Showing posts with label oppression. Show all posts
Showing posts with label oppression. Show all posts

Monday, May 18, 2009

The Government: Wayyyyyyyyyy Out of Control

When you read this story from Montreal, please be aware that it is not satire. Big Brother has arrived and he speaks French. Badly.

Mark Steyn has a few thoughts too.

I hope that this case gets similar media exposure as the Robert Dziekanski one did. Sure, no one died here but it is yet another example of the police (and the State) deeply out of control. If Ms. Kosoian decides to sue then I will support her legal defence fund.

Tuesday, October 07, 2008

The Obama Doctrine

America should help out all oppressed people in the world . . . except Iraqis.

How peculiar.

Saturday, July 12, 2008

The Moral Relativism of the Ultra-Liberal

Have you been following the absolute horrible atrocities going on in Zimbabwe? I have. Besides Robert Mugabe ending any hope of democracy, there are countless people being murdered and tortured by the thugs of this tyrant.

To date I thought I had heard some of the most ridiculous statements of defense of Mugabe. One came from Khurrum Awan's mentor, Mohammed Elmasry, when he wrote this editorial in the Montreal Gazette. I've also heard some African callers to BBC London assert that Zimbabwe is the "greatest democracy the world has ever seen". Such callers obviously missed the lesson that if you're going to tell a lie, ensure there's some shred of truth to it.

But now the Globe & Mail's life long ultra leftist, Rick Salutin, wins the gold medal for going where no reasonably sane person has ever dared to go before. Jonathan Kay provides his take on Salutin's diatribe, along with a link to the actual editorial as well. Below Kay's article, be sure to read the sick moral relativist ramblings of one "Ambrose99". Thankfully there are enough thoughtful Canadians out there who won't let such hateful screeds go unanswered.

Sadly though, there are many, many people out there who emulate the twisted logic of Salutin and Ambrose99. Listen carefully to them and you will almost always see that their hatred for America and Israel far outweighs any care or support they have for people in this world who are truly being oppressed. And this is why the UN has become a useless organization and why the atrocities in Zimbabwe, Darfur, Burma, and countless other places is allowed to continue. These people have blood on their hands yet are so mired in their own endless schtick that they've actually convinced themselves that they are on the side of the angels. There is no greater delusion!

For more on the Zimbabwe situation, please go here and here.

Tuesday, April 01, 2008

My Faith in Humanity Is Waning

I frequently hear from politicians that the "collective wisdom of the public knows all". Really?! I somehow doubt it.

In just the past few days I've heard/read the following:

  • The people who want independence in Tibet are terrorists & criminals and Mother China is a benevolent government.
  • Because of what happened to North American Natives in the past few hundred years justifies China doing what they are to the "ungrateful" people of Tibet.
  • Robert Mugabe's Zimbabwe has the most democratic government on the planet.
  • After WW2, most German people thought that their Nazi government had done nothing wrong, not even to the Jews.
I sometimes wonder where we're headed.

Thursday, March 27, 2008

Strange Dilemma - What Would You Do?

I've received several messages from someone asking me to remove my Tibet Protest March video from YouTube:

The writer appears to be a woman living in Richmond, BC. "She" says that a friend of hers appears in the video and she fears for her safety if the video remains up.

Besides the obvious authenticity issue of the anonymous writer, this raises all sorts of issues of censorship. If you were in my case, what would you do?

Monday, April 02, 2007

Human Rights Discussion (CBC Style)

On the recent edition of CBC radio's Sunday Edition program there was a long discussion about "Human Rights". I felt compelled to send them this letter:

While I found the thoughts of your two guests informative, it wasn't a very balanced discussion. Adding someone like Mark Steyn onto your panel would have made it a lot more interesting.

The basic flaw with the arguments your guests put forward is that they assume that the major human rights violators are just "friends waiting for their grievances to be resolved".

Does anyone REALLY think that dialogue and offers of friendship will ever resolve things with al Qaeda, Kim Jong-il in North Korea, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad in Iran, or Robert Mugabe in Zimbabwe?

The truth is that in most cases these men must be imprisoned or killed before anything can actually change. Denying this basic fact has provided gainful lifetime employment for thousands in the UN but has also DIRECTLY resulted in the murders of millions of people and the ongoing oppression of millions of others.


Update: I just received this response from to my e-mail:

Thank you for your comments. They have been received by the program.

Reynold Gonsalves
Associate Producer
CBC Radio One, The Sunday Edition

Please note that emails sent to the program may be read onair as part of our Mail segment.

For more information about the program, you can check our website at:

http://cbc.ca/thesundayedition


And to it I responded with this:

Dear Reynold,

I certainly hope that letters such as mine will be read on-air. Being immersed in the trees of the CBC, as you are, I wonder if you're able to fully appreciate the forest that constitutes all Canadians in 2007. When right-of-centre people, even mildly right-of-centre people like me hear discussions on CBC Radio, you have no idea how many times we feel like pulling our hair out, frustrated that there's most often no one in the discussion that remotely represents anything other than a left or ultra-left viewpoint. If you were a private broadcaster then it's no one's business what's heard on-air but you are a public broadcaster, on-air through the tax dollars of everyone, and thus clearly should represent the public at large.

I'd love to be a a fly on the wall if you were to read my previous paragraph to your colleagues at the CBC. My guess is that many would laugh or scoff at it. This would speak volumes of exactly what I'm talking about.