up hotties to follow him around John Abbott.