Fox News appeals to American readers of whitish hue and rightish politics. Sun News is its Canadian counterpart, followed by the true hosers of the Great White North. The print arm of Sun News is QMI, which owns and publishes a number of whitish and rightish Canadian newspapers, the Toronto Sun being first and foremost.
Most of the writing in the Sun is in paragraphs of one sentence and words of one syllable, styled for those who move their lips when they read. However, the QMI papers and Sun TV have a few sane and literate pundits, among them Michael Coren. His column today is headed "Too easy to call out slurs before facts proven in Trayvon Martin case". Here's an excerpt.
...the usual race pimps and inverted racists, such as Al Sharpton, weighed in, and the New Black Panthers broke the law, uttered threats and screamed. They were aided in this by the increasingly hysterical and exploitative President Barack Obama, who made some absurd comment about Trayvon Martin looking like the son he never had. [Walt's emphasis.]
Possibly, Mr. President, but could that son also have looked like Shawn Tyson? He’s the 16-year-old with a long record of armed assaults who was just sentenced to life in prison with no chance of parole for murdering two British young men who wandered into the wrong part of town, also in Florida.
When these and so many other black-on-white murders occur, we are told that race is not an issue. When whites kill blacks — and official statistics have these cases as being incredibly rare — we are assured that racism is everything. Actually, black men are frequent victims, but their killers are invariably other black men. The vast majority of murderers of white men are also black.
Click here to read the whole piece. For an inverted racist's take on the issue, see "Trayvon’s killing echoes an uglier time in America". Konrad Yakabuski, the lamestream Globe and Mail's man in Washington, goes straight down the "racism is still alive and well in America line", as predicted here on March 28th. Advantage Obama!
Saturday, March 31, 2012
Friday, March 30, 2012
"The Little Black Book of Scams" (downloadable)
Even though it first ran almost two years ago, "Help Kids Canada - a scam or only half a scam?" continues to draw comments from kids who have got sucked into working for the scammers as well as from the scammees. People keep saying, "If we'd only known..."And of course there are lots of other scams out there which have been going on for years, lots of lowlifes making a good living out of knowing what to say and do to separate you from your money.
Apart from the old "buy a chocolate bar for charity" scam, fraudsters use internet scams, money transfer requests, pyramid schemes, fake lotteries, non-existent sweepstakes and dishonest contests. Some of these scams disappear for a few years, but then resurface with a slightly different twist, the classic example being the "Spanish prisoner" letter.
Who falls for this stuff? If you've been bitten, don't be ashamed. Most of us have been taken in at one time or another. Not becoming a victim is easier said than done. The best way to arm yourself is with information. The Competition Bureau of Canada has just published its version of a booklet which originated with its Australian counterpart, which explains how to protect yourself against fraud. It’s called The Little Black Book of Scams.
And get this. It's FREE. No strings attached. You can get it from a reputable source, namely Walt Whiteman. Just click here to open the .pdf file, which you can read or save. The file size is only 1.73 MB so it's well worth keeping and passing along to your friends.
Muslim immigration top issue in French election
Last week Walt predicted that the killings by -- and subsequent "judicial execution" of -- Mohamed Merah would make the Islamization of France a major issue in that country's presidential election. This week, Marine Le Pen, leader of the Front National -- a nationalist party diametrically opposed to immigration -- asked, "How many Mohammed Merahs are arriving on boats and planes each day, filling France with immigrants? How many Mohammed Merahs are among the children of our immigrants?"
You have to give Mlle Le Pen full marks for the courage to ask such questions, in the face of daily vilification by the liberal press. But she is not the only one addressing the issue. French President Nicolas Sarkozy, fighting for re-election, has called for restrictions on legal immigration. He also wants laws to make it illegal to browse Islamist websites or visit Islamist training camps, and tougher policing and more deportations. Indeed, on the day of Merah’s first killing, Sarkozy said there were "too many foreigners" in France.
How is it, Walt wants to know, that the Europeans -- regarded here in North America as being a bunch of decadent, effete, liberal wimps -- have the guts to at least debate issues of immigration and culture, while our oh-so-PC "leaders" won't even acknowledge the Muslim elephant in the room?
Immigration has been a thorny issue ever since the invention of the wheel. The Chinese built a Great Wall to keep the hordes of foreigners out. And every country has a set of rules for dealing with new immigrants. Historically, newcomers had no help integrating into the host culture. They had to live with discrimination, adopt the culture and ways of their chosen land, and make the best of it.
Following the demise of the great colonial empires, Europe opened its doors to its black and brown ex-subjects, doing more than what was reasonable to deal with these ancient issues, in spite of the warnings of such seers as Enoch Powell. But now a new problem has arrived.
Never before has the world had to deal with a group that have a faith that tells them they must dominate all the others, that it is OK to lie to do that, and if that is not enough, it would be a good idea to blow yourself up if you have a chance of taking a few infidels with you. The old responses to a question as old as humanity simply don't work.
In the last decade or so, the French have come to realize that their country, their culture and their way of life is threatened by immigrants who refuse to adapt. It took centuries to build that country and culture and they want to keep it the way it is...or was. Who can blame them?
Meanwhile, in Canada and the USA, the do-gooders, "progressive thinkers", liberals and lamestream media keep feeding us the utter bullshit that immigration is good for our economy and for our country, that the majority of Muslims are good people who really share our values, and that the proliferation of mosques and Islamic cultural centres in our cities can be safely ignored. Anyone who disagrees must be an Islamophobe and a racist!
When will our politicians -- or even one of them -- grow a set and propose policies to protect our culture and our society from the Islamist menace.
You have to give Mlle Le Pen full marks for the courage to ask such questions, in the face of daily vilification by the liberal press. But she is not the only one addressing the issue. French President Nicolas Sarkozy, fighting for re-election, has called for restrictions on legal immigration. He also wants laws to make it illegal to browse Islamist websites or visit Islamist training camps, and tougher policing and more deportations. Indeed, on the day of Merah’s first killing, Sarkozy said there were "too many foreigners" in France.
How is it, Walt wants to know, that the Europeans -- regarded here in North America as being a bunch of decadent, effete, liberal wimps -- have the guts to at least debate issues of immigration and culture, while our oh-so-PC "leaders" won't even acknowledge the Muslim elephant in the room?
Immigration has been a thorny issue ever since the invention of the wheel. The Chinese built a Great Wall to keep the hordes of foreigners out. And every country has a set of rules for dealing with new immigrants. Historically, newcomers had no help integrating into the host culture. They had to live with discrimination, adopt the culture and ways of their chosen land, and make the best of it.
Following the demise of the great colonial empires, Europe opened its doors to its black and brown ex-subjects, doing more than what was reasonable to deal with these ancient issues, in spite of the warnings of such seers as Enoch Powell. But now a new problem has arrived.
Never before has the world had to deal with a group that have a faith that tells them they must dominate all the others, that it is OK to lie to do that, and if that is not enough, it would be a good idea to blow yourself up if you have a chance of taking a few infidels with you. The old responses to a question as old as humanity simply don't work.
In the last decade or so, the French have come to realize that their country, their culture and their way of life is threatened by immigrants who refuse to adapt. It took centuries to build that country and culture and they want to keep it the way it is...or was. Who can blame them?
Meanwhile, in Canada and the USA, the do-gooders, "progressive thinkers", liberals and lamestream media keep feeding us the utter bullshit that immigration is good for our economy and for our country, that the majority of Muslims are good people who really share our values, and that the proliferation of mosques and Islamic cultural centres in our cities can be safely ignored. Anyone who disagrees must be an Islamophobe and a racist!
When will our politicians -- or even one of them -- grow a set and propose policies to protect our culture and our society from the Islamist menace.
Wednesday, March 28, 2012
How an isolated incident will derail the US presidential election
Disclaimer: Walt is not a supporter of George Zimmerman. If I saw a black kid in a hoodie walking down the street, I'd be walking in the other direction, not following him. Even if I were a member of the vigilantes and cop wannabes who call themselves "Neighbourhood Watch", I'd leave well enough alone. Hey, I'm a lover, not a fighter.
Should Zimmerman be arrested and prosecuted? Hell, yes! Even one of the investigating offiers said so, but got shot down [Watch it! Ed.] by the local DA who said there was no way the state would ever get a conviction. Is that racist? Hell, no! It's just expressing the reality of criminal justice (sic) and race relations in much of the USA, more than a century and a half after the beginning of the Glorious War of the Secession.
What does this have to do with the presidential election? Please... I'm getting to it...
What Mr. Zimmerman has done, by killing Trayvon Martin, is stir the always-simmering pot of racial conflict, always an issue in the USA but one which we thought could pretty much be ignored in 2012. After all, white Americans had already proved that they're tolerant and liberal enough to elect a (more-or-less) black president. And there's no dearth of other issues: the economy (stupid!), unpopular foreign wars, Obamacare and "social issues" (read gay "marriage" and abortions).
So, according to Walt, race should have been a non-issue...until Mr. Zimmerman did for Mr. Martin. When the news broke, that giant sucking sound was the sharp intake of breath of millions of conservatives hoping and praying that Zimmerman is not a registered Republican. [Well??? Is he??? Ed.]
On the other hand, millions of white liberals were eager to portray Zimmerman as some kind of white skin-head neo-Nazi. Doesn't seem he fits that stereotype any more than Martin fit the stereotype of the black gangsta. All Zimmerman is, IMHO, is a typical nervous white "average American", afraid of "the other" and, unfortunately, resident in a state which lets people carry concealed firearms and says you don't have to back off from a confrontation.
Millions of people don't see it that way. The public backlash has been huge, and is gaining size and momentum even as I write. All that's needed to transform that backlash into votes against racism -- ergo, for Obama -- is a little encouragement.
Some might say it would be pretty low for the incumbent president to suggest that he should be re-elected to avoid handing the government of the USA over to the kind of people who run around shooting black kids. The president would never say such a thing, or even suggest it. Right? Well...
What Obama has done is call for an investigation -- fair enough -- and personalize the issue by saying that if he had had a son, he (the son) would've looked like Trayvon Martin.
Walt predicts that the words that will be remembered, out of the few sentences uttered by Obama, will be "my son". As in, "Some cracker done shot the President's son!"
You may think, gentle reader, that would be a bit of a stretch, but keep in mind that millions of "average Americans" believe that Obama is a Muslim. [Well??? Isn't he??? Ed.] George Carlin said that when you picture an average American, don't forget that 50% of them are dumber than that guy! Millions of voters will equate the killing of Trayvon Martin with a white racist attack on the President... and vote accordingly.
And here's the beauty part, for the Democrats. It will be impossible for the inevitable Mitt Romney to take (or even suggest) any position other than condemning Zimmerman and all he stands for (including the "right to bear arms") without coming across as a racist gun nut.
Stick a fork in Romney. He's done... thanks to Zimmerman. Lifetime pct .985.
Worth reading: "Why did Trayvon Martin die?" by Margaret Wente, in today's Globe and Mail.
Should Zimmerman be arrested and prosecuted? Hell, yes! Even one of the investigating offiers said so, but got shot down [Watch it! Ed.] by the local DA who said there was no way the state would ever get a conviction. Is that racist? Hell, no! It's just expressing the reality of criminal justice (sic) and race relations in much of the USA, more than a century and a half after the beginning of the Glorious War of the Secession.
What does this have to do with the presidential election? Please... I'm getting to it...
What Mr. Zimmerman has done, by killing Trayvon Martin, is stir the always-simmering pot of racial conflict, always an issue in the USA but one which we thought could pretty much be ignored in 2012. After all, white Americans had already proved that they're tolerant and liberal enough to elect a (more-or-less) black president. And there's no dearth of other issues: the economy (stupid!), unpopular foreign wars, Obamacare and "social issues" (read gay "marriage" and abortions).
So, according to Walt, race should have been a non-issue...until Mr. Zimmerman did for Mr. Martin. When the news broke, that giant sucking sound was the sharp intake of breath of millions of conservatives hoping and praying that Zimmerman is not a registered Republican. [Well??? Is he??? Ed.]
On the other hand, millions of white liberals were eager to portray Zimmerman as some kind of white skin-head neo-Nazi. Doesn't seem he fits that stereotype any more than Martin fit the stereotype of the black gangsta. All Zimmerman is, IMHO, is a typical nervous white "average American", afraid of "the other" and, unfortunately, resident in a state which lets people carry concealed firearms and says you don't have to back off from a confrontation.
Millions of people don't see it that way. The public backlash has been huge, and is gaining size and momentum even as I write. All that's needed to transform that backlash into votes against racism -- ergo, for Obama -- is a little encouragement.
Some might say it would be pretty low for the incumbent president to suggest that he should be re-elected to avoid handing the government of the USA over to the kind of people who run around shooting black kids. The president would never say such a thing, or even suggest it. Right? Well...
What Obama has done is call for an investigation -- fair enough -- and personalize the issue by saying that if he had had a son, he (the son) would've looked like Trayvon Martin.
Walt predicts that the words that will be remembered, out of the few sentences uttered by Obama, will be "my son". As in, "Some cracker done shot the President's son!"
You may think, gentle reader, that would be a bit of a stretch, but keep in mind that millions of "average Americans" believe that Obama is a Muslim. [Well??? Isn't he??? Ed.] George Carlin said that when you picture an average American, don't forget that 50% of them are dumber than that guy! Millions of voters will equate the killing of Trayvon Martin with a white racist attack on the President... and vote accordingly.
And here's the beauty part, for the Democrats. It will be impossible for the inevitable Mitt Romney to take (or even suggest) any position other than condemning Zimmerman and all he stands for (including the "right to bear arms") without coming across as a racist gun nut.
Stick a fork in Romney. He's done... thanks to Zimmerman. Lifetime pct .985.
Worth reading: "Why did Trayvon Martin die?" by Margaret Wente, in today's Globe and Mail.
Breaking news! Republicans guaranteed to lose in November
It's clear to me now. Mitt Romney will lead his party to defeat in this year's presidential election. One (1) man has singlehandedly negated any chance they might have had. I will tell you who and why later today. Watch this space!
It must be spring...
because the Leafs are out! I refer, of course, to the sad-sack Toronto Maple Leafs. If, as seems likely, the Florida Panthers make it into the NHL playoffs, and Toronto doesn't -- now a mathematical certainty -- Toronto will establish a new NHL record for the number of seasons finishing out of the playoffs.
As a diehard Montréal Canadiens fan, Walt shouldn't be quite so vociferous in mocking the Buds. In spite of the encouragement of Walt and his missus (pictured), les Glorieux are also out of the playoff picture. In fact, they're in the Eastern Conference basement, although if the Leafs lose two or three more and the Canadiens get a couple of points, that could change.
But for Montréal, not being around for the post-season is an anomaly. Call it an 82-game fluke. With major changes in the offing this summer -- starting with a new GM, let's hope -- Walt confidently predicts that in 2012-13 les Canadiens seront là! Lifetime pct .984.
As a diehard Montréal Canadiens fan, Walt shouldn't be quite so vociferous in mocking the Buds. In spite of the encouragement of Walt and his missus (pictured), les Glorieux are also out of the playoff picture. In fact, they're in the Eastern Conference basement, although if the Leafs lose two or three more and the Canadiens get a couple of points, that could change. But for Montréal, not being around for the post-season is an anomaly. Call it an 82-game fluke. With major changes in the offing this summer -- starting with a new GM, let's hope -- Walt confidently predicts that in 2012-13 les Canadiens seront là! Lifetime pct .984.
Sunday, March 25, 2012
So, Dad, how do you like the new iPad we got you?
We welcome back Agent 46, who passes along an example of an old dog's failure to learn a new trick.
Friday, March 23, 2012
US schools turning kids into Muslim fanatics, says ACT! founder
Brigitte Gabriel is the pseudonym of Nour Saman, a Lebanese-American journalist, author, and activist. She frequently speaks at meetings of American conservative groups such as the Heritage Foundation.
Ms Gabriel says flatly (and loudly) that Islam keeps countries backward and teaches terrorism. And radical Islamists are subverting the US education system by brainwashing students about the true nature and intentions of Islam. That's the message of this video.
Brigitte Gabriel is the founder of American Congress For Truth and ACT! for America. This link will take you to the ACT! for America Education website. If you've got kids in the US educational system [Is dis a system?! Ed.] you need to check this out.
Related story: Colorado student quits high school choir over Islamic song praising Allah
Ms Gabriel says flatly (and loudly) that Islam keeps countries backward and teaches terrorism. And radical Islamists are subverting the US education system by brainwashing students about the true nature and intentions of Islam. That's the message of this video.
Brigitte Gabriel is the founder of American Congress For Truth and ACT! for America. This link will take you to the ACT! for America Education website. If you've got kids in the US educational system [Is dis a system?! Ed.] you need to check this out.
Related story: Colorado student quits high school choir over Islamic song praising Allah
Thursday, March 22, 2012
Jew-killer turns out to be Muslim extremist -- quelle surprise!
So, farewell then Mohamed Merah, cold-blooded murderer of a French rabbi and three small children. Walt hopes the 72 virgins who meet you in paradise turn out to be male 19-year-olds. [Don't go there. Ed.]
Merah died in a hail of bullets in Toulouse, France, last night, after a tense 30-hour standoff with the gendarmerie. He was firing at the cops as he defenestrated himself.
In the first hours after the killing, the usual lefties and mainstream media hacks were claiming that the killer must have been a French neo-Nazi, undoubtedly inspired by the presidential campaign rhetoric of Marine Le Pen, leader of the right-wing Front National. Ms LePen, like her father before her, has not been shy to talk about France's problems with immigrants, race and religion. She had previously likened Muslims praying in the street to the Nazi occupation.
Today Walt hears that chefs in Toulouse and Paris are preparing extra helpings of crow, to be eaten by those moaning about the threat of a right-wing, fascist, neo-Nazi [That's enough adjectives. Ed.] takeover of the French government. For, you see, Mohamed Merah was a French citizen, of Algerian origin, and a Muslim.
Not just any Muslim, though. Merah had been under intelligence surveillance and a Middle East think tank said he appeared to belong to Fursan Al-Izza, a French of Al-Qaeda, ideologically aligned with the movement to Islamise Western states by implementing sharia law.
During the standoff, Merah boasted to police negotiators that he had brought France to its knees, and that his only regret was not having been able to carry out more killings.
President Nicolas Sarkozy, who is fighting hard for re-election, called Merah's killings "terrorist attacks" and announced a crackdown on people following extremist websites. [Like ours? Ed.]
Said M. le Président, "From now on, any person who habitually consults websites that advocate terrorism or that call for hate and violence will be punished. France will not tolerate ideological indoctrination on its soil."
Meanwhile, the lefties have opened their mouths to change feet, and are now accusing Marine LePen of using the crisis for political gain. A spokesthingy for far-left (i.e. crypto-Commie) challenger Jean-Luc Melenchon denounced Mlle Le Pen’s party as "vultures"feeding at the scenes of the crimes.
"Throughout this campaign, yesterday as today, Marine Le Pen has had the same goal – to feed a Crusader spirit inspired by religious war under the theory of a clash of civilisations," alleged Alexis Corbière.
If that is so, Walt wishes Mlle Le Pen all the best in her campaign, and invites M. Corbière to partake of a sumptuous banquet of merde.
À lire aussi: "Quand le suspect s'appelle Mohamed", de La Presse (Montréal)
Merah died in a hail of bullets in Toulouse, France, last night, after a tense 30-hour standoff with the gendarmerie. He was firing at the cops as he defenestrated himself.
In the first hours after the killing, the usual lefties and mainstream media hacks were claiming that the killer must have been a French neo-Nazi, undoubtedly inspired by the presidential campaign rhetoric of Marine Le Pen, leader of the right-wing Front National. Ms LePen, like her father before her, has not been shy to talk about France's problems with immigrants, race and religion. She had previously likened Muslims praying in the street to the Nazi occupation.
Today Walt hears that chefs in Toulouse and Paris are preparing extra helpings of crow, to be eaten by those moaning about the threat of a right-wing, fascist, neo-Nazi [That's enough adjectives. Ed.] takeover of the French government. For, you see, Mohamed Merah was a French citizen, of Algerian origin, and a Muslim.
Not just any Muslim, though. Merah had been under intelligence surveillance and a Middle East think tank said he appeared to belong to Fursan Al-Izza, a French of Al-Qaeda, ideologically aligned with the movement to Islamise Western states by implementing sharia law.
During the standoff, Merah boasted to police negotiators that he had brought France to its knees, and that his only regret was not having been able to carry out more killings.
President Nicolas Sarkozy, who is fighting hard for re-election, called Merah's killings "terrorist attacks" and announced a crackdown on people following extremist websites. [Like ours? Ed.]
Said M. le Président, "From now on, any person who habitually consults websites that advocate terrorism or that call for hate and violence will be punished. France will not tolerate ideological indoctrination on its soil."
Meanwhile, the lefties have opened their mouths to change feet, and are now accusing Marine LePen of using the crisis for political gain. A spokesthingy for far-left (i.e. crypto-Commie) challenger Jean-Luc Melenchon denounced Mlle Le Pen’s party as "vultures"feeding at the scenes of the crimes.
"Throughout this campaign, yesterday as today, Marine Le Pen has had the same goal – to feed a Crusader spirit inspired by religious war under the theory of a clash of civilisations," alleged Alexis Corbière.
If that is so, Walt wishes Mlle Le Pen all the best in her campaign, and invites M. Corbière to partake of a sumptuous banquet of merde.
À lire aussi: "Quand le suspect s'appelle Mohamed", de La Presse (Montréal)
Tuesday, March 20, 2012
Lost in translation
Agent 6 reports from a location unknown about a bit of miscommunication in the Gulf emirate of Qatar. Apparently a new fuel tanker arrived at a site there and needed to have safety instructions lettered onto it in Arabic. So the newly-appointed American manager told the site supervisor, an Indian chappie, to ensure that the tanker was clearly labelled "Diesel Fuel" in Arabic and "No Smoking" in Arabic.
Here, according to Agent 6, is what he got.
Agent 6 swears this is for real! However, Walt's efforts to get confirmation from Al Jazeera were fruitless...
Here, according to Agent 6, is what he got.
Agent 6 swears this is for real! However, Walt's efforts to get confirmation from Al Jazeera were fruitless...
Lawyer for killer soldier says no evidence against his client
The BBC reports today that "Steel-drivin' John Henry" Browne, who represents the American soldier accused of massacring 16 Afghan villagers in their homes last week, has said there is "no forensic evidence" against and "no confession" by Staff Sgt. O.J. Simpson. [Ed., please check name.]
Sgt. Simpson is resting comfortably at Fort Leavenworth, getting grief counselling as well as legal counselling over charges which may be filed this week. Or not. Despite repeated Afghan assertions that more than one American was involved in the killings, the sergeant remains the only suspect.
Sgt. Simpson is resting comfortably at Fort Leavenworth, getting grief counselling as well as legal counselling over charges which may be filed this week. Or not. Despite repeated Afghan assertions that more than one American was involved in the killings, the sergeant remains the only suspect.
Monday, March 19, 2012
Campaign bust raises eyebrows in Alberta
When it comes to politics, there's not a lot to say about the Canadian province of Alberta. That's out there in the west, home to roughnecks, rednecks and yahoos. It's also pretty much a one-party state [province! Ed.] -- that party being the Conservative Party.
Alberta Conservatives are... let's just say Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum would feel right at home there, if only they weren't Catholics. They've been in power forever...or maybe it just seems that way.
But, gentle readers, there is hope. There is an opposition party. That would be the Wildrose Party. And, believe it or not, the Wildrose Party has a female leader -- a hotty (by Alberta standards) named Danielle Smith
And Danielle has a brand new campaign bus, unveiled in Edmonton today. Here's what it looks like.
That should get some attention when it drives past the oil sands. Honk if you like `em boys. And good luck, Danielle!
Alberta Conservatives are... let's just say Newt Gingrich and Rick Santorum would feel right at home there, if only they weren't Catholics. They've been in power forever...or maybe it just seems that way.
But, gentle readers, there is hope. There is an opposition party. That would be the Wildrose Party. And, believe it or not, the Wildrose Party has a female leader -- a hotty (by Alberta standards) named Danielle Smith
And Danielle has a brand new campaign bus, unveiled in Edmonton today. Here's what it looks like.
That should get some attention when it drives past the oil sands. Honk if you like `em boys. And good luck, Danielle!
Sunday, March 18, 2012
Civilians, shmivilians -- in the Middle East, who cares?
When I wrote about the atrocity in Kandahar, my point was that those who support the American invasion of Afghanistan should be ashamed, dismayed, even outraged... but not surprised. Massacres of innocent civilians by US troops have happened before, and will almost certainly happen again.
I gave the example of the My Lai massacre of 1968, an egregious example of the premeditated and unjustified slaughter of civilians which the US military at first denied, then covered up, then tried to excuse. One "man", William Calley, was sentenced to life imprisonment, but served just three and a half years under house arrest.
Yesterday someone reminded me of the Haditha massacre, which was carried out by American troops in the middle of the glorious war against Iraq. On 19 November 2005, 24 unarmed Iraqi men, women and children were killed by a group of US Marines in Haditha, a city in western Iraq. They were all civilians.
There again, the strategy of the US military was deny, deny, deny. An initial Marine Corps communique reported that 15 civilians were during an attack on a convoy, and eight "insurgents" were killed when the Marines returned fire. However, Time magazine didn't buy the official explanation, and hassled the Marines into investigating.
The inquiry found evidence that "supports accusations that U.S. Marines deliberately shot civilians, including unarmed men, women and children". At least three officers were officially reprimanded for failing to properly initially report and investigate the killings. Over a year later, eight Marines were charged in connection with the "incident".
Another nine months went by. Then the authorities dropped charges against Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt, who has been accused of murder, and Capt. Randy Stone, accused of failing to investigate the incident. Why were the charges dropped? Because it was felt that Iraqis would be unlikely to come to the USA to testify!
Let us pause here to consider that Staff Sgt. Bob Bales, the "single individual" named as the perpetrator of this week's murders in Kandahar, has been spirited out of the Middle East to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, where he will undoubtedly receive a fair trial... if any Afghans can make it to the USA to testify.
Getting back to the Haditha massacre... In August 2007, the investigating officer recommended the dropping of charges against Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum. However, in October, his commanding officer decided the charges should not be dropped, but lowered to involuntary manslaughter, reckless endangerment and aggravated assault.
By June of 2008, six defendants had had their cases dropped and a seventh had (to no-one's surprise) been found not guilty. Not so Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich. In October 2007, the investigating officer recommended that Wuterich be tried for negligent homicide -- something less than murder -- in the deaths of two women and five children. Further charges of assault and manslaughter were ultimately dropped, and Wuterich was convicted of a single count of negligent dereliction of duty -- something less than negligent homicide -- on January 24, 2012. That's right... 2012!
Was Wuterich punished for murdering seven people? Oh yes indeed! He received a reduction in rank and cut in pay. No jail time.
Iraqis voiced understandable disbelief and outrage, after the six-year US military prosecution ended with not a single one of the Marines sentenced to jail. The Haditha massacre has been linked to the decision to withdraw US troops from Iraq at the end of 2011. Now Afghanistan's democratically elected (?) president Karzai has called for American soldiers to get out of Afghanistan, or at least out of the rural villages. No wonder.
Footnote: On 14 December 2011, the New York Times published excerpts from classified transcripts of military interviews from the investigation into the Haditha massacre. In the interviews, Marines said civilians were killed "on a regular basis". The deaths of 20 civilians is described not as "remarkable" but "routine. Maj. Gen. Steve Johnson described such things as "a cost of doing business". And then Americans wonder why they are not welcome in Iraq, Afghanistan or anywhere else in the Middle East...except maybe Israel.
I gave the example of the My Lai massacre of 1968, an egregious example of the premeditated and unjustified slaughter of civilians which the US military at first denied, then covered up, then tried to excuse. One "man", William Calley, was sentenced to life imprisonment, but served just three and a half years under house arrest.
Yesterday someone reminded me of the Haditha massacre, which was carried out by American troops in the middle of the glorious war against Iraq. On 19 November 2005, 24 unarmed Iraqi men, women and children were killed by a group of US Marines in Haditha, a city in western Iraq. They were all civilians.
There again, the strategy of the US military was deny, deny, deny. An initial Marine Corps communique reported that 15 civilians were during an attack on a convoy, and eight "insurgents" were killed when the Marines returned fire. However, Time magazine didn't buy the official explanation, and hassled the Marines into investigating.
The inquiry found evidence that "supports accusations that U.S. Marines deliberately shot civilians, including unarmed men, women and children". At least three officers were officially reprimanded for failing to properly initially report and investigate the killings. Over a year later, eight Marines were charged in connection with the "incident".
Another nine months went by. Then the authorities dropped charges against Lance Cpl. Justin Sharratt, who has been accused of murder, and Capt. Randy Stone, accused of failing to investigate the incident. Why were the charges dropped? Because it was felt that Iraqis would be unlikely to come to the USA to testify!
Let us pause here to consider that Staff Sgt. Bob Bales, the "single individual" named as the perpetrator of this week's murders in Kandahar, has been spirited out of the Middle East to Fort Leavenworth, Kansas, where he will undoubtedly receive a fair trial... if any Afghans can make it to the USA to testify.
Getting back to the Haditha massacre... In August 2007, the investigating officer recommended the dropping of charges against Lance Cpl. Stephen Tatum. However, in October, his commanding officer decided the charges should not be dropped, but lowered to involuntary manslaughter, reckless endangerment and aggravated assault.
By June of 2008, six defendants had had their cases dropped and a seventh had (to no-one's surprise) been found not guilty. Not so Staff Sgt. Frank Wuterich. In October 2007, the investigating officer recommended that Wuterich be tried for negligent homicide -- something less than murder -- in the deaths of two women and five children. Further charges of assault and manslaughter were ultimately dropped, and Wuterich was convicted of a single count of negligent dereliction of duty -- something less than negligent homicide -- on January 24, 2012. That's right... 2012!
Was Wuterich punished for murdering seven people? Oh yes indeed! He received a reduction in rank and cut in pay. No jail time.
Iraqis voiced understandable disbelief and outrage, after the six-year US military prosecution ended with not a single one of the Marines sentenced to jail. The Haditha massacre has been linked to the decision to withdraw US troops from Iraq at the end of 2011. Now Afghanistan's democratically elected (?) president Karzai has called for American soldiers to get out of Afghanistan, or at least out of the rural villages. No wonder.
Footnote: On 14 December 2011, the New York Times published excerpts from classified transcripts of military interviews from the investigation into the Haditha massacre. In the interviews, Marines said civilians were killed "on a regular basis". The deaths of 20 civilians is described not as "remarkable" but "routine. Maj. Gen. Steve Johnson described such things as "a cost of doing business". And then Americans wonder why they are not welcome in Iraq, Afghanistan or anywhere else in the Middle East...except maybe Israel.
Saturday, March 17, 2012
What's that Russelling in the bushes?
Looks like Jason Russell's fame as creator of the "Kony 2012" video has gone to his... errr... head. Or perhaps he thought he hadn't yet received enough publicity. In any case, Mr. Russesll was "detained" by San Diego police in San Diego yesterday for allegedly being drunk in public, masturbating in public and, ummm, vandalizing cars.
Notice our careful use of the word "allegedly". Mr. Russell is presumed innocent. Unless, of course, there should be something -- like a video -- that would prove his guilt.
Oh.
Notice our careful use of the word "allegedly". Mr. Russell is presumed innocent. Unless, of course, there should be something -- like a video -- that would prove his guilt.
Oh.
US Army Staff Sergeant Bales out
Now that he's safely back in the good ole USA, where no harm -- like a lynch mob -- can befall him, the Army has finally identified the soldier who allegedly massacred 16 Afghan villagers earlier this week.He is Staff Sergeant Robert Bales, formerly of Washington state and now resident in the stockade at a base in Kansas. This photo (by Ryan Hallock, US Army) of a soldier identified as Staff Sergeant Robert Bales, left, appeared in an article in High Desert Warrior, a US military website, last year. Good luck looking for it though. According to Reuters, the article and photo have since been removed from the site.
It is said that Bales just "snapped", due to the stress of war. How one man could have killed 16 Afghans -- 9 of them women and children -- in houses up to 2 miles apart, and had time to burn at least some of the bodies before returning to his base, has not yet been explained. The villagers say there was more than one attacker. Obviously that's impossible. Why would we doubt military spokesmen who tell us there was just the one (temporarily?) deranged individual.
Stickers and stones may hurt someone's feelings
Caution! Some readers may find this sticker offensive!
If you want one of these stickers on your bumper, Walt advises you to run -- don't walk! -- down to the Android's Dungeon or other bricks-and-mortar retailer, because websites offering you the freedom to express your opinion are being shut down as fast as they open up.
The bumper sticker, which the usual gliberal suspects are already calling "racist", apparently originated with an outfit called Stumpy's Stickers. Their website has already attracted the wrath of the Thought Police; at the moment Walt is only seeing a 404 error.
Walt suggests you try this one but be prepared to wait awhile, as you may get "there seems to be a problem connecting to our database" at first. Perhaps they are swamped with orders!
Go ahead! Express yourself! And don't forget to tell `em Walt sent ya!
PS: If you think this bumper sticker is offensive, check Google Images for "Don't re-nig in 2012". This one is mild compared to some of the others! Makes Walt wish he had a bigger bumper.
If you want one of these stickers on your bumper, Walt advises you to run -- don't walk! -- down to the Android's Dungeon or other bricks-and-mortar retailer, because websites offering you the freedom to express your opinion are being shut down as fast as they open up.
The bumper sticker, which the usual gliberal suspects are already calling "racist", apparently originated with an outfit called Stumpy's Stickers. Their website has already attracted the wrath of the Thought Police; at the moment Walt is only seeing a 404 error.
Walt suggests you try this one but be prepared to wait awhile, as you may get "there seems to be a problem connecting to our database" at first. Perhaps they are swamped with orders!
Go ahead! Express yourself! And don't forget to tell `em Walt sent ya!
PS: If you think this bumper sticker is offensive, check Google Images for "Don't re-nig in 2012". This one is mild compared to some of the others! Makes Walt wish he had a bigger bumper.
Thursday, March 15, 2012
Screeners of "Kony 2012" stoned in Uganda
The African Youth Initiative Network (AYINET), a Ugandan activist group, thought it would be a good idea to organize a community tour for the now-infamous "KONY 2012" video, to let the people of northern Uganda see what all the fuss is about.
Joseph Kony's "Lord's Resistance Army" has been more active in southern Uganda, and residents of other parts of the country don't seem to know much about it. Thus the idea was to educate them, and maybe make a few shillings for the African Youth Initiative Network along the way. Good idea, right? Errr, wrong!
The first screening, held this week in the northern town of Lira, provoked such a furious reaction that the tour has been cancelled. Imagine the scene -- the video projected onto a white sheet, held up by crude metal rods, in a dusty town park, with 5,000 Ugandans watching with curiosity, then bafflement, then anger. People began shouting abuse, then throwing stones, forcing the crowd to scatter and the organizers to flee in terror.
Turns out the local people were more than a little PO'd by Jason Russell's call to "make Kony famous" by putting his image on T-shirts and posters. Why should we give celebrity status to a killer, many Ugandans asked. Others said the video brought back painful memories of a war that had ended in Uganda in 2006 when the LRA was chased out of the country.
A Ugandan blogger, Rosebell Kagumire, was amongst those who survived the screening. "There was chaos, we had to run away," she tweeted. Many people were disappointed and angry, she said. "They have had enough of money makers!"
Geoffrey York, the Globe and Mail's man in Africa [following Ugandan events from nearby South Africa? Ed.] writes that after the screening, callers to local radio stations demanded that no T-shirts of Joseph Kony should be allowed into the region.
Victor Ochen, a director of AYINET, says he is worried that the video will waste money that could be better spent on helping the victims of the LRA -- like his brother and his cousin, for instance. According to York, Ochen wrote on his website "Raising potentially false expectations such as arresting Kony in 2012 will not rebuild the lives of the people in northern Uganda. Restoration of communities devastated by Kony is a greater priority than catching or killing him."
Walt has been unable to find this disclaimer on the AYINET website or anywhere else, but agrees with the general sentiment. Just one thing though. If ravaged communities are indeed to be restored, the work should be done and the money raised by the Ugandans themselves. The Lord's Resistance Army was and is a Ugandan thing, not something for which Westerners should feel any guilt or responsibility.
Joseph Kony's "Lord's Resistance Army" has been more active in southern Uganda, and residents of other parts of the country don't seem to know much about it. Thus the idea was to educate them, and maybe make a few shillings for the African Youth Initiative Network along the way. Good idea, right? Errr, wrong!
The first screening, held this week in the northern town of Lira, provoked such a furious reaction that the tour has been cancelled. Imagine the scene -- the video projected onto a white sheet, held up by crude metal rods, in a dusty town park, with 5,000 Ugandans watching with curiosity, then bafflement, then anger. People began shouting abuse, then throwing stones, forcing the crowd to scatter and the organizers to flee in terror.
Turns out the local people were more than a little PO'd by Jason Russell's call to "make Kony famous" by putting his image on T-shirts and posters. Why should we give celebrity status to a killer, many Ugandans asked. Others said the video brought back painful memories of a war that had ended in Uganda in 2006 when the LRA was chased out of the country.
A Ugandan blogger, Rosebell Kagumire, was amongst those who survived the screening. "There was chaos, we had to run away," she tweeted. Many people were disappointed and angry, she said. "They have had enough of money makers!"
Geoffrey York, the Globe and Mail's man in Africa [following Ugandan events from nearby South Africa? Ed.] writes that after the screening, callers to local radio stations demanded that no T-shirts of Joseph Kony should be allowed into the region.
Victor Ochen, a director of AYINET, says he is worried that the video will waste money that could be better spent on helping the victims of the LRA -- like his brother and his cousin, for instance. According to York, Ochen wrote on his website "Raising potentially false expectations such as arresting Kony in 2012 will not rebuild the lives of the people in northern Uganda. Restoration of communities devastated by Kony is a greater priority than catching or killing him."
Walt has been unable to find this disclaimer on the AYINET website or anywhere else, but agrees with the general sentiment. Just one thing though. If ravaged communities are indeed to be restored, the work should be done and the money raised by the Ugandans themselves. The Lord's Resistance Army was and is a Ugandan thing, not something for which Westerners should feel any guilt or responsibility.
Canadian think tank says immigrants "huge drain" on economy
Canada's QMI Agency reports a study by that country's conservative Fraser Institute, which says that recent immigrants are a huge drain on the country's economy. Immigrants who arrived in Canada between 1987 and 2004 received about $6,000 more in government services per per person in 2005 than they paid in taxes. The cost to Canadian taxpayers? Between $16 and $23 billion a year!
Before 1987, in the days when immigrants were... errr... lighter, immigrants made more money, so paid more in taxes than those who have arrived in this quarter-century. So say the report's authors, Herbert Grubel and Patrick Grady, explaining their analysis of data from Statistics Canada.
"As a result of Canada's welfare-state policies, social programs and progressive income tax system, these [newer] immigrants impose a huge fiscal burden on Canadian taxpayers," said Grubel.
But doesn't Canada need immigrants to take up all those jobs that native-born Canadians can't or won't do? Not according to Messrs Grubel and Grady. And, they add, children of new Canadians, even if they are working, are not likely to be able to earn enough to make up for the taxpayers' money their parents received.
The researchers conclude that in order to alleviate the fiscal strain on taxpayers, Canada’s immigration selection process should be reformed to emphasize a reliance on market forces to replace the existing, failed system of using points to select immigrants. In other words, let the market decide which types of workers and professionals are needed.
Before 1987, in the days when immigrants were... errr... lighter, immigrants made more money, so paid more in taxes than those who have arrived in this quarter-century. So say the report's authors, Herbert Grubel and Patrick Grady, explaining their analysis of data from Statistics Canada.
"As a result of Canada's welfare-state policies, social programs and progressive income tax system, these [newer] immigrants impose a huge fiscal burden on Canadian taxpayers," said Grubel.
But doesn't Canada need immigrants to take up all those jobs that native-born Canadians can't or won't do? Not according to Messrs Grubel and Grady. And, they add, children of new Canadians, even if they are working, are not likely to be able to earn enough to make up for the taxpayers' money their parents received.
The researchers conclude that in order to alleviate the fiscal strain on taxpayers, Canada’s immigration selection process should be reformed to emphasize a reliance on market forces to replace the existing, failed system of using points to select immigrants. In other words, let the market decide which types of workers and professionals are needed.
Wednesday, March 14, 2012
The Irishman who ordered three beers
Agent 36, who has been mentioned in Walt's blog under his own name, gets his Agent Number for this lovely (and timely) Irish tale...
An Irishman moves into a tiny hamlet in County Kerry, walks into the best pub and promptly orders three beers. The bartender raises his eyebrows, but serves the man three beers, which he drinks quietly at a table, alone. An hour later, the man has finished the three beers and orders three more. This happens yet again. The next evening the man again orders and drinks three beers at a time, several times.
Soon the entire town is whispering about The Man Who Orders Three Beers. Finally, a week later, the bartender broaches the subject on behalf of the town. "I don't mean to pry, but folks around here are wondering why you always order three beers?"
"Tis odd, isn't it?" the man replies. "You see, I have two brothers, and one went to America, and the other to Australia. We promised each other that we would always order an extra two beers whenever we drank... as a way of keeping up the Irish family bond."
The bartender and the whole town were pleased with this answer, and soon "The Man Who Orders Three Beers" became a local celebrity and a source of pride to the hamlet, even to the extent that out-of-towners would come to watch him drink.
Then, one day, the man comes in and orders only two beers. The bartender pours them with a heavy heart. This continues for the rest of the evening. He orders only two beers. The word flies around town. Prayers are offered for the soul of one of the brothers.
The next day, the bartender says to the man, "Folks around here, me first of all, want to offer sincere condolences to you on the death of one of your brothers. You know... the two beers and all."
The man ponders this for a moment, then replies, "You'll be happy to hear that both of me two brothers are alive and well. It's just that I, myself, have decided to give up drinking for Lent."
An Irishman moves into a tiny hamlet in County Kerry, walks into the best pub and promptly orders three beers. The bartender raises his eyebrows, but serves the man three beers, which he drinks quietly at a table, alone. An hour later, the man has finished the three beers and orders three more. This happens yet again. The next evening the man again orders and drinks three beers at a time, several times.
Soon the entire town is whispering about The Man Who Orders Three Beers. Finally, a week later, the bartender broaches the subject on behalf of the town. "I don't mean to pry, but folks around here are wondering why you always order three beers?"
"Tis odd, isn't it?" the man replies. "You see, I have two brothers, and one went to America, and the other to Australia. We promised each other that we would always order an extra two beers whenever we drank... as a way of keeping up the Irish family bond."
The bartender and the whole town were pleased with this answer, and soon "The Man Who Orders Three Beers" became a local celebrity and a source of pride to the hamlet, even to the extent that out-of-towners would come to watch him drink.
Then, one day, the man comes in and orders only two beers. The bartender pours them with a heavy heart. This continues for the rest of the evening. He orders only two beers. The word flies around town. Prayers are offered for the soul of one of the brothers.
The next day, the bartender says to the man, "Folks around here, me first of all, want to offer sincere condolences to you on the death of one of your brothers. You know... the two beers and all."
The man ponders this for a moment, then replies, "You'll be happy to hear that both of me two brothers are alive and well. It's just that I, myself, have decided to give up drinking for Lent."
Tuesday, March 13, 2012
Mitt meets a Republican
I trust The Economist will not mind my showing you the editorial cartoon from the current issue.
I wish I knew the name of the artist. He/she is technically very accomplished. And this comment strikes me as right on the romney. ["Money", surely! Ed.]
I wish I knew the name of the artist. He/she is technically very accomplished. And this comment strikes me as right on the romney. ["Money", surely! Ed.]
Monday, March 12, 2012
Which straw will be the last?
After more than 10 years of fighting, after the killing of Osama bin Laden, after the spending of billions of dollars, after the killing of thousands of Western invaders and thousands more Afghans, the US military is still in Afghanistan. So are troops from a handful of other countries still willing to hold the bully's coat.
What would it take to make the Americans leave Afghanistan? What would it take to convince the Obama government that the US is not wanted there? What would it take to show the Pentagon that they are fighting a war that is pointless, a war they cannot win?
Would Afghan rage over the burning of Qu'rans do it? How about the threat of reprisals for the massacre of women and children? Apparently those straws are not enough to break the back of the American camel.
Today, George Little, chief spokesthingy for the Pentagon -- fons et origio mali -- said the basic war strategy in Afghanistan will not change despite the mass killing of Afghan civilians, which he called "a deplorable but isolated incident". In other words, it wasn't part of the plan, but hey, shit happens.
Walt finds it significant that the Pentagon says the alleged killings were allegedly perpetrated by a US soldier whom the Pentagon won't name, even though he's in American custody.
The Unknown Soldier has been idenified, however, as a staff sergeant who has been in the military for 11 years. He is married with two children. He served three tours in Iraq and began his first deployment to Afghanistan in December. He is from Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA, and was assigned to support a special operations unit of either Green Berets or Navy SEALs engaged in a "village stability operation" -- essentially a sanctioned, armed version of Neighbourhood Watch. Some neighbourhood. Some watch!
What the Pentagon is doing, you see, is stonewalling. Some Afghan officials and local villagers expressed doubt that a single soldier could have carried out all the killings and burned the bodies afterward. Some villagers also told officials there were multiple soldiers and heard shooting from different directions. But Lt. Col. Jimmie Cummings, another spokesman for the Coalition, insisted there was only one gunman.
So did Little Georgie Little, who told reporters there is "every indication" that the attack, was perpetrated by a single individual "acting on his own". [Is Lee Harvey Oswald really dead? Ed.] And Little refused to identify the soldier or provide other information about his unit, even though the information in my sixth paragraph has been known and published for more than 24 hours.
So it's deny, deny, deny...all the way. How much longer can this go on before the helicopter lands on the roof of the US embasssy to carry off the last Defenders of Democracy and Freedom?
Footnote: As I write this, the lamestream media are starting to talk of Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich having a change of heart as to American policy in Afghanistan. Maybe the mission needs to be re-evaluated, they're saying. Maybe it's time to withdraw, they're saying. Errr, didn't someone say that already? Oh yeah...it was Ron Paul who said it, ages ago, but he's not a serious candidate. Or so says the lamestream media.
What would it take to make the Americans leave Afghanistan? What would it take to convince the Obama government that the US is not wanted there? What would it take to show the Pentagon that they are fighting a war that is pointless, a war they cannot win?
Would Afghan rage over the burning of Qu'rans do it? How about the threat of reprisals for the massacre of women and children? Apparently those straws are not enough to break the back of the American camel.
Today, George Little, chief spokesthingy for the Pentagon -- fons et origio mali -- said the basic war strategy in Afghanistan will not change despite the mass killing of Afghan civilians, which he called "a deplorable but isolated incident". In other words, it wasn't part of the plan, but hey, shit happens.
Walt finds it significant that the Pentagon says the alleged killings were allegedly perpetrated by a US soldier whom the Pentagon won't name, even though he's in American custody.
The Unknown Soldier has been idenified, however, as a staff sergeant who has been in the military for 11 years. He is married with two children. He served three tours in Iraq and began his first deployment to Afghanistan in December. He is from Joint Base Lewis-McChord, WA, and was assigned to support a special operations unit of either Green Berets or Navy SEALs engaged in a "village stability operation" -- essentially a sanctioned, armed version of Neighbourhood Watch. Some neighbourhood. Some watch!
What the Pentagon is doing, you see, is stonewalling. Some Afghan officials and local villagers expressed doubt that a single soldier could have carried out all the killings and burned the bodies afterward. Some villagers also told officials there were multiple soldiers and heard shooting from different directions. But Lt. Col. Jimmie Cummings, another spokesman for the Coalition, insisted there was only one gunman.
So did Little Georgie Little, who told reporters there is "every indication" that the attack, was perpetrated by a single individual "acting on his own". [Is Lee Harvey Oswald really dead? Ed.] And Little refused to identify the soldier or provide other information about his unit, even though the information in my sixth paragraph has been known and published for more than 24 hours.
So it's deny, deny, deny...all the way. How much longer can this go on before the helicopter lands on the roof of the US embasssy to carry off the last Defenders of Democracy and Freedom?
Footnote: As I write this, the lamestream media are starting to talk of Rick Santorum and Newt Gingrich having a change of heart as to American policy in Afghanistan. Maybe the mission needs to be re-evaluated, they're saying. Maybe it's time to withdraw, they're saying. Errr, didn't someone say that already? Oh yeah...it was Ron Paul who said it, ages ago, but he's not a serious candidate. Or so says the lamestream media.
"You have two cows..." (for Canucks)
Further to yesterday's update of the old "You have two cows" study of economic systems, Agent 3 has filled in the blank for Canada.
You have two cows. Vous avez deux vaches. You pay HST on the cows, your milking machine, their feed and the water they drink. You sell government-inspected milk in government-inspected containers by the government-mandated litre, and you charge HST on the milk.
You spend hours every week completing government information forms, tax returns and applications for assistance. When your tax assessment comes, you are obliged to sell one of the cows to pay your accountant and what's owing on the taxes.
You go broke and apply for welfare. You are refused because you still have one cow. You starve to death. So does the cow.
You have two cows. Vous avez deux vaches. You pay HST on the cows, your milking machine, their feed and the water they drink. You sell government-inspected milk in government-inspected containers by the government-mandated litre, and you charge HST on the milk.
You spend hours every week completing government information forms, tax returns and applications for assistance. When your tax assessment comes, you are obliged to sell one of the cows to pay your accountant and what's owing on the taxes.
You go broke and apply for welfare. You are refused because you still have one cow. You starve to death. So does the cow.
Sunday, March 11, 2012
"You have two cows..." (latest version)
Ron McPherson, the father of Facilitism, has passed along an updated version of "You have two cows", a tongue-in-cheek explanation of various economic "systems" which has been floating around the internet for years. Here's the latest take on how modern economics works (?) in different parts of the world.
SOCIALISM: You have 2 cows. You give one to your neighbour.
COMMUNISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and gives you some milk.
FASCISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and sells you some milk.
NAZISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and shoots you.
BUREAUCRACY: You have 2 cows. The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then throws the milk away.
TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull. Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows. You sell them and retire on the income.
ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND (VENTURE) CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows. The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company.
The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. You sell one cow to buy a new president of the USA, leaving you with nine cows. No balance sheet provided with the release. The public then buys your bull.
AN AMERICAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows. Later, you hire a consultant to analyse why the cow has dropped dead.
A GREEK CORPORATION: You have two cows. You borrow lots of euros to build barns, milking sheds, hay stores, feed sheds, dairies, cold stores, abattoir, cheese unit and packing sheds. You still only have two cows.
A FRENCH CORPORATION: You have two cows. You go on strike, organise a riot, and block the roads, because you want three cows.
AN ITALIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows, but you don't know where they are.You decide to have lunch.
A SWISS CORPORATION: You have 5000 cows. None of them belong to you.You charge the owners for storing them.
A CHINESE CORPORATION: You have two cows. You have 300 people milking them. You claim that you have full employment, and high bovine productivity. You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.
AN INDIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows.You worship them.
A BRITISH CORPORATION: You have two cows. Both are mad.
AN IRAQI CORPORATION: Everyone thinks you have lots of cows.You tell them that you have none. No-one believes you, so they bomb the crap out of you and invade your country. You still have no cows, but at least you are now a Democracy.
AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. Business seems pretty good. You close the office and go for a few beers to celebrate.
FACILITISM: You have two cows. You, the cows, and everyone else is contented.
Well, he would say that, wouldn't he? Seriously, facilitism is a fascinating -- if utopian -- concept. If you'd like to learn more about how it would work (!), buy Ron's book, Freedom's Dawning. Click here and tell him Walt sent you.
SOCIALISM: You have 2 cows. You give one to your neighbour.
COMMUNISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and gives you some milk.
FASCISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and sells you some milk.
NAZISM: You have 2 cows. The State takes both and shoots you.
BUREAUCRACY: You have 2 cows. The State takes both, shoots one, milks the other, and then throws the milk away.
TRADITIONAL CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell one and buy a bull. Your herd multiplies, and the economy grows. You sell them and retire on the income.
ROYAL BANK OF SCOTLAND (VENTURE) CAPITALISM: You have two cows. You sell three of them to your publicly listed company, using letters of credit opened by your brother-in-law at the bank, then execute a debt/equity swap with an associated general offer so that you get all four cows back, with a tax exemption for five cows. The milk rights of the six cows are transferred via an intermediary to a Cayman Island company secretly owned by the majority shareholder who sells the rights to all seven cows back to your listed company.
The annual report says the company owns eight cows, with an option on one more. You sell one cow to buy a new president of the USA, leaving you with nine cows. No balance sheet provided with the release. The public then buys your bull.
AN AMERICAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. You sell one, and force the other to produce the milk of four cows. Later, you hire a consultant to analyse why the cow has dropped dead.
A GREEK CORPORATION: You have two cows. You borrow lots of euros to build barns, milking sheds, hay stores, feed sheds, dairies, cold stores, abattoir, cheese unit and packing sheds. You still only have two cows.
A FRENCH CORPORATION: You have two cows. You go on strike, organise a riot, and block the roads, because you want three cows.
AN ITALIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows, but you don't know where they are.You decide to have lunch.
A SWISS CORPORATION: You have 5000 cows. None of them belong to you.You charge the owners for storing them.
A CHINESE CORPORATION: You have two cows. You have 300 people milking them. You claim that you have full employment, and high bovine productivity. You arrest the newsman who reported the real situation.
AN INDIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows.You worship them.
A BRITISH CORPORATION: You have two cows. Both are mad.
AN IRAQI CORPORATION: Everyone thinks you have lots of cows.You tell them that you have none. No-one believes you, so they bomb the crap out of you and invade your country. You still have no cows, but at least you are now a Democracy.
AN AUSTRALIAN CORPORATION: You have two cows. Business seems pretty good. You close the office and go for a few beers to celebrate.
FACILITISM: You have two cows. You, the cows, and everyone else is contented.
Well, he would say that, wouldn't he? Seriously, facilitism is a fascinating -- if utopian -- concept. If you'd like to learn more about how it would work (!), buy Ron's book, Freedom's Dawning. Click here and tell him Walt sent you.
Mad as a March, errr, soldier?
On 16 March 1968, American troops killed about 425 (give or take) unarmed Vietnamese civilians in what became known as the Son My (or My Lai) Massacre. Most of the victims were women, children (including babies), and elderly people. Some of the bodies were later found to be mutilated.
Second Lieutenant William Calley, a platoon leader in "Charlie" Company of 1st Battalion, 20th Infantry, singlehandedly killed 22 villagers, for which cowardly act he was punished according to American justice, and served three and a half years under house arrest.
Some apologists for the military thought Calley must have been crazy. The stress of war and all that. Poor boy. Or maybe he just hated gooks. Anyway, we were told, this was a one-off incident, perpetrated by a deranged individual -- wonder who killed the other 400? -- and would never happen again.
Now Associated Press reports that a US "service member" -- Lt. William Calley Jr. [Ed., please check name] -- walked out of a base in southern Afghanistan before dawn today and started shooting Afghan civilians. Villagers showed an Associated Press photographer 15 bodies, including women and children, who they say were killed by the American.
NATO officials have issued the customary profuse apology, in a mimeographed letter "to whom it may concern". Reprisals can certainly be expected. Stay tuned.
Second Lieutenant William Calley, a platoon leader in "Charlie" Company of 1st Battalion, 20th Infantry, singlehandedly killed 22 villagers, for which cowardly act he was punished according to American justice, and served three and a half years under house arrest.
Some apologists for the military thought Calley must have been crazy. The stress of war and all that. Poor boy. Or maybe he just hated gooks. Anyway, we were told, this was a one-off incident, perpetrated by a deranged individual -- wonder who killed the other 400? -- and would never happen again.
Now Associated Press reports that a US "service member" -- Lt. William Calley Jr. [Ed., please check name] -- walked out of a base in southern Afghanistan before dawn today and started shooting Afghan civilians. Villagers showed an Associated Press photographer 15 bodies, including women and children, who they say were killed by the American.
NATO officials have issued the customary profuse apology, in a mimeographed letter "to whom it may concern". Reprisals can certainly be expected. Stay tuned.
Saturday, March 10, 2012
Blame Canuck for KONY 2012 backlash
Who's Grant Oyston? He's a 19-year-old student at Acadia university, in Canada's "down East" provinces. And he's the driving force at Visible Children, a website set up to set the fats straight on the Invisible Children campaign to expose Joseph Kony and his murderous Lord's Resistance Army. The KONY 2012 video has had millions of views and garnered support from celebrities from Janet Jackson to Zooey Deschanel. Hey, if Rihanna is for something, how can you be against it?
But Geoffrey York, the Globe and Mail 's man in Africa, reports that the video has attracted a lot of blowback from people who challenge the aims and approach of the Invisible Children campaign. As Walt told you earlier this week, Mr. Oyston has raised some serious questions about Invisible Children's financing structure, its call for direct military intervention against Kony's ragtag "army" of child slaves, and Invisible Children's connections with the Uganda and Sudanese armies.
"Military intervention may or may not be the right idea, but people supporting KONY 2012 probably don't realise they're supporting the Ugandan military who are themselves raping and looting away," Oyston wrote. Check out "Why I'm Opposed to the Campaign", in Sabotage Times. [Gotta love that name. Ed.]
In Oyston's view, learning more about Kony and lobbying western governments to do more to bring Kony before the International Criminal Court is good. But still, he advises against supporting the campaign or donating to Invisible Children. Click here to read "What to do", posted on Visible Children yesterday. Hint: Don't give them any money. Oyston recommends another charity instead.
But Geoffrey York, the Globe and Mail 's man in Africa, reports that the video has attracted a lot of blowback from people who challenge the aims and approach of the Invisible Children campaign. As Walt told you earlier this week, Mr. Oyston has raised some serious questions about Invisible Children's financing structure, its call for direct military intervention against Kony's ragtag "army" of child slaves, and Invisible Children's connections with the Uganda and Sudanese armies.
"Military intervention may or may not be the right idea, but people supporting KONY 2012 probably don't realise they're supporting the Ugandan military who are themselves raping and looting away," Oyston wrote. Check out "Why I'm Opposed to the Campaign", in Sabotage Times. [Gotta love that name. Ed.]
In Oyston's view, learning more about Kony and lobbying western governments to do more to bring Kony before the International Criminal Court is good. But still, he advises against supporting the campaign or donating to Invisible Children. Click here to read "What to do", posted on Visible Children yesterday. Hint: Don't give them any money. Oyston recommends another charity instead.
Friday, March 9, 2012
"Go back to the hellhole you came from", sez Canadian Muslim prof
Walt is obliged to correct the belief of some of his Agents and readers that all the Muslims who've immigrated to Canada in the last decade are living on welfare in Toronto. One notable exception to the stereotype is Mahfooz A. Kanwar, emeritus professor of sociology at Mount Royal College in Calgary.
Dr. Kanwar came to Canada in 1966 (via the UK and then the USA), and seems to have embraced the values of his adopted country, even if that means forgetting about imposing his Muslim culture on that of the majority in the name of the official multiculturalism so beloved of the Canadian government.
Walt's attention has only recently been drawn (by Agent 6) to some quite politically incorrect statements made by Prof. Kanwar in response to demands by some Muslim immigrants to the Winnipeg area. Just over a year ago, about a dozen Muslim families who recently immigrated to Canada demanded that the Louis Riel School Division excuse their children from music and coed physical education programmes for religious reasons. Like the Taliban, the families believe music is un-Islamic, and that phys ed classes should be segregated by gender even in grade school.
The school board reacted in the usual PC Canadian way, bending itself double to accommodate these demands, just like the Toronto District School Board. (See "Update on Islamization of Toronto schools", posted here in July.) For instance, although music and phys ed are compulsory parts of the Manitoba curriculum, the educators said they might have the Muslim kids do a writing project on music to satisfy the legal requirement. In short, the school district tried to find a way to adapt the curriculum to fit the wishes of the minority, rather than requiring the minority to fit into the school and Canadian culture. Another case of the tail wagging the PC dog.
Dr. Kanwar, however, begs to differ. Although a member of the Muslim Canadian Congress, he said he would "tell them, this is Canada, and in Canada, we teach music and physical education in our schools. If you don't like it, leave. If you want to live under sharia law, go back to the hellhole country you came from or go to another hellhole country that lives under sharia law."
He added that he is tired of hearing about such out-of-tune demands from newcomers to Canada. [Obviously the good doctor is an accomplished punster. Ed.] "Immigrants to Canada should adjust to Canada , not the other way around," is how he put it.
Dr. Kanwar says he used to buy into the official multiculturalism which became fashionable during the reign of Trudeau, the Sun King. He makes it clear, that like most Canadians, he is pleased that Canada has citizens from every country and corner in the world, but he rejects "official multiculturalism" -- the state policy "that entrenches the lie" that all cultures and beliefs are of equal value and of equal validity in Canada. [Walt's emphasis.]
"The fact is, Canada has an enviable culture based on Judeo-Christian values -- not Muslim values -- with British and French rule of law and traditions and that's why it's better than all of the other places in the world. We are heading down a dangerous path if we allow the idea that sharia law has a place in Canada. It does not. It is completely incompatible with the idea and reality of Canada," says the professor.
Back in the Trudeau era, Dr. Kanwar founded the Pakistan-Canada Association, and was a big fan of state-sponsored multicult. But his views changed when he started listening to the people who joined his group. They badmouthed Canada, weren't interested in knowing Canadians or even in learning one of the country's official languages. They created cultural ghettos which were duly funded by the Canadian government.
"One day it dawned on me that the reason all of us wanted to move here was going to disappear if we didn't start defending Canada and its fundamental values." That's when he started speaking out against the dangers of official multiculturalism, and he's been doing so ever since. Click here to read "Tolerance misplaced" written by Dr. Kanwar in 2009.
See also "Multiculturalism fails in Canada too, says Muslim leader", which relates to a speech delivered to the 47th Munich Security Conference in February 2011 by British Prime Minister David Cameron. "Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism," the British leader said, "we have failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong. We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run counter to our values. So when a white person holds objectionable views -- racism, for example -- we rightly condemn them. But when equally unacceptable views or practices have come from someone who isn’t white, we’ve been too cautious, frankly even fearful, to stand up to them."
Except in Canada and the USA, it has suddenly become OK for political leaders to say things like that. Back in October 2010, German Chancellor Angela Merkel was the first of Europe’s democratic leaders to have the stones [Errr... Ed.] to say that official multiculturalism had "failed totally."
In February 2011, while the Winnipeg educators were busy pandering, French President Nicolas Sarkozy declared that the government policy that encourages immigrant groups to foster distinct societies within France "is a failure.... If you come to France, you accept to melt into a single community, which is the national community, and if you do not want to accept that, you cannot be welcome in France."
M le Président added, "We have been too concerned about the identity of the person who was arriving and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him." And M Sarkozy hasn't changed his tune in the intervening year. Just this week, Walt noticed, he said, while campaigning for re-election, that France has too many foreigners which she can't accommodate. Pretty strong stuff for the son of a Hungarian Jew.
As for Dr. Kanwar, he says for years, some "non-whites like me" have felt the failings of official multiculturalism must be exposed. He must be encouraged, nowadays, to see that leaders of the majority culture are starting to get it, at long last. Well... in Europe, anyway.
Dr. Kanwar came to Canada in 1966 (via the UK and then the USA), and seems to have embraced the values of his adopted country, even if that means forgetting about imposing his Muslim culture on that of the majority in the name of the official multiculturalism so beloved of the Canadian government.
Walt's attention has only recently been drawn (by Agent 6) to some quite politically incorrect statements made by Prof. Kanwar in response to demands by some Muslim immigrants to the Winnipeg area. Just over a year ago, about a dozen Muslim families who recently immigrated to Canada demanded that the Louis Riel School Division excuse their children from music and coed physical education programmes for religious reasons. Like the Taliban, the families believe music is un-Islamic, and that phys ed classes should be segregated by gender even in grade school.
The school board reacted in the usual PC Canadian way, bending itself double to accommodate these demands, just like the Toronto District School Board. (See "Update on Islamization of Toronto schools", posted here in July.) For instance, although music and phys ed are compulsory parts of the Manitoba curriculum, the educators said they might have the Muslim kids do a writing project on music to satisfy the legal requirement. In short, the school district tried to find a way to adapt the curriculum to fit the wishes of the minority, rather than requiring the minority to fit into the school and Canadian culture. Another case of the tail wagging the PC dog.
Dr. Kanwar, however, begs to differ. Although a member of the Muslim Canadian Congress, he said he would "tell them, this is Canada, and in Canada, we teach music and physical education in our schools. If you don't like it, leave. If you want to live under sharia law, go back to the hellhole country you came from or go to another hellhole country that lives under sharia law."
He added that he is tired of hearing about such out-of-tune demands from newcomers to Canada. [Obviously the good doctor is an accomplished punster. Ed.] "Immigrants to Canada should adjust to Canada , not the other way around," is how he put it.
Dr. Kanwar says he used to buy into the official multiculturalism which became fashionable during the reign of Trudeau, the Sun King. He makes it clear, that like most Canadians, he is pleased that Canada has citizens from every country and corner in the world, but he rejects "official multiculturalism" -- the state policy "that entrenches the lie" that all cultures and beliefs are of equal value and of equal validity in Canada. [Walt's emphasis.]
"The fact is, Canada has an enviable culture based on Judeo-Christian values -- not Muslim values -- with British and French rule of law and traditions and that's why it's better than all of the other places in the world. We are heading down a dangerous path if we allow the idea that sharia law has a place in Canada. It does not. It is completely incompatible with the idea and reality of Canada," says the professor.
Back in the Trudeau era, Dr. Kanwar founded the Pakistan-Canada Association, and was a big fan of state-sponsored multicult. But his views changed when he started listening to the people who joined his group. They badmouthed Canada, weren't interested in knowing Canadians or even in learning one of the country's official languages. They created cultural ghettos which were duly funded by the Canadian government.
"One day it dawned on me that the reason all of us wanted to move here was going to disappear if we didn't start defending Canada and its fundamental values." That's when he started speaking out against the dangers of official multiculturalism, and he's been doing so ever since. Click here to read "Tolerance misplaced" written by Dr. Kanwar in 2009.
See also "Multiculturalism fails in Canada too, says Muslim leader", which relates to a speech delivered to the 47th Munich Security Conference in February 2011 by British Prime Minister David Cameron. "Under the doctrine of state multiculturalism," the British leader said, "we have failed to provide a vision of society to which they feel they want to belong. We have even tolerated these segregated communities behaving in ways that run counter to our values. So when a white person holds objectionable views -- racism, for example -- we rightly condemn them. But when equally unacceptable views or practices have come from someone who isn’t white, we’ve been too cautious, frankly even fearful, to stand up to them."
Except in Canada and the USA, it has suddenly become OK for political leaders to say things like that. Back in October 2010, German Chancellor Angela Merkel was the first of Europe’s democratic leaders to have the stones [Errr... Ed.] to say that official multiculturalism had "failed totally."
In February 2011, while the Winnipeg educators were busy pandering, French President Nicolas Sarkozy declared that the government policy that encourages immigrant groups to foster distinct societies within France "is a failure.... If you come to France, you accept to melt into a single community, which is the national community, and if you do not want to accept that, you cannot be welcome in France."
M le Président added, "We have been too concerned about the identity of the person who was arriving and not enough about the identity of the country that was receiving him." And M Sarkozy hasn't changed his tune in the intervening year. Just this week, Walt noticed, he said, while campaigning for re-election, that France has too many foreigners which she can't accommodate. Pretty strong stuff for the son of a Hungarian Jew.
As for Dr. Kanwar, he says for years, some "non-whites like me" have felt the failings of official multiculturalism must be exposed. He must be encouraged, nowadays, to see that leaders of the majority culture are starting to get it, at long last. Well... in Europe, anyway.
"All-American Muslims" cancelled; viewers disappointed
Walt has just received word that TLC’s All-American Muslims was cancelled on Wednesday, after only one season on the air. Its viewers -- both of them -- have expressed extreme disappointment. Mr. and Mrs. Hussain Obama, of Washington, have written a letter of complaint to TLC, in which they suggest that the cancellation is racist and not in keeping with the spirit of the new USA.
The reality series, which followed a group of Muslim-Americans living in Michigan, was plagued with problems throughout its brief (but not brief enough) run. It only took advertisers Lowes and Kayak.com one show before they pulled out of their promotional contract. The alleged show also drew criticism from the Florida Family Association, which cited the show as "propaganda that riskily hides the Islamic agenda’s clear and present danger to American liberties and traditional values."
Meanwhile, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's execrable Little Mosque on the Prairie, which inspired All-American Muslims, was found to have been cancelled last fall on grounds of irrelevance and irreconcilable inconceivability. The CBC found it unnecessary to make any announcement, since ratings indicated no-one was watching anyway.
The reality series, which followed a group of Muslim-Americans living in Michigan, was plagued with problems throughout its brief (but not brief enough) run. It only took advertisers Lowes and Kayak.com one show before they pulled out of their promotional contract. The alleged show also drew criticism from the Florida Family Association, which cited the show as "propaganda that riskily hides the Islamic agenda’s clear and present danger to American liberties and traditional values."
Meanwhile, the Canadian Broadcasting Corporation's execrable Little Mosque on the Prairie, which inspired All-American Muslims, was found to have been cancelled last fall on grounds of irrelevance and irreconcilable inconceivability. The CBC found it unnecessary to make any announcement, since ratings indicated no-one was watching anyway.
Thursday, March 8, 2012
Don't indulge same-sex marriage "madness": Scottish cardinal
The British government is contemplating following the lead of Canada and several US states, in legalizing "gay marriage". The UK's most senior Roman Catholic bishop, Keith Cardinal O’Brien, has issued a strong warning against the move.
The prelate begins by saying, "Those of us who were not in favour of civil partnership, believing that such relationships are harmful to the physical, mental and spiritual wellbeing of those involved, warned that in time marriage would be demanded too. We were accused of scaremongering then, yet exactly such demands are upon us now.
"Redefining marriage will have huge implications for what is taught in our schools, and for wider society," he continues. "It will redefine society since the institution of marriage is one of the fundamental building blocks of society. The repercussions of enacting same-sex marriage into law will be immense.
"If same-sex marriage is enacted into law what will happen to the teacher who wants to tell pupils that marriage can only mean – and has only ever meant – the union of a man and a woman? Will that teacher’s right to hold and teach this view be respected or will it be removed? Will both teacher and pupils simply become the next victims of the tyranny of tolerance -- heretics whose dissent from state-imposed orthodoxy must be crushed at all costs?"
Judging from the US and Canadian experience so far, the answer to the Cardinal's rhetorical questions is YES.
What Cardinal O'Brien is saying is that no government has the moral authority to dismantle the universally understood meaning of marriage.
And the Cardinal is not speaking only of the moral authority conferred by God and His Church. Walt presumes non-believers and secular humanists would still consider themselves bound by the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. Here's what it says in Article 16: marriage is a right which applies to men and women. "The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State."
Cardinal O'Brien writes, "This universal truth is so self-evident that it shouldn’t need to be repeated. If the Government attempts to demolish a universally recognised human right, they will have forfeited the trust which society has placed in them and their intolerance will shame the United Kingdom in the eyes of the world."
In his article, the Cardinal urges those who wish to speak up for traditional marriage and family values to sign a petition being organized by the UK Coalition for Marriage. This link will take you to the website, but at the moment it appears to be under construction. However, the Massachusetts Coalition for Marriage & Family has a good website, which Walt encourages those in MA (or anywhere) to visit and support.
The prelate begins by saying, "Those of us who were not in favour of civil partnership, believing that such relationships are harmful to the physical, mental and spiritual wellbeing of those involved, warned that in time marriage would be demanded too. We were accused of scaremongering then, yet exactly such demands are upon us now.
"Redefining marriage will have huge implications for what is taught in our schools, and for wider society," he continues. "It will redefine society since the institution of marriage is one of the fundamental building blocks of society. The repercussions of enacting same-sex marriage into law will be immense.
"If same-sex marriage is enacted into law what will happen to the teacher who wants to tell pupils that marriage can only mean – and has only ever meant – the union of a man and a woman? Will that teacher’s right to hold and teach this view be respected or will it be removed? Will both teacher and pupils simply become the next victims of the tyranny of tolerance -- heretics whose dissent from state-imposed orthodoxy must be crushed at all costs?"
Judging from the US and Canadian experience so far, the answer to the Cardinal's rhetorical questions is YES.
What Cardinal O'Brien is saying is that no government has the moral authority to dismantle the universally understood meaning of marriage.
And the Cardinal is not speaking only of the moral authority conferred by God and His Church. Walt presumes non-believers and secular humanists would still consider themselves bound by the Universal Declaration on Human Rights. Here's what it says in Article 16: marriage is a right which applies to men and women. "The family is the natural and fundamental group unit of society and is entitled to protection by society and the State."
Cardinal O'Brien writes, "This universal truth is so self-evident that it shouldn’t need to be repeated. If the Government attempts to demolish a universally recognised human right, they will have forfeited the trust which society has placed in them and their intolerance will shame the United Kingdom in the eyes of the world."
In his article, the Cardinal urges those who wish to speak up for traditional marriage and family values to sign a petition being organized by the UK Coalition for Marriage. This link will take you to the website, but at the moment it appears to be under construction. However, the Massachusetts Coalition for Marriage & Family has a good website, which Walt encourages those in MA (or anywhere) to visit and support.
DON'T send me the Kony video!
Memo to all Agents, followers, readers and (especially) guilt-ridden white liberals. Please do NOT send me the video about Joseph Kony's atrocities in Uganda. I'll give you three good reasons.
1. It's old news. This is not the first time we've been told that Kony is responsible for killing 1000s of children and kidnapping more 1000s to be used as sex slaves and/or soldiers in his misnamed and misbegotten "Lord’s Resistance Army". The Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (amongst others) has been covering this story for ten (10) years.
And hey... Walt told you about it last October! In "Another dumb war America can't win", I called attention to Al Obama's plans to send American soldiers to join in the hunt for Kony. Did it happen? Don't know. Was Kony caught? Definitely not.
Besides, in the context of African politics in the post-colonial era, this is nothing new. The Mau Mau terrorists did it in Kenya even before the British left. (Most of the victims of that nasty little war were blacks, not whites.) The black terrorists in Rhodesia did the same to overthrow the Ian Smith government, and will do it again, if necessary, to keep Comrade Bob Mugabe in power. It's hard to think of a sub-Saharan African country in which children have not been victimized.
2. It's not going to make any difference. This is just another of those Worthy Causes that come to the attention of celebs like Piers Moron, who jump on the bandwagon for the publicity value. Remember Haiti? Has all the international attention and well-meaning donations done any good? No!
Dear readers, please learn and remember the old African acronym: MAWA. Mother Africa Wins Again. Even "Invisible Children", the producers of the video, say that the only way Kony will be brought to justice (African style -- i.e. killed) is if the Ugandan army does it. That would be the same Afghan army that put Idi Amin in power, and only slightly less ogrish Milton Obote both before and after Amin. Don't expect an end to tyranny and slaughter from those guys. In the end, MAWA.
3. The motives of Invisible Children are more than a little suspect. Call me cynical, but I question what will happen to any money you might donate. (And soliciting donations is the whole point of the video.)
Human Rights Watch points out that Kony’s army is down to a few hundred and hasn’t been in Uganda for years, a fact which the documentary leaves out, due to time constraints no doubt. They ask why, this late in the game, the film is being promoted and the begging bowl passed through the social media,
Visible Children has some answers. They say Invisible Children is a controversial activist group operating on a not-for-profit basis. They raise money by selling merchandise like those stupid bracelets.
Last year, the blog claims, Invisible Children spent $8,676,614, of which only 32% went to direct services. Much of the rest went to staff salaries, travel and transport, and film production. Another case of folks -- white folks -- doing well out of doing good.
Film maker Jason Russell responds to the criticism by saying "That is the old way of thinking. We stand by our use of a third of our money going to our film budget so we can build a real-time website of sightings of Kony’s army."
The key word there is "we", which means Jason Russell and his non-Ugandan friends and Ugandan hangers-on. Is that who you really want to help? If so, send your guilt money to Walt. I'll see that it gets into the right hands. Yeah... sure...
1. It's old news. This is not the first time we've been told that Kony is responsible for killing 1000s of children and kidnapping more 1000s to be used as sex slaves and/or soldiers in his misnamed and misbegotten "Lord’s Resistance Army". The Canadian Broadcasting Corp. (amongst others) has been covering this story for ten (10) years.
And hey... Walt told you about it last October! In "Another dumb war America can't win", I called attention to Al Obama's plans to send American soldiers to join in the hunt for Kony. Did it happen? Don't know. Was Kony caught? Definitely not.
Besides, in the context of African politics in the post-colonial era, this is nothing new. The Mau Mau terrorists did it in Kenya even before the British left. (Most of the victims of that nasty little war were blacks, not whites.) The black terrorists in Rhodesia did the same to overthrow the Ian Smith government, and will do it again, if necessary, to keep Comrade Bob Mugabe in power. It's hard to think of a sub-Saharan African country in which children have not been victimized.
2. It's not going to make any difference. This is just another of those Worthy Causes that come to the attention of celebs like Piers Moron, who jump on the bandwagon for the publicity value. Remember Haiti? Has all the international attention and well-meaning donations done any good? No!
Dear readers, please learn and remember the old African acronym: MAWA. Mother Africa Wins Again. Even "Invisible Children", the producers of the video, say that the only way Kony will be brought to justice (African style -- i.e. killed) is if the Ugandan army does it. That would be the same Afghan army that put Idi Amin in power, and only slightly less ogrish Milton Obote both before and after Amin. Don't expect an end to tyranny and slaughter from those guys. In the end, MAWA.
3. The motives of Invisible Children are more than a little suspect. Call me cynical, but I question what will happen to any money you might donate. (And soliciting donations is the whole point of the video.)
Human Rights Watch points out that Kony’s army is down to a few hundred and hasn’t been in Uganda for years, a fact which the documentary leaves out, due to time constraints no doubt. They ask why, this late in the game, the film is being promoted and the begging bowl passed through the social media,
Visible Children has some answers. They say Invisible Children is a controversial activist group operating on a not-for-profit basis. They raise money by selling merchandise like those stupid bracelets.
Last year, the blog claims, Invisible Children spent $8,676,614, of which only 32% went to direct services. Much of the rest went to staff salaries, travel and transport, and film production. Another case of folks -- white folks -- doing well out of doing good.
Film maker Jason Russell responds to the criticism by saying "That is the old way of thinking. We stand by our use of a third of our money going to our film budget so we can build a real-time website of sightings of Kony’s army."
The key word there is "we", which means Jason Russell and his non-Ugandan friends and Ugandan hangers-on. Is that who you really want to help? If so, send your guilt money to Walt. I'll see that it gets into the right hands. Yeah... sure...
Wednesday, March 7, 2012
Afghan president welcomes International Women's Day
Today -- or maybe it was yesterday -- was International Women's Day. The whole thing is a Communist propaganda exercise anyway, so who really cares. Well, Afghanistan's democractically elected president (it says here) Ahmed Karzai cares. He chose the occasion to endorse a code of conduct promulgated by the Ulema Council, comprising 150 top Muslim clerics.
Women, the Islamic scholars say, are secondary. Men are fundamental. That's according to the statement, published on Krazai's own website. Walt is taking an informant's word for this, but if you can read Pushtu -- written in Arabic script -- you're welcome to check it out for yourself.
To the wimmin of the world, the statement came as something of a bitter pill -- not unlike Krazai himself. Why, this kind of thinking could dramatically restrict Afghan (and other Muslim) women’s daily lives and threaten a return to the dark days of Taliban rule.
The Prez's endorsement seems aimed at enticing the Taliban into the peace process. Unfortunately, it runs counter to the intentions of the assorted westerners who backed the US invasion of Afghanistan "to advance women’s rights in the land they fought to take back from the extremists".
One of those expressing Serious Concern is Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister, John Baird, a well-known lover of wimmin. [Shome mistake, shurely?! Ed.] "These reports are of serious concern to Canada," said a statement from Joan's press secretary. "We call on the Government of Afghanistan to uphold the provisions of Afghanistan’s constitution, which establishes equal rights for men and women, and to respect its obligations under international law."
If Walt's informant is translating Krazai's web page correctly, it says "No, we won't be doing that."
Footnote: Agent 78 tells me International Women's Day is actually tomorrow. Being an ex-Communist, she should know.
Women, the Islamic scholars say, are secondary. Men are fundamental. That's according to the statement, published on Krazai's own website. Walt is taking an informant's word for this, but if you can read Pushtu -- written in Arabic script -- you're welcome to check it out for yourself.
To the wimmin of the world, the statement came as something of a bitter pill -- not unlike Krazai himself. Why, this kind of thinking could dramatically restrict Afghan (and other Muslim) women’s daily lives and threaten a return to the dark days of Taliban rule.
The Prez's endorsement seems aimed at enticing the Taliban into the peace process. Unfortunately, it runs counter to the intentions of the assorted westerners who backed the US invasion of Afghanistan "to advance women’s rights in the land they fought to take back from the extremists".
One of those expressing Serious Concern is Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister, John Baird, a well-known lover of wimmin. [Shome mistake, shurely?! Ed.] "These reports are of serious concern to Canada," said a statement from Joan's press secretary. "We call on the Government of Afghanistan to uphold the provisions of Afghanistan’s constitution, which establishes equal rights for men and women, and to respect its obligations under international law."
If Walt's informant is translating Krazai's web page correctly, it says "No, we won't be doing that."
Footnote: Agent 78 tells me International Women's Day is actually tomorrow. Being an ex-Communist, she should know.
Monday, March 5, 2012
SPAM ALERT: e-mail from "service@youtube.com"
For the last few days Walt has been getting e-mails from the address shown in the header telling me that my video is on the top of YouTube, or it's been approved, or similar BS. This one's pretty clever because it arrives in my inbox, rather than the spam box, about half the time. But it IS spam.
If you follow the links you'll eventually wind up at the "Canadian" Family Pharmacy, purveyor of dubious drugs for several years. According to MX Lab, there's no real threat, but if you open the link somewhere someone will capture your e-mail address, and après ça, le déluge!
If you get one of these in your in-box, just move it to the spam box. Don't open it. You're welcome.
PS - Walt's e-mail is walt.whiteman@yahoo.com. Feel free...
If you follow the links you'll eventually wind up at the "Canadian" Family Pharmacy, purveyor of dubious drugs for several years. According to MX Lab, there's no real threat, but if you open the link somewhere someone will capture your e-mail address, and après ça, le déluge!
If you get one of these in your in-box, just move it to the spam box. Don't open it. You're welcome.
PS - Walt's e-mail is walt.whiteman@yahoo.com. Feel free...
Sunday, March 4, 2012
Book review: Who killed Garfield?
In the latter half of the 19th century, the USA had a remarkably long string of mediocre presidents. (I'm quoting the Simpsons here.) Most Americans would have trouble naming four or three or even one of the presidents between Lincoln and Teddy Roosevelt, for the very good reason that they were wholly unmemorable.A couple of them died in office. William Henry Harrison for one. He was one of the generals who bungled the War of 1812 but was later remember -- and elected -- as a hero. He died from pneumonia brought on by standing bareheaded in frightful weather while making the longest inaugural speech in the history of the presidency. Didn't know enough to come in out of the rain!
Then there was James A. Garfield. General Garfield was a hero of the War of the Secession -- "Civil War" to you Yankees -- and was elected following an extremely fractious Republic convention at which he nominated someone else!
Garfield was apparently quite a remarkable man. Born into unimaginable poverty in Ohio [Not Illinois? Ed.], he rose to the heights in the army and then in Congress by dint of his brilliance, studiousness and work ethic. He was a devoted father, a gifted orator, a spellbinding speaker and a passionate advocate for freed slaves.
Just four months after assuming office, President Garfield was shot by one Charles Guiteau, a frustrated office-seeker who may have been deranged. Or not. At his trial, Guiteau admitted to shooting Garfield, but said the President's death, some six weeks after the shooting, was caused by others.
What "others"? Let Walt not be the spiller or spoiler of this plot. Better you should read Destiny of the Republic: A Tale of Madness, Medicine & the Murder of a President, by Candice Millard. This is truly a first-rate history -- carefully and thoroughly researched and written with immense narrative power. Ms Millard retells one of the great forgotten stories of US history and in so doing gives the lie to the suggestion that American politics -- indeed American life -- was at this time somehow dull and inconsequential.
A must-read for doctors and lawyers, for reasons that will be obvious, Walt gives Destiny of the Republic (Doubleday, 2011) 17 stars.
Note to Ed.: Could you please check and make sure we have the right picture of the late president?
Book non-review: A white liberal guilt trip to Timbuktu
Now that the roads have dried out, more or less, Walt ventured out to the library, over Fort Mudge way, looking for some intellectual nourishment. I picked up two pieces, one of which turned out to be quite tasty and digestible. The other was nausea-inducing. I'll tell you about that one first.
Rick Antonson (it says here) is an internationally respected tourism executive, which one supposes is a cut or two above being an internationally respected used car dealer. For reasons unclear, Mr. Antonson set out with "entertaining train companions Ebou and Ussegnou, a mysterious cook called Nema, and intrepid guide Zak" to reach the ancient city of Timbuktu, the capital of Mali, one of the most backward states of Africa, the most backward continent of the world.
The jacket blurbs compare Antonson with Eric Newby, Redmond O'Hanlon and Bill Bryson. Walt has read Newby, O'Hanlon and Bryson, and -- trust me -- Antonson is not in the same league or even on the same planet. What Antonson is is a member of the Noble Savage school. You know... "These Africans were once a great people, with a civilization much greater and more, errr, civilized than ours, but since they came into contact with the evil white men, their fabulous city crumbled into dust and their people descended into the deep pit of poverty, which we really must throw money into, to help them get out of the trap we created..." etc etc ad nauseam.
Does the book actually say this? Alas, I can't tell you, because I didn't get as far as the text itself. I was stopped by the foreword by Professor Geoffrey Lipman, a citizen of the world -- meaning I couldn't figure out his actual citizenship -- Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations World Tourism Organization and professional spokesthingy for sustainable and politically correct tourism.
Obviously Prof. Lipman is a progressive thinker and someone who does well out of doing good. No flying economy class for him, I'm sure! Here is what he has to say about Mali and about Antonson's book.
At p. 8 (first page of the Foreword) - Rick Antonson's personal odyssey is peppered with commentary on issues that are geopolitically relevant...
At p. 9 (second page of the Foreword) - We [Walt's emphasis] owe the children of Africa a seriously better future...
At p. 10 (third page of the Foreword) - What is heroic here is Mali itself and the indomitable spirit of its people.... Mali has a history as proud and rich as any country on the planet, but it is a nation that has also been dealt an incredibly tough hand...
At p. 11 (fourth and -- thank goodness -- final page of the Foreword), Lipman quotes from the book itself - Travel holds immense hope for a better world. Two hundred and eighteen countries call this tiny planet home: each of us is but a step or two away from a person in every one of those nations.... Tourism, more than any other industry, can bring people together to celebrate differences.
That was all I could take. Unfortunately I started the book while sitting down to dinner -- yes, yes, bad habit, I know -- and was obliged to put it aside at the end of the foreword lest I regurgitate Mrs. Walt's excellent dai dop woy.
Mr. Antonson's alleged book is called To Timbuktu for a Haircut. If you're a guilt-ridden liberal of the Hebrew persuasion, you'll surely love it. Being none of those things, I'm surmising from the foreword, not from having read it.
Rick Antonson (it says here) is an internationally respected tourism executive, which one supposes is a cut or two above being an internationally respected used car dealer. For reasons unclear, Mr. Antonson set out with "entertaining train companions Ebou and Ussegnou, a mysterious cook called Nema, and intrepid guide Zak" to reach the ancient city of Timbuktu, the capital of Mali, one of the most backward states of Africa, the most backward continent of the world.
The jacket blurbs compare Antonson with Eric Newby, Redmond O'Hanlon and Bill Bryson. Walt has read Newby, O'Hanlon and Bryson, and -- trust me -- Antonson is not in the same league or even on the same planet. What Antonson is is a member of the Noble Savage school. You know... "These Africans were once a great people, with a civilization much greater and more, errr, civilized than ours, but since they came into contact with the evil white men, their fabulous city crumbled into dust and their people descended into the deep pit of poverty, which we really must throw money into, to help them get out of the trap we created..." etc etc ad nauseam.
Does the book actually say this? Alas, I can't tell you, because I didn't get as far as the text itself. I was stopped by the foreword by Professor Geoffrey Lipman, a citizen of the world -- meaning I couldn't figure out his actual citizenship -- Assistant Secretary-General of the United Nations World Tourism Organization and professional spokesthingy for sustainable and politically correct tourism.
Obviously Prof. Lipman is a progressive thinker and someone who does well out of doing good. No flying economy class for him, I'm sure! Here is what he has to say about Mali and about Antonson's book.
At p. 8 (first page of the Foreword) - Rick Antonson's personal odyssey is peppered with commentary on issues that are geopolitically relevant...
At p. 9 (second page of the Foreword) - We [Walt's emphasis] owe the children of Africa a seriously better future...
At p. 10 (third page of the Foreword) - What is heroic here is Mali itself and the indomitable spirit of its people.... Mali has a history as proud and rich as any country on the planet, but it is a nation that has also been dealt an incredibly tough hand...
At p. 11 (fourth and -- thank goodness -- final page of the Foreword), Lipman quotes from the book itself - Travel holds immense hope for a better world. Two hundred and eighteen countries call this tiny planet home: each of us is but a step or two away from a person in every one of those nations.... Tourism, more than any other industry, can bring people together to celebrate differences.
That was all I could take. Unfortunately I started the book while sitting down to dinner -- yes, yes, bad habit, I know -- and was obliged to put it aside at the end of the foreword lest I regurgitate Mrs. Walt's excellent dai dop woy.
Mr. Antonson's alleged book is called To Timbuktu for a Haircut. If you're a guilt-ridden liberal of the Hebrew persuasion, you'll surely love it. Being none of those things, I'm surmising from the foreword, not from having read it.
Friday, March 2, 2012
Disney anti-obesity show: what you WON'T see
Walt's Florida-based agents don't go to Disney World. Only they know why. How could they pass up a chance to see a new "anti-obesity attraction", which opened at Epcot just last month?
Well, it's too late now. The anti-fat exhibit has been closed, after only three weeks, because of the complaints of angry parents, doctors and "obesity experts". [Ed. Please check if that's "obesity" or "obese".] The offended ones said the attraction was "horrifying" and -- predictably, in our PC age -- insensitive.
You'll find the Orlando Sentinel 's description of the exhibit, called "Habit Heroes", right here. Inside the 4,700-square-foot space, kids worked with protagonists Will Power and Callie Stenics (the one with the high jiggle factor) to fight bad habits, personified as grotesquely obese villains with names like The Glutton, Lead Bottom and The Snacker.
In one room, kids wielded guns that shot broccoli and apples, aiming to knock out cream puffs and hot dogs. In another, they pressure Lead Bottom into dancing to help him lose weight. These few words don't really convey an adequate mental picture, so, thanks to the miracle of YouTube, here's the hidden camera video.
Now I ask you, how could anyone be offended by that? I could watch Callie Stenics all day long!
For more on the fattening of America, see Walt's previous posts, "Fat and fatter", "Showers for those who can't see their toes" and "Fattest people on earth". And remember, even though someone may be fat, don't you dare tell them so!
Well, it's too late now. The anti-fat exhibit has been closed, after only three weeks, because of the complaints of angry parents, doctors and "obesity experts". [Ed. Please check if that's "obesity" or "obese".] The offended ones said the attraction was "horrifying" and -- predictably, in our PC age -- insensitive.
You'll find the Orlando Sentinel 's description of the exhibit, called "Habit Heroes", right here. Inside the 4,700-square-foot space, kids worked with protagonists Will Power and Callie Stenics (the one with the high jiggle factor) to fight bad habits, personified as grotesquely obese villains with names like The Glutton, Lead Bottom and The Snacker.
In one room, kids wielded guns that shot broccoli and apples, aiming to knock out cream puffs and hot dogs. In another, they pressure Lead Bottom into dancing to help him lose weight. These few words don't really convey an adequate mental picture, so, thanks to the miracle of YouTube, here's the hidden camera video.
Now I ask you, how could anyone be offended by that? I could watch Callie Stenics all day long!
For more on the fattening of America, see Walt's previous posts, "Fat and fatter", "Showers for those who can't see their toes" and "Fattest people on earth". And remember, even though someone may be fat, don't you dare tell them so!
50 years of history
From the land where the sun always shines -- well, almost always -- Agent 6 interrupts his packing to send us a terrific collage of images of 50 years of history, set to "We Didn't Start the Fire" by Billy Joël.
It's a nice trip down memory lane for those of us who know who Jack Kerouac and D.H. Lawrence were. Enjoy it here.
It's a nice trip down memory lane for those of us who know who Jack Kerouac and D.H. Lawrence were. Enjoy it here.
Thursday, March 1, 2012
Two more Americans killed in `ghan over Qu'ran
Better to be disciplined than shot. That seems to be the message coming from Jan Kubic, who runs the U.N. mission in Afghanistan. Responding to the reprisal killings of two more Americans by an Afghan soldier and an Afghan literacy teacher (!), both Muslims, Mr. Kubic said that after "the profound apology there must be the second step... appropriate disciplinary action. Because only after such a disciplinary action the international military forces would be able to say yes, we are sincere."
Today's killings -- it's already Thursday afternoon in the armpit of the world -- are the latest in a series of deaths as anti-Americanism rises following the burning by US soldiers of several copies of the Qu'ran -- the Holy Book of Islam. Both were killed just as the top NATO commander allowed a small number of foreign advisers to return to work at Afghan ministries after more than a week of being locked down in secure locations because of the killing of two other Americans.
Walt guesses the literacy teacher thinks that killing Americans for desecrating the Sacred Scripture will teach the Americans a lesson in cultural literacy, if nothing else. If so, he doesn't know Americans very well. See "Why the Afghans keep killing Americans", posted here on Sunday.
Today's killings -- it's already Thursday afternoon in the armpit of the world -- are the latest in a series of deaths as anti-Americanism rises following the burning by US soldiers of several copies of the Qu'ran -- the Holy Book of Islam. Both were killed just as the top NATO commander allowed a small number of foreign advisers to return to work at Afghan ministries after more than a week of being locked down in secure locations because of the killing of two other Americans.
Walt guesses the literacy teacher thinks that killing Americans for desecrating the Sacred Scripture will teach the Americans a lesson in cultural literacy, if nothing else. If so, he doesn't know Americans very well. See "Why the Afghans keep killing Americans", posted here on Sunday.
Canadians think immigrants should adopt Canadian values, eh!
A little while ago, the Pierre Elliott Trudeau Foundation -- named for Himself and funded by, errr, who knows? -- commissioned a poll to find out what Canadians think about immigration.
Much to the surprise of no-one except the Canadian government, Environics pollsters found a solid consensus around the notion that immigrants should accept certain values as a precondition for joining Canadian society. In other words, when in Rome, do as the Canadians do... or something like that. Try to get along with the locals, eh!
Walt's Canadian agents -- the older ones at least -- tell us that at one time, Canada's immigration policies were considered the best in the world. They ensured that "new Canadians", as they were called before the diversity-promoters took over, would be successfully settled and integrated within a few short years.
But since the daze of PET, successive Canadian governments -- both Liberal and Tory -- have set immigration levels extraordinarily high. On average, 250,000 immigrants are being allowed to immigrate to Canada annually and that's without counting the 180,000 temporary foreign workers who are arriving each year.
Moreover, thanks to white liberal guilt, the doors have been opened to huge extended families from south Asia and the Caribbean -- people trying to get into the cold! Why would someone leave a paradise like, say, Jamaica or Sri Lanka, to come to Canada, where it's cold and you have to work for a living? Answer: because medicare is free and you don't really have to work because the working Canadians will give you a warm house, a warm car, and monthly welfare cheques.
No wonder, then, that Canada has the highest per capita immigration rate in the world -- double that of the United States, Great Britain and most of western Europe. And get this. Less than 18% of immigrants being admitted have the training or education needed to fill labour shortages.
Instead, they come as sponsored relatives of immigrants already in Canada, or as refugees and asylum-seekers. Even when bogus refugee claims are detected and denied, it takes the Keystone cops [Canadian Border Services Agency, surely. Ed.] years -- if ever -- to boot them out of the countryl
The majority of would-be immigrants are not screened properly at all. Thus Canada's security and that of its neighbours is compromised.
For these reasons and more, the Centre for Immigration Policy Reform recently submitted a comprehensive paper to the federal government entitled: Immigration Is Too High and Not Based on Canada's Economic Interests. Worth a read.
Much to the surprise of no-one except the Canadian government, Environics pollsters found a solid consensus around the notion that immigrants should accept certain values as a precondition for joining Canadian society. In other words, when in Rome, do as the Canadians do... or something like that. Try to get along with the locals, eh!
Walt's Canadian agents -- the older ones at least -- tell us that at one time, Canada's immigration policies were considered the best in the world. They ensured that "new Canadians", as they were called before the diversity-promoters took over, would be successfully settled and integrated within a few short years.
But since the daze of PET, successive Canadian governments -- both Liberal and Tory -- have set immigration levels extraordinarily high. On average, 250,000 immigrants are being allowed to immigrate to Canada annually and that's without counting the 180,000 temporary foreign workers who are arriving each year.
Moreover, thanks to white liberal guilt, the doors have been opened to huge extended families from south Asia and the Caribbean -- people trying to get into the cold! Why would someone leave a paradise like, say, Jamaica or Sri Lanka, to come to Canada, where it's cold and you have to work for a living? Answer: because medicare is free and you don't really have to work because the working Canadians will give you a warm house, a warm car, and monthly welfare cheques.
No wonder, then, that Canada has the highest per capita immigration rate in the world -- double that of the United States, Great Britain and most of western Europe. And get this. Less than 18% of immigrants being admitted have the training or education needed to fill labour shortages.
Instead, they come as sponsored relatives of immigrants already in Canada, or as refugees and asylum-seekers. Even when bogus refugee claims are detected and denied, it takes the Keystone cops [Canadian Border Services Agency, surely. Ed.] years -- if ever -- to boot them out of the countryl
The majority of would-be immigrants are not screened properly at all. Thus Canada's security and that of its neighbours is compromised.
For these reasons and more, the Centre for Immigration Policy Reform recently submitted a comprehensive paper to the federal government entitled: Immigration Is Too High and Not Based on Canada's Economic Interests. Worth a read.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)