I wrote this post in November 2011 in response to a comment made in an email exchange with an Occupy protester in England. It is as true for me today as it was the day I wrote it.
“England shirt poppy thing: what diff whether these joyless overpaid spit-roasting thickoes wear a mark of Remembrance or not?”
Occupy protester →']);" class="more-link">Continue reading
Justin Trudeau is not fit to be Prime Minister. I know this because I read it every day somewhere in the mainstream or social media. The reasons are varied and many but two key factors get mentioned more than any other; he was a teacher and he inherited some money from his father.
I’ve been voting in elections for more years than I care to acknowledge and I haven’t always been successful at voting for the best candidate so I’m always open to anything that will better help me evaluate those running for office.
Quite honestly, it had just never occurred to me that former professions or family inheritances were factors worth considering; if it had, I would have dismissed Rob Ford as unqualified for his political office because he inherited a fairly hefty chunk of change from his father and didn’t do much before taking a job in sales at his father’s company,
Foolishly, I thought he was unqualified because he is a self-indulgent buffoon. →']);" class="more-link">Continue reading
“To me, consensus seems to be the process of abandoning all beliefs, principles, values, and policies. So it is something in which no one believes and to which no one objects.”
“Freedom will destroy itself if it is not exercised within some sort of moral framework, some body of shared beliefs. . .”
There’s an easy way to tell the difference between a major threat to our national security and a minor one – rhetoric. The more bellicose the rhetoric by our political leadership, the less danger they perceive from whoever it is they are condemning or in terms of political fallout.
That shouldn’t be taken to mean that there are no serious threats, even the most stupid among them (and there is a serious competition to earn that title) can identify and understand that there are; but the level of accusatory rhetoric is dependent the source and nature of the threat to economic or political interests.
Developments this past week underscore how international affairs as it is being practiced by world leaders.
Canada’s Prime Minister, Stephen Harper, has gone to China to foster – or more accurately, to repair – relations with China that he damaged early in his first mandate. He was successful in getting a couple of billion in new trade deals and the support of the Chinese government in creating a currency hub in Toronto.
At some point, he will also mention that he discussed the issue of human rights violations although it will be the trade deals that will be the only evidence of anything having happened.
‘’Human rights violations” is one of those wonderful catch-all phrases our current politicians like to use because it seems filled with meaning and principle but is so vague on specifics as to obscure the necessity of doing anything.
It’s a way to legitimize lusting after trade and economic benefit from repressive but economically strong nations. Despite how often they meet to discuss trade and human rights violations – it is only trade on which any progress is made. →']);" class="more-link">Continue reading
“War on terror’ is a misnomer. It would be like calling America’s involvement in World War II a ‘war on kamikazism.’ Terrorism, like kamikazism, is a tactic.”
I don’t like war. It is an ugly, brutal business in which too many innocent people are slaughtered and that has unpredictable and uncertain outcomes. I consider war to be the ultimate failure of civilized people to resolve their differences. Nevertheless, I understand and accept that sometimes there is no other option but to go to war to defend against tyranny and those who are threat to the lives of others and the security of peaceful nations.
I also believe that there is no reason to fight war other than to win it. I believe that if if you are forced to war, then you need to commit whatever resources are available to you in order to achieve victory – not for glory but for self-preservation and the preservation of others.
Canada has gone to war for the third time in a decade and in the same region of the world. Now we have joined a coalition of reportedly 59 other nations to combat ISIL; an armed force of fewer than 40,000 fighters that are storming their way across Syria and Iraq with sociopathic efficiency.
Decades of conflict in the Middle East – thousands upon thousands dead and the world’s leaders seemed to have learned little to nothing from that waste of human life. →']);" class="more-link">Continue reading
Earlier in the week I wrote that I wasn’t interested in hearing the sordid details of the Jian Gomeshi rough-sex scandal and I meant it but there doesn’t seem to be any avoiding it now.
Has it really only been five days since this story broke? There have been so many reports, commentary and opinion published that it feels like it has been going on forever. Even the attack on Parliament Hill didn’t get this much coverage or opinion.
When it’s all said and done, it still comes down to a simple case of he said vs. she said and she said and she said and she said and she said and she said and she said and she said. That’s nine “she saids’ and counting versus one ‘he said”. It stretches credulity that there isn’t a least some fire under all this smoke. →']);" class="more-link">Continue reading
For one brief shining moment in Canada last week, our political leaders were united.
On the day following the shooting of Cpl. Nathan Cirillo and the subsequent attack by Michael Zehaf Bibeau on Parliament, our leaders stood together to condemn the attacks and to tell the world that Canadians would not be intimidated. They even shook hands and exchanged hugs after their speeches in a show of solidarity.
It was too good to last. →']);" class="more-link">Continue reading