I'll say it again. The news travels slowly between the outside world and Walt's cabin in the woods. We've just learned of a survey which every Canadian reader of WWW ought to take. And you have only the rest of today -- AUGUST 31st -- to do it!
Since June -- we said the news travels slowly -- Citizenship and Immigration Canada (CIC) has had a "Public and Stakeholder Consultation" open on its website, asking for input from all you hosers on immigration levels for 2014 and beyond. Here's what they say they want to know.
We are seeking your feedback on immigration to Canada, specifically on the total number of new permanent residents Canada should welcome and how this overall total should be distributed among immigration categories. The consultation will explore a number of issues related to three main questions:
- What is the appropriate level of immigration for Canada, this year and beyond?
- What is the best ratio – or mix – between the number of economic immigrants, family class immigrants and the refugee/humanitarian class?
- Economic immigration is a key immigration goal for Canada’s long-term economic growth. What role can immigration play to support Canada’s economy?
When you read the questions, you'll see they ask only about how many and what kind of immigrants should be accepted. "None at all" is not an option! But there's a comments box at the end where you can say what you really think, just in case a real human being may be reading. (But don't be surprised if that's not the case.)
To be frank [I thought you were Len?! Ed.], I don't think anyone in the Harpoon government gives two shits (or even one) about what Canadians think. They're going to do the PC thing -- like admitting more Syrian and gay Russian "refugees" -- no matter what you tell them. But do the survey anyway. Give `em hell! It'll make you feel better!
Cliquez ici pour la version française.
Before you do it, reread "Think tank calls immigrants and refugees huge burden on Canadians", posted on WWW just two days ago.
Saturday, August 31, 2013
Are we going to hit Syria or not? How we're betting...
It looks as if President Hussein Obama is bound and determined to counter his wussy image [not "uppity"? Ed.] by ordering a "limited, surgical" air strike against Syria, even though a good many members of Congress and the majority of the American people are opposed to intervention in that insane civil war. That'll show those Ay-rabs, huh!
Mind you, the Prez hasn't actually pushed the button yet. Perhaps he's waiting to see how many other countries are lining up for sloppy seconds. So far only France and Turkey -- yes, Turkey -- have offered to hold America's coat ["coat-tails", surely. Ed.].
The British Parliament, perhaps mindful of Tony Bliar's "WMD" deception, voted down Prime Minister Cameron's motion to lead the charge. Rather a sticky wicket, wot! And Canada's Steve Harper, normally in favour of anything that Israel is in favour of, has declined even to call the Canuck Parliament back from its summer snooze. That way, you see, he won't have to answer any embarrassing questions about the ongoing scandal involving his two favourite "journalists", Mike Puffy and Pam Wally.
Or perhaps Obama is fearful lest a "boots on the ground" invasion of Syria, which would follow as surely as the next president will be a Republican, turn into another (a) Libya, (b) Afghanistan, (c) Iraq, (d) Vietnam, (e) all of the above. Obie is not a stupid man. He may even realize that the rest of the world doesn't want the USA to be the world's policeman. But of course he can't say that in public.
So will the USA (or anyone else?) actually do anything to/about Syria? Len thinks not. Stay tuned.
Further reading: "15 Signs That Obama Has Already Made The Decision To Go To War With Syria", by Michael Snyder, posted on Activist Post on Sunday, August 25th. It's now Saturday, August 31st, and still nothing has happened except for a lot of bluster from the mouths of Obama, Kerry and, errr, Cameron. That's all ye know and all ye need to know.
Mind you, the Prez hasn't actually pushed the button yet. Perhaps he's waiting to see how many other countries are lining up for sloppy seconds. So far only France and Turkey -- yes, Turkey -- have offered to hold America's coat ["coat-tails", surely. Ed.].
The British Parliament, perhaps mindful of Tony Bliar's "WMD" deception, voted down Prime Minister Cameron's motion to lead the charge. Rather a sticky wicket, wot! And Canada's Steve Harper, normally in favour of anything that Israel is in favour of, has declined even to call the Canuck Parliament back from its summer snooze. That way, you see, he won't have to answer any embarrassing questions about the ongoing scandal involving his two favourite "journalists", Mike Puffy and Pam Wally.
Or perhaps Obama is fearful lest a "boots on the ground" invasion of Syria, which would follow as surely as the next president will be a Republican, turn into another (a) Libya, (b) Afghanistan, (c) Iraq, (d) Vietnam, (e) all of the above. Obie is not a stupid man. He may even realize that the rest of the world doesn't want the USA to be the world's policeman. But of course he can't say that in public.
So will the USA (or anyone else?) actually do anything to/about Syria? Len thinks not. Stay tuned.
Further reading: "15 Signs That Obama Has Already Made The Decision To Go To War With Syria", by Michael Snyder, posted on Activist Post on Sunday, August 25th. It's now Saturday, August 31st, and still nothing has happened except for a lot of bluster from the mouths of Obama, Kerry and, errr, Cameron. That's all ye know and all ye need to know.
Teemu Selanne decides to keep playing hockey
It's about a month until the opening of the NHL hockey season, unless Gary Bitchman finds an excuse to shut `er down again. I know the time is near because Agent 4, who hibernates during the summer, has sent us a video. Watch it to learn what made Teemu Selanne (who sometimes hibernates during the games) decide to reup for another year with the Mighty Ducks.
Thursday, August 29, 2013
Think tank calls immigrants and refugees huge burden on Canadians
The elephant in the room can be ignored no longer. The metaphor is very appropriate, considering the number of immigrants and "refugees" -- notice the quotes -- allowed to enter Canada from lands full of elephants, such as Sri Lanka and Zimbabwe.
According to a report published today by the Fraser Institute, a conservative Canadian think tank, bandaid-like reforms by the Harper government will only make a minor dent in the "fiscal burden" on society imposed by the newcomers unwanted and unwelcomed by the majority of Canadians.
How much is that burden, I hear you ask. It's C$20,000,000,000... per annum! That's $19 billion in real money, a truly huge sum for a country with a population of just 34 million, of whom perhaps a third pay no federal income tax.
In his essay, Herb Grubel -- a former caucus colleague of the Dear Leader -- says Mr. Harpoon's government should take more "radical" steps. He suggests phasing out the sponsorship of parents and grandparents -- the so-called "family class" -- and bringing in an employer-driven system to attract economic immigrants who might actually contribute something to the fiscus, rather than sponge off Canuck taxpayers.
"The economic performance of recent immigrants is substantially below that of other Canadians," Mr. Grubel notes, saying their average total income is 70% of that of other Canadians. Worse still, immigrants pay just over half (54%) of the taxes paid by others.
Mr. Grubel says there’s no consensus on the reason for immigrants’ poor performance, though he noted that both refugees and parents-grandparents clearly didn’t need to pass the government’s test for economic migrants that require certain levels of education, training and language proficiency. No surprise there!
His report praises some of the new federal policies on economic and family-class immigration, and especially Ottawa’s somewhat tougher approach to asylum-seekers. He says it will have some success in reducing the burden caused by immigrants who cost more in social services and general government expenses than they contribute in taxes.
He goes on to state another stone truth, that the "large-scale" intake of immigrants since the late 1980s has raised "serious concerns" over effects on "Canadian culture, religious tolerance and national security". Another non-surprise.
Mr. Grubel argues that Canadians should be allowed to debate the broader question of just how many new Canadians are needed in coming years. Should the Canuck government close the doors completely, or leave them slightly ajar? That's the real elephant in the room. He concludes that a broad public policy debate would at least ensure there is a "better informed and more rational Canadian immigration policy." Now that would be a surprise!
According to a report published today by the Fraser Institute, a conservative Canadian think tank, bandaid-like reforms by the Harper government will only make a minor dent in the "fiscal burden" on society imposed by the newcomers unwanted and unwelcomed by the majority of Canadians.
How much is that burden, I hear you ask. It's C$20,000,000,000... per annum! That's $19 billion in real money, a truly huge sum for a country with a population of just 34 million, of whom perhaps a third pay no federal income tax.
In his essay, Herb Grubel -- a former caucus colleague of the Dear Leader -- says Mr. Harpoon's government should take more "radical" steps. He suggests phasing out the sponsorship of parents and grandparents -- the so-called "family class" -- and bringing in an employer-driven system to attract economic immigrants who might actually contribute something to the fiscus, rather than sponge off Canuck taxpayers.
"The economic performance of recent immigrants is substantially below that of other Canadians," Mr. Grubel notes, saying their average total income is 70% of that of other Canadians. Worse still, immigrants pay just over half (54%) of the taxes paid by others.
Mr. Grubel says there’s no consensus on the reason for immigrants’ poor performance, though he noted that both refugees and parents-grandparents clearly didn’t need to pass the government’s test for economic migrants that require certain levels of education, training and language proficiency. No surprise there!
His report praises some of the new federal policies on economic and family-class immigration, and especially Ottawa’s somewhat tougher approach to asylum-seekers. He says it will have some success in reducing the burden caused by immigrants who cost more in social services and general government expenses than they contribute in taxes.
He goes on to state another stone truth, that the "large-scale" intake of immigrants since the late 1980s has raised "serious concerns" over effects on "Canadian culture, religious tolerance and national security". Another non-surprise.
Mr. Grubel argues that Canadians should be allowed to debate the broader question of just how many new Canadians are needed in coming years. Should the Canuck government close the doors completely, or leave them slightly ajar? That's the real elephant in the room. He concludes that a broad public policy debate would at least ensure there is a "better informed and more rational Canadian immigration policy." Now that would be a surprise!
Wednesday, August 28, 2013
Getting stoned is good for you, sez Muslim cleric
Brampton ON ain't what it used to be. When a couple of Walt's agents grew up there, it was a one-stop-light farming town northwest of Toronto, the font of all evil. It was a white community, where the Italian Catholic immigrants were considered exotic. There were a few Jews, but no synagogue. And certainly there was no mosque.
Well, Brampton has changed. White folks are in the minority now -- not to say an endangered species! And mosques abound. One of them provides a pulpit [Is this right? Ed.] for Sheikh Faisal Hamid Abdur-Razak, who preaches a hellfire-and-brimstone version of Islam.
Sheikh Faisal is against sin, and in particular adultery and homosexuality. These are not regarded as serious sins by the "Christian churches". The former is winked at and the latter is effectively encouraged in certain "Christian" circles. But according to the imam, adulterers and gays should be put to death... preferably by stoning.
Yep, stoning is good for the Muslim soul, if not so good for the body. If you're a sinful Muslim and get stoned, your soul will be purified as the stones rain down on your head.
Some people -- perhaps even some Muslims -- would call Sheikh Faisal a raving loony, and his beliefs medieval and barbaric. But many Muslims -- perhaps a majority -- would agree with him.
In 2010, the Pew Research Centre published "Tolerance and Tension: Islam and Christianity in Sub-Saharan Africa" -- an extensive poll of the views of modern life held by people in Middle Eastern and African countries where Islam is the dominant religion. Here's a quote.
"The survey finds considerable support among Muslims in several countries for the application of criminal sanctions such as stoning people who commit adultery, and whipping or cutting off the hands of thieves. Support for these kinds of punishments is consistently lower among Christians than among Muslims. The survey also finds that in seven countries, roughly one-third or more of Muslims say they support the death penalty for those who leave Islam."
These opinions were expressed by majorities of Muslims in Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan and Nigeria.
What happens, Len wonders, when people who hold such views immigrate to the USA, the UK, France, Canada or the Netherlands? Do they change their beliefs? Do they make an effort to conform to the norms of the more civilized countries to which they come?
Sheikh Faisal, for one, seems to think we should accommodate him, not the other way around. And our wussy politicians let him preach this rubbish, because after all, it's a free country. And hate speech is only a crime for white Christians. Political correctness wins again!
Well, Brampton has changed. White folks are in the minority now -- not to say an endangered species! And mosques abound. One of them provides a pulpit [Is this right? Ed.] for Sheikh Faisal Hamid Abdur-Razak, who preaches a hellfire-and-brimstone version of Islam.
Sheikh Faisal is against sin, and in particular adultery and homosexuality. These are not regarded as serious sins by the "Christian churches". The former is winked at and the latter is effectively encouraged in certain "Christian" circles. But according to the imam, adulterers and gays should be put to death... preferably by stoning.
Yep, stoning is good for the Muslim soul, if not so good for the body. If you're a sinful Muslim and get stoned, your soul will be purified as the stones rain down on your head.
Some people -- perhaps even some Muslims -- would call Sheikh Faisal a raving loony, and his beliefs medieval and barbaric. But many Muslims -- perhaps a majority -- would agree with him.
In 2010, the Pew Research Centre published "Tolerance and Tension: Islam and Christianity in Sub-Saharan Africa" -- an extensive poll of the views of modern life held by people in Middle Eastern and African countries where Islam is the dominant religion. Here's a quote.
"The survey finds considerable support among Muslims in several countries for the application of criminal sanctions such as stoning people who commit adultery, and whipping or cutting off the hands of thieves. Support for these kinds of punishments is consistently lower among Christians than among Muslims. The survey also finds that in seven countries, roughly one-third or more of Muslims say they support the death penalty for those who leave Islam."
These opinions were expressed by majorities of Muslims in Egypt, Pakistan, Jordan and Nigeria.
What happens, Len wonders, when people who hold such views immigrate to the USA, the UK, France, Canada or the Netherlands? Do they change their beliefs? Do they make an effort to conform to the norms of the more civilized countries to which they come?
Sheikh Faisal, for one, seems to think we should accommodate him, not the other way around. And our wussy politicians let him preach this rubbish, because after all, it's a free country. And hate speech is only a crime for white Christians. Political correctness wins again!
Monday, August 26, 2013
Sandro Magister on the Pope's two super-embarrassing appointments
"He the prelate of the IOR, she a commissioner for the reorganization of the Vatican administration. Two appointments desired and decided by Pope Francis, which however are the living negation of his program of housecleaning and reform.
"Both of these appointments were made by Pope Francis, the first through his own highly personal decision. And for both of them, immediately afterward, there came to light grave counter-indications about which the pope was initially in the dark.
"And yet, in late August, no correction of course appears to be in sight."
Why has the Pope done nothing to correct these two obvious and huge mistakes? Are Cardinal Bertone -- the man who would be pope -- and the other disgraced members of the Curia leaving the Holy Father to twist in the wind, his papacy dead in the water because of his disorganization, inexperience and naïveté? Len thinks we won't have to wait long for an answer.
Saturday, August 24, 2013
The new face of the Vatican -- mulier iucunda intellegensque
Thought you might like to see a pic of the Vatican's new PR (= Public Relations) girl, hired personally by Pope Francis. Vero! (= Really!) Her name is Francesca Chaouqui, and she's said to have "connections" with seven -- count `em, 7! -- cardinals. Len's guess is that the man with whom Francesca is "connecting" in the picture is not one of the prelates. After all, he does seem to be enjoying the company of a mulier iucunda, not a vir iucundus.
Getting back to Ms Chaouqui... She's the director of PR (= Chief Fart-catcher) for the Pope's new "Privy Council" -- the eight cardinals Pope Francis appointed basically to run the Church because, as he has admitted publicly, he himself doesn't have the "organizational skills" to do so.
Iucunda Francesca may be, but whether she's intelligens is a matter of debate within the walls of the Holy See. She's already made several powerful enemies by daring to speak the truth (as she sees it) on her Twitter account, which has just mysteriously been closed.
Chief among her detractors is our old friend Tarcisio Cardinal Bertone, whom Ms Chaouqui accused of being "corrupt". His Eminence is now suing her. If there's ever a trial [In your dreams! Ed.] both Walt and Agent 3 will be going to Rome for the pleasure of seeing Bertone cross-examined under oath.
Ms. Chaouqui also reported that Pope Benedict XVI resigned because he has leukaemia, and that his butler, Paolo Gabriele, was not the one who leaked sensitive Vatican documents showing corruption in the highest offices of the Church, and implicating... you guessed it... Bertone. In reality, she said, Gabriele took the fall for a "certain high Vatican official", who was the real leaker.
All three of Ms. Chaouqui's stories, which "certain high Vatican officials" find so scandalous, sound quite plausible to me. If she's right, she may indeed have the makings of a fine investigative reporter. How on earth Pope Francis determined to appoint her to a sensitive PR position is a mystery -- one of the famous mysteries of the Church. Perhaps he just liked her name. (Geddit?!)
Recommended reading: Information for this post was drawn from a report in "Clerical Whispers", a blog with which was have no connection!
If I remember my catechism rightly, "making known the hidden faults of your neighbour" is a violation of one of the Ten Commandments. All the same, we need to be told the truth about what's going on in the Church, so plaudits to the bloggers and Francesca and all those who dare to speak out.
Friday, August 23, 2013
Obama silent on Chris Lane killing -- WHY?
Ed. here, filling in for Walt and Len today. Seems hardly fair. But my comment on the day's news will be just a short one. On Wednesday Len wrote about the disparity in the lamestream media's coverage of the killing of Christopher Lane, compared with that of Trayvon Martin. But there's someone else whose view of "racism" spins 180 degrees when a crime is black-on-white, rather than white-on-black.
Step forward Barack Hussein Obama, the first (somewhat) black President of the USA! When I say "step forward", I mean that literally, since O'Bama has yet to say Word One about the senseless killing of a white college student by three young black thugs. Here's a comment from Canada's QMI agency.
Why did President Obama weigh in on the Trayvon Martin killing but not the alleged thrill killing of Australian baseball player Christopher Lane in Oklahoma?
Lane killed by a gunshot in the back last week in Duncan, Okla., where he was visiting his girlfriend.
Chancey Allen Luna, 16, and James Francis Edwards Jr., 15, have been charged with first degree murder, according to the Stephens County District Attorney’s office. Michael Dewayne Jones, 17, has been charged with use of a vehicle in the discharge of a weapon and accessory to murder after the fact, the District Attorney’s office said.
According to police, Jones said the three teens decided to kill someone “for the fun of it.”
Police said Jones told them on Sunday that the three teenagers saw Lane out jogging and decided he would be their target, followed him in their vehicle and then shot him. Jones was driving the car, and Luna fired the gun, according to prosecutors.
When Trayvon Martin got killed, the Prez was quick off the mark to identify himself with the family of the deceased. Should we hold our collective breath waiting for him to say "If I'd had a son, he'd look much like 'Junior'"? In a word... no.
Step forward Barack Hussein Obama, the first (somewhat) black President of the USA! When I say "step forward", I mean that literally, since O'Bama has yet to say Word One about the senseless killing of a white college student by three young black thugs. Here's a comment from Canada's QMI agency.
Lane killed by a gunshot in the back last week in Duncan, Okla., where he was visiting his girlfriend.
Chancey Allen Luna, 16, and James Francis Edwards Jr., 15, have been charged with first degree murder, according to the Stephens County District Attorney’s office. Michael Dewayne Jones, 17, has been charged with use of a vehicle in the discharge of a weapon and accessory to murder after the fact, the District Attorney’s office said.
According to police, Jones said the three teens decided to kill someone “for the fun of it.”
Police said Jones told them on Sunday that the three teenagers saw Lane out jogging and decided he would be their target, followed him in their vehicle and then shot him. Jones was driving the car, and Luna fired the gun, according to prosecutors.
When Trayvon Martin got killed, the Prez was quick off the mark to identify himself with the family of the deceased. Should we hold our collective breath waiting for him to say "If I'd had a son, he'd look much like 'Junior'"? In a word... no.
Thursday, August 22, 2013
Pope Francis to consecrate the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary
On April 18th, not long after the inauguration (or instalment or whatever they're calling it now) of Pope Francis, Walt predicted that the Holy Father would do something... soon... to fulfill the request of Our Lady of Fatima.
The immediate cause for (perhaps premature) rejoicing was the Holy Father's request to the bishops of Portugal to reconsecrate that nation to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. That was soon done, and further consecrations followed, notably in the Middle East where, sadly, nothing seems to have changed. In fact, things have arguably gotten worse. Len will explain why in a moment.
The explanation is necessary in light of today's announcement from the Vatican that Pope Francis will consecrate the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary at a ceremony on October 13th, the 96th anniversary of the final appearance of the Blessed Virgin at Fatima.
For the occasion, the original statue of Our Lady of Fatima will be brought to the Vatican from the shrine in Portugal, for public veneration on October 12th, followed by the consecration ceremony the following day. Pope Francis will also speak on Marian devotion, preside at Eucharistic Adoration, and lead the Holy Rosary with audio links to Marian shrines around the world.
All well and good. By this act, we can see that the Holy Father believes in the Fatima Message, and acknowledges the correctness of what his predecessor said, that the Message of Fatima is still valid today. Seemingly he acknowledges that the Blessed Virgin holds Heaven's Key to Peace.
Sadly, his plan to consecrate the world stops short of doing what Our Lady of Fatima asked. Her request was not for the consecration of the world, but for the solemn and public Consecration of Russia, by name, by the Pope acting in unison (at the same time) with all the bishops of the world.
Sister Lucia, chosen by Heaven to receive Our Lady's Message, was quite clear about that. After Pope Pius XII had consecrated the world (in a radio braodcast, no less), Sister Lucia said that act was insufficient.
She did not speak out after another consecration by John Paul II -- she had been silenced by the Vatican by that time -- but the late pope acknowledged prayer that he knew Our Lady was still waiting. Here's what he said in his prayer for the consecration of the world in 1984.
"Mother of the Church! Enlighten especially the peoples of which You Yourself await our consecration and entrustment.”
He died without ever asking for the Consecration of Russia by name. Nor was Benedict XVI permitted by the Curial promoters of Ostpolitik to do as Our Lady asked. Will Pope Francis be able to break the chains that bind him? He has been known to speak his own mind. Perhaps on October 13th he will speak his heart too!
The immediate cause for (perhaps premature) rejoicing was the Holy Father's request to the bishops of Portugal to reconsecrate that nation to the Immaculate Heart of Mary. That was soon done, and further consecrations followed, notably in the Middle East where, sadly, nothing seems to have changed. In fact, things have arguably gotten worse. Len will explain why in a moment.
The explanation is necessary in light of today's announcement from the Vatican that Pope Francis will consecrate the world to the Immaculate Heart of Mary at a ceremony on October 13th, the 96th anniversary of the final appearance of the Blessed Virgin at Fatima.
All well and good. By this act, we can see that the Holy Father believes in the Fatima Message, and acknowledges the correctness of what his predecessor said, that the Message of Fatima is still valid today. Seemingly he acknowledges that the Blessed Virgin holds Heaven's Key to Peace.
Sadly, his plan to consecrate the world stops short of doing what Our Lady of Fatima asked. Her request was not for the consecration of the world, but for the solemn and public Consecration of Russia, by name, by the Pope acting in unison (at the same time) with all the bishops of the world.
Sister Lucia, chosen by Heaven to receive Our Lady's Message, was quite clear about that. After Pope Pius XII had consecrated the world (in a radio braodcast, no less), Sister Lucia said that act was insufficient.
She did not speak out after another consecration by John Paul II -- she had been silenced by the Vatican by that time -- but the late pope acknowledged prayer that he knew Our Lady was still waiting. Here's what he said in his prayer for the consecration of the world in 1984.
"Mother of the Church! Enlighten especially the peoples of which You Yourself await our consecration and entrustment.”
He died without ever asking for the Consecration of Russia by name. Nor was Benedict XVI permitted by the Curial promoters of Ostpolitik to do as Our Lady asked. Will Pope Francis be able to break the chains that bind him? He has been known to speak his own mind. Perhaps on October 13th he will speak his heart too!
Wednesday, August 21, 2013
Race and crime as seen by America's lamestream media
You haven't forgotten Trayvon Martin, have you? How could you... what with "Reverend Al" Sharpton and every liberal politician and journalist in America hollering "Justice for Trayvon" even after George Zimmerman, his killer, was found not guilty?
There's a reason for all the fuss, of course. Trayvon was black, and George Zimmerman is (almost) white. So that proves there's still racism in America, that you can't expect justice from a white system, blacks are still second-class citizens, yada yada yada. Great is the beating of breasts in the lamestream media.
Further reading: "Obama's Trayvon remark called 'hysterical and exploitative'"; "Walmart responsible for social injustice!" and "Was Rachel Jeantel speaking 'Black English' or 'Ebonics' or what?"
In the third of those articles, written only yesterday, Len spoke of the existence of a large and growing American underclass, comprised mainly of blacks, Latinos and white trailer trash. You know the type, right? No? Well have a look at three of them and their families -- speakers of "Black English" every one of them. You'll hear it in this video. [I tried to upload it but failed. Sorry. Ed.]
The three teenage yoofs -- two definitely black and one kind of a "high yaller" -- appeared in an Oklahoma court today charged with the murder of a young Australian who had come to America to play baseball on a college scholarship.
Unlike George Zimmerman, Christopher Lane was not armed. Nor did he get into any kind of argument or confrontation with "the Duncan Three". They decided to shoot him, prosecutors said yesterday, for the simplest of motives -- to break up the boredom of an Oklahoma summer. One of the three shot Mr. Lane in the back, for the fun of it. That's what they told the police.
Chancey Allen Luna, 16, and James Francis "Junior" Edwards, 15, of Duncan were charged with first-degree murder and, under Oklahoma law, will be tried as adults. Michael Dewayne Jones, 17, of Duncan was accused of using a vehicle in the discharge of a weapon and accessory after the fact to first-degree murder.
This video aired on ABC-TV. No, not the American Broadcasting Corp., but the Australian Broadcasting Corp. You'll have to look hard to find pix of those poor disadvantaged boys in the American press. Nor has much of anything been made of the fact that they're, errr, black. Len will tell you why.
See, the racist stereotype is that young black males are more likely to commit violent and senseless crimes than are white or Asian males. Thus they are more likely to be picked on by the mostly white police, and "cracker" vigilantes like George Zimmerman. To suggest that there is some truth to the stereotype is, in itself, racist, and definitely not politically correct.
So what is the lamestream media to do when confronted with the inconvenient truth that, by their own admission, some black kids committed a senseless and violent crime? They can't very well blame the victim, since the young thugs themselves said they didn't even know the guy.
So for the time being, it's better to say as little as possible. That will give "Reverend Al" and all the other bleeding-heart reality-deniers time to hone the "blame white society" defence. Then it will be revealed that the perps are indeed black... and, of course, victims themselves.
There's a reason for all the fuss, of course. Trayvon was black, and George Zimmerman is (almost) white. So that proves there's still racism in America, that you can't expect justice from a white system, blacks are still second-class citizens, yada yada yada. Great is the beating of breasts in the lamestream media.
Further reading: "Obama's Trayvon remark called 'hysterical and exploitative'"; "Walmart responsible for social injustice!" and "Was Rachel Jeantel speaking 'Black English' or 'Ebonics' or what?"
In the third of those articles, written only yesterday, Len spoke of the existence of a large and growing American underclass, comprised mainly of blacks, Latinos and white trailer trash. You know the type, right? No? Well have a look at three of them and their families -- speakers of "Black English" every one of them. You'll hear it in this video. [I tried to upload it but failed. Sorry. Ed.]
The three teenage yoofs -- two definitely black and one kind of a "high yaller" -- appeared in an Oklahoma court today charged with the murder of a young Australian who had come to America to play baseball on a college scholarship.
Unlike George Zimmerman, Christopher Lane was not armed. Nor did he get into any kind of argument or confrontation with "the Duncan Three". They decided to shoot him, prosecutors said yesterday, for the simplest of motives -- to break up the boredom of an Oklahoma summer. One of the three shot Mr. Lane in the back, for the fun of it. That's what they told the police.
Chancey Allen Luna, 16, and James Francis "Junior" Edwards, 15, of Duncan were charged with first-degree murder and, under Oklahoma law, will be tried as adults. Michael Dewayne Jones, 17, of Duncan was accused of using a vehicle in the discharge of a weapon and accessory after the fact to first-degree murder.
This video aired on ABC-TV. No, not the American Broadcasting Corp., but the Australian Broadcasting Corp. You'll have to look hard to find pix of those poor disadvantaged boys in the American press. Nor has much of anything been made of the fact that they're, errr, black. Len will tell you why.
See, the racist stereotype is that young black males are more likely to commit violent and senseless crimes than are white or Asian males. Thus they are more likely to be picked on by the mostly white police, and "cracker" vigilantes like George Zimmerman. To suggest that there is some truth to the stereotype is, in itself, racist, and definitely not politically correct.
So what is the lamestream media to do when confronted with the inconvenient truth that, by their own admission, some black kids committed a senseless and violent crime? They can't very well blame the victim, since the young thugs themselves said they didn't even know the guy.
So for the time being, it's better to say as little as possible. That will give "Reverend Al" and all the other bleeding-heart reality-deniers time to hone the "blame white society" defence. Then it will be revealed that the perps are indeed black... and, of course, victims themselves.
Tuesday, August 20, 2013
Walt = Ted... NOT!
Len is still keeping Walt's seat warm. [Doubtless your doing so will be more appreciated come winter. Normally we keep it beside the stove. Ed.] This week, though, finds me a bit uncomfortable having to field questions about Walt's whereabouts and real identity.The problem seems to be that Walt has never been seen in the same room, at the same time, as Senator Ted Cruz (Republican, Texas) who is bidding fair to be the next Republican candidate for the presidensity of the Excited States of America.
Stories like Texas Sen. Ted Cruz to renounce newfound Canadian citizenship have given life to the old rumour that Walt -- like Senator Cruz -- is actually a citizen of both Canada and the USA. Walt has never said this (publicly, at least) and as far as Len knows, it's not true.
As for Senator Cruz, he was born in Calgary, Alberta. Calgary, aka "Dallas North", may be the most Americanized of all Canadian cities -- look at those stupid Stetsons! -- but being born there makes you a Canuck! The senator may renounce his Canuckitude, but he can't deny it...eh!
Anyhoo... Walt and Len wish Senator Cruz well in his quest. Senator Rand Paul (Republican, Kentucky) too.
Was Rachel Jeantel speaking "Black English" or "Ebonics" or what?
The first thing we must do is identify Rachel Jeantel for those who weren't following the Trayvon Martin controversy closely. Rachel is a BBW from the `hood, and was on the phone with Trayvon Martin at the time of the confrontation with George Zimmerman at the end of which Trayvon was dead. She was thus the prosecution's star witness at Mr. Zimmerman's trial.
If you search "Rachel Jeantel" on YouTube, you can find Ms. Jeantel's testimony in its entirety. But will you be able to understand what she's saying? Counsel for the defence made much of the fact that he was having difficulty doing so. His many requests for repetition or clarification of what she said were seen by some as an attempt to denigrate [No puns, please. Ed.] her intelligence/education/integrity.
In other words, the defence was accused of racism, of trying to discredit Ms. Jeantel and her testimony based on who she was and how she spoke. Among those hollering "racism" was John McWhorter, a professor of linguistics and editor of the ultra-liberal New Republic. Interviewed on "All In" by the very PC Chris Hayes, Prof. McWhorter asserted that Ms Jeantel was merely speaking "Black English", and very articulately too. If her answers weren't clear to the judge and the jury, it was because they were "crackers", the whole lot of them.
But is there such a thing as "Black English"? If so, is it a generally acceptable part of "the linguistic bounty that is America" (to quote Hayes)? Prof. McWhorter declined to debate the issue on Fox News, but Jehmu Green and Brian Benjamin, both persons of colour, had at it. Here's what they had to say.
Mr. Benjamin said there's no such thing as "Black English". Ms. Green adopted Jesse Jackson's characterization of the "language" as a "garbage dialect". Whatever "Black English" may be, she said, "it's not a language that's going to get you to graduate from high school, to go to college, to find a job, or to keep a job."
As you watch the video, you can't help but be impressed by both debaters' command of proper English. (I was tempted to write "the Queen's English", but hey, it's America.) They don't speak "Black English", at least not on TV.
Nor is "Black English" the mangled language misused by Freeman Gosden and Charles Correll in the old (and very politically incorrect) radio and TV sitcom, Amos 'n' Andy. Messrs. Gosden and Correll were white actors who wrote and spoke in the artificial "dialect" of the minstrel show tradition -- a caricature of the way American blacks really spoke, even back in the day.
Back in the 60s, "linguistics experts" like Prof. McWhorter coined another label for the "language" they now call "Black English". They called it "Ebonics", and defined it as African-American Vernacular English, "a distinctive lect of English spoken by many African-Americans". There's a book about it -- Ebonics, the True Language of Black Folks -- but that doesn't make it a language.
What is "Ebonics" then? The Urban Dictionary calls it "a poor excuse for a failure to grasp the basics of english [sic]. When in doubt, throw an "izzle" sound in the middle of any word of just string random thoughts together and insinuate that they actually mean something. When backed into a corner, you can always claim that it has something to do with a sort of symbolism or is a defining trait that makes your race great, versus own up to the fact that it is essentially laziness at it's [sic]finest.
Ms. Jeantel wasn't speaking "Ebonics", nor was she speaking "Black English". What Ms. Jeantel speaks is the idiom of the `hood, the language spoken by poor blacks -- and white and Latinos -- who grow up in certain parts of American cities. It is not the language used by the likes of Ms. Green and Mr. Benjamin, or Prof. McWhorter. It is that of folks who are poor and uneducated and happy to remain the latter if not the former. It doesn't mean they're bad folks or dumb folks, only that they are what they are -- members of a distinct and growing American underclass.
If you search "Rachel Jeantel" on YouTube, you can find Ms. Jeantel's testimony in its entirety. But will you be able to understand what she's saying? Counsel for the defence made much of the fact that he was having difficulty doing so. His many requests for repetition or clarification of what she said were seen by some as an attempt to denigrate [No puns, please. Ed.] her intelligence/education/integrity.
In other words, the defence was accused of racism, of trying to discredit Ms. Jeantel and her testimony based on who she was and how she spoke. Among those hollering "racism" was John McWhorter, a professor of linguistics and editor of the ultra-liberal New Republic. Interviewed on "All In" by the very PC Chris Hayes, Prof. McWhorter asserted that Ms Jeantel was merely speaking "Black English", and very articulately too. If her answers weren't clear to the judge and the jury, it was because they were "crackers", the whole lot of them.
But is there such a thing as "Black English"? If so, is it a generally acceptable part of "the linguistic bounty that is America" (to quote Hayes)? Prof. McWhorter declined to debate the issue on Fox News, but Jehmu Green and Brian Benjamin, both persons of colour, had at it. Here's what they had to say.
Mr. Benjamin said there's no such thing as "Black English". Ms. Green adopted Jesse Jackson's characterization of the "language" as a "garbage dialect". Whatever "Black English" may be, she said, "it's not a language that's going to get you to graduate from high school, to go to college, to find a job, or to keep a job."
As you watch the video, you can't help but be impressed by both debaters' command of proper English. (I was tempted to write "the Queen's English", but hey, it's America.) They don't speak "Black English", at least not on TV.
Nor is "Black English" the mangled language misused by Freeman Gosden and Charles Correll in the old (and very politically incorrect) radio and TV sitcom, Amos 'n' Andy. Messrs. Gosden and Correll were white actors who wrote and spoke in the artificial "dialect" of the minstrel show tradition -- a caricature of the way American blacks really spoke, even back in the day.
Back in the 60s, "linguistics experts" like Prof. McWhorter coined another label for the "language" they now call "Black English". They called it "Ebonics", and defined it as African-American Vernacular English, "a distinctive lect of English spoken by many African-Americans". There's a book about it -- Ebonics, the True Language of Black Folks -- but that doesn't make it a language.
What is "Ebonics" then? The Urban Dictionary calls it "a poor excuse for a failure to grasp the basics of english [sic]. When in doubt, throw an "izzle" sound in the middle of any word of just string random thoughts together and insinuate that they actually mean something. When backed into a corner, you can always claim that it has something to do with a sort of symbolism or is a defining trait that makes your race great, versus own up to the fact that it is essentially laziness at it's [sic]finest.
Ms. Jeantel wasn't speaking "Ebonics", nor was she speaking "Black English". What Ms. Jeantel speaks is the idiom of the `hood, the language spoken by poor blacks -- and white and Latinos -- who grow up in certain parts of American cities. It is not the language used by the likes of Ms. Green and Mr. Benjamin, or Prof. McWhorter. It is that of folks who are poor and uneducated and happy to remain the latter if not the former. It doesn't mean they're bad folks or dumb folks, only that they are what they are -- members of a distinct and growing American underclass.
Monday, August 19, 2013
South Asian girls' secret weapon against forced marriages
Readers of WWW -- indeed anyone who lives on this planet -- will know that it is not uncommon for immigrants from south Asian countries like India and Pakistan to send their western-born daughters "back home" to marry "a suitable boy", usually against the will of the putative bride. It's a good deal for the girls' families and for the grooms. The families get rid of a daughter without having to pay a dowry, and the new husbands get a free pass to immigrate to the UK, USA or Canada.
Not such a prize for the wives though. The western-raised girls have some peculiar modern notions about love and marriage. They would like to have a say in choosing their husbands. And they would like to live in a modern, western-style "partnership", without having to worry that their "traditionally-minded" husbands will beat them... or worse... for being insufficiently servile, or in the name of "honour".
But how do you escape a forced marriage? What do you do when mummy and daddy tell you, "Get in the car. Ve are taking you to the airport. You vill go back home and marry the one ve have chosen for you"? How do you get away?
Enter Karma Nirvana, a UK-based charity dedicated to putting a stop to forced marriages. They've come up with a secret weapon to help girls being bundled off to the old country. More accurately, they've found a new and clever use for an old tool.
Yes, folks, it's a spoon! What the girl should do, they say, while the parents are backing her trousseau, is stick the spoon [Please rewrite this. Ed.]
OK, she should put the spoon in her panties! Then, when she goes through security, the presence of a metal object in her nether regions will be detected, and she will be taken to a safe space where she will have one last opportunity to disclose that she's being sent home to marry against her will.
Karma Nirvana operations manager Natasha Rattu told Agence France Press, "We've had people [call to say] it's helped them and got them out of a dangerous situation. It's an incredibly difficult thing to do with your family around you, but they won't be aware that you have done it. It's a safe way."
According to AFP, a joint UK Home Office-Foreign Office unit dedicated to preventing forced marriages handled about 1,500 cases in 2012. The most common country linked to the investigations was Pakistan. No surprise there. Other countries included India -- again, no surprise -- Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Somalia, Turkey, and Iraq. No western "Christian" countries were mentioned.
Not such a prize for the wives though. The western-raised girls have some peculiar modern notions about love and marriage. They would like to have a say in choosing their husbands. And they would like to live in a modern, western-style "partnership", without having to worry that their "traditionally-minded" husbands will beat them... or worse... for being insufficiently servile, or in the name of "honour".
But how do you escape a forced marriage? What do you do when mummy and daddy tell you, "Get in the car. Ve are taking you to the airport. You vill go back home and marry the one ve have chosen for you"? How do you get away?
Enter Karma Nirvana, a UK-based charity dedicated to putting a stop to forced marriages. They've come up with a secret weapon to help girls being bundled off to the old country. More accurately, they've found a new and clever use for an old tool.Yes, folks, it's a spoon! What the girl should do, they say, while the parents are backing her trousseau, is stick the spoon [Please rewrite this. Ed.]
OK, she should put the spoon in her panties! Then, when she goes through security, the presence of a metal object in her nether regions will be detected, and she will be taken to a safe space where she will have one last opportunity to disclose that she's being sent home to marry against her will.
Karma Nirvana operations manager Natasha Rattu told Agence France Press, "We've had people [call to say] it's helped them and got them out of a dangerous situation. It's an incredibly difficult thing to do with your family around you, but they won't be aware that you have done it. It's a safe way."
According to AFP, a joint UK Home Office-Foreign Office unit dedicated to preventing forced marriages handled about 1,500 cases in 2012. The most common country linked to the investigations was Pakistan. No surprise there. Other countries included India -- again, no surprise -- Bangladesh, Afghanistan, Somalia, Turkey, and Iraq. No western "Christian" countries were mentioned.
Sunday, August 18, 2013
"We came, we conquered, we failed"
Len apologizes for the sporadic nature of posts on WWW this month. Walt and I aim for a post a day, and generally we make it or come close, but right now Len is preoccupied with business matters -- we don't make a living from blogging, you know!! -- and Walt is off communing with nature somewhere.
All the same, we do try to keep up with news and views as expressed in the meedja. Surfing the net today, I came across a trenchant opinion piece by Grant LaFleche, writing in the Saint Catharines Standard, one of the QMI papers.
In M Lafleche's opinion, "The NATO's project in Afghanistan has failed. It's been 12 years since the Taliban was deposed and everything the mission was supposed to achieve is on the verge of collapse."
He does not argue (as perhaps he should) that "intervention" in Afghanistan ["invasion", surely. Ed.] was unnecessary. He says it was the right thing to do, but that we -- the USA and its NATO allies -- blew it.
"The post 9-11 strategy was to and crush the Taliban, and then turn over control and security to the new Afghani government as quickly as possible," says M LaFleche.
"It was ridiculously short sighted and naive. Afghanistan is not a literate nation with a democratic tradition or history of a free market. To transform into a self-reliant democracy and economy was not a project of a few years but of several decades. It would mean building an entirely new political economy and discarding centuries of tradition that was, literally, stuck in the middle ages. It would mean a plan more than ambitious than the rebuilding post war Germany or Japan. It meant nation-building from scratch."
But no nation has been built. The "democratically-elected" Mohamed Karzai pretends to be in power, but his writ does not run much farther than a mile or so from the perimeter of Kabul...if that far. When the USA withdraws its troops next year (with the remaining "others" hitching a ride on the last chopper out), the Krazai government will collapse, the Taliban will rush to fill the power vacuum, and Afghanistan will revert to what it has always been -- a barbaric, savage and ungovernable collection of warring tribes.
What happens then? We'll let M LaFleche have the last word. "We will likely again debate the merits of sending our troops to war while we ask ourselves what went wrong the first time around."
All the same, we do try to keep up with news and views as expressed in the meedja. Surfing the net today, I came across a trenchant opinion piece by Grant LaFleche, writing in the Saint Catharines Standard, one of the QMI papers.
In M Lafleche's opinion, "The NATO's project in Afghanistan has failed. It's been 12 years since the Taliban was deposed and everything the mission was supposed to achieve is on the verge of collapse."
He does not argue (as perhaps he should) that "intervention" in Afghanistan ["invasion", surely. Ed.] was unnecessary. He says it was the right thing to do, but that we -- the USA and its NATO allies -- blew it.
"The post 9-11 strategy was to and crush the Taliban, and then turn over control and security to the new Afghani government as quickly as possible," says M LaFleche.
"It was ridiculously short sighted and naive. Afghanistan is not a literate nation with a democratic tradition or history of a free market. To transform into a self-reliant democracy and economy was not a project of a few years but of several decades. It would mean building an entirely new political economy and discarding centuries of tradition that was, literally, stuck in the middle ages. It would mean a plan more than ambitious than the rebuilding post war Germany or Japan. It meant nation-building from scratch."
But no nation has been built. The "democratically-elected" Mohamed Karzai pretends to be in power, but his writ does not run much farther than a mile or so from the perimeter of Kabul...if that far. When the USA withdraws its troops next year (with the remaining "others" hitching a ride on the last chopper out), the Krazai government will collapse, the Taliban will rush to fill the power vacuum, and Afghanistan will revert to what it has always been -- a barbaric, savage and ungovernable collection of warring tribes.
What happens then? We'll let M LaFleche have the last word. "We will likely again debate the merits of sending our troops to war while we ask ourselves what went wrong the first time around."
Thursday, August 15, 2013
More Chinese fakery
Walt lived in China for three years. During that time he managed to learn to read perhaps a dozen words, not enough to understand the story which follows, for which thanks go to Agent 78.
Walt also learned that nothing in China should be taken to be real until proven so. Some of the fakes for which China has become infamous are pretty good. But not this one.
This is the "lion" proudly displayed by Luohe zoo, in Henan province. A visitor with her 6-year-old son in tow told the sprat that the animal was an African lion. That's what it says on the sign. "But mommy," the kid kept whining, "it's not making lion sounds. It's making dog sounds!"
Indeed. Investigation revealed that the "lion cage" was occupied by a dog -- a Tibetan mastiff, to be exact. A park official said the zoo really did have a lion, but it had been moved elsewhere for breeding purposes.
According to People’s Daily, the facility was also advertising other phony animals. Another type of dog was found in the "wolf" cage, and the snake cage, for example, didn’t actually contain any snakes -- just rats.
A Luohe City official passed the buck to the "independent contractor" responsible for running the zoo. However, he said, the contract still has a year to run so can't be terminated early. But all is not lost. The city will "urge" the contractor not to put the advertised animals in the cages, but to correct the signs! This is China!
Walt also learned that nothing in China should be taken to be real until proven so. Some of the fakes for which China has become infamous are pretty good. But not this one.
This is the "lion" proudly displayed by Luohe zoo, in Henan province. A visitor with her 6-year-old son in tow told the sprat that the animal was an African lion. That's what it says on the sign. "But mommy," the kid kept whining, "it's not making lion sounds. It's making dog sounds!"
Indeed. Investigation revealed that the "lion cage" was occupied by a dog -- a Tibetan mastiff, to be exact. A park official said the zoo really did have a lion, but it had been moved elsewhere for breeding purposes.
According to People’s Daily, the facility was also advertising other phony animals. Another type of dog was found in the "wolf" cage, and the snake cage, for example, didn’t actually contain any snakes -- just rats.
A Luohe City official passed the buck to the "independent contractor" responsible for running the zoo. However, he said, the contract still has a year to run so can't be terminated early. But all is not lost. The city will "urge" the contractor not to put the advertised animals in the cages, but to correct the signs! This is China!
Tuesday, August 13, 2013
Silence is golden
Rarely heard, and even more rarely seen, Agent 21 sends us this little story from the Antipodes. [How can you be against podes? Ed.]
As Air Force One arrives at Heathrow Airport, President Obama descends to a warm and dignified reception from the Queen.
They are driven in a 1934 Bentley to the edge of central London, where they change to a magnificent 17th-century carriage hitched to six white horses. They continue on towards Buckingham Palace, waving to thousands of cheering Britons. All is going well.
Suddenly, the right rear horse lets out the most horrendous earth-shattering fart ever heard in the British Commonwealth. The smell is so atrocious that both passengers in the royal landau must use handkerchiefs to cover their noses. The fart shakes the coach, but the two heads of state do their best to ignore the incident.
The Queen politely turns to President Obama and says, "Mr President, please, accept my regrets. I am sure you understand there are some things that even a Queen cannot control."
Obama, always trying to be "presidential," responds, "Your Majesty, plese don't give the matter another thought. Until you mentioned it, I honestly thought it was one of the horses."
Moral of the story: SILENCE IS GOLDEN.
As Air Force One arrives at Heathrow Airport, President Obama descends to a warm and dignified reception from the Queen.
They are driven in a 1934 Bentley to the edge of central London, where they change to a magnificent 17th-century carriage hitched to six white horses. They continue on towards Buckingham Palace, waving to thousands of cheering Britons. All is going well.
Suddenly, the right rear horse lets out the most horrendous earth-shattering fart ever heard in the British Commonwealth. The smell is so atrocious that both passengers in the royal landau must use handkerchiefs to cover their noses. The fart shakes the coach, but the two heads of state do their best to ignore the incident.
The Queen politely turns to President Obama and says, "Mr President, please, accept my regrets. I am sure you understand there are some things that even a Queen cannot control."
Obama, always trying to be "presidential," responds, "Your Majesty, plese don't give the matter another thought. Until you mentioned it, I honestly thought it was one of the horses."
Moral of the story: SILENCE IS GOLDEN.
Another win for the gay lobby: Canada to welcome gay refugees from Russia
A previous WWW post reported REAL Women of Canada's rebuke to their country's not-openly gay foreign affairs minister, Johnboy Baird, for the shrillness of his gay rights crusade. We pointed out that Baird is not the only closet queen in the Canadian government. The other confirmed bachelor is Jason Kenney, who was Minister of Immigration until a mini-shuffle this summer saw his well-padded posterior moved to Labour.
Mr. Kenney may have moved, but his LGBT-friendly policies linger on. While running Immigration, he brought in a policy of trying to resettle gay Muslims fleeing from persecution in Iran and Iraq.
In January he said he "cannot think of a more obvious case of persecution". We guess China's Tibetans and Uighurs are less obvious. Or maybe they just don't have the support of the gay lobby in the government and media elites of Canuckistan.
Today comes an announcement by Mr. Kenney's successor, Chris Alexander, that Canada will be bending over to welcome gays fleeing "persecution" in Russia! In referring to the Russian government's new laws prohibiting pro-queer propaganda, Chris the Boy Wonder said "any refugee claims related to this particular issue will of course be looked at very seriously by [Canada's] very generous system." The italics are Len's.
The mind boggles. Are Canadians really that stupid? Do they not realize that their ridiculously "balanced" immigration system is being gamed by the scum of the entire earth? Does Canada really need more bogus refugees to swell the ranks of hairdressers, interior designers and, yes, welfare claimants in Toronto's Church/Wellesley "community".
Readers' comments in the lamestream media on the REAL Women story, the controversy over the Sochi Olympics, and this latest twist are running heavily against Johnboy and Jason's pro-gay stance. There is an evident disconnect between the words and actions of the Canadian government and the majority of Canadians outside of the chattering classes.
One comment appended to the Globe and Mail's article says "It seems that we live in a democratic laboratory where people are just mice. Maybe once in a while referendums should be organized on hot topics, like in Switzerland. In this way people could have a voice directly and misrepresentation would be avoided (and Baird would stand corrected)."
Indeed, Kudos to "Val Kovacs" for saying what so many Canadians are thinking. But will Steve Harper and his gay caballeros listen? Len thinks there are two chances...
See also "Canadian Conservatives' base divided over government's pushing 'gay rights'"
And, for a chuckle [maybe not? Ed.] don't miss the VIDEO "'Brand new leather jacket'"
Mr. Kenney may have moved, but his LGBT-friendly policies linger on. While running Immigration, he brought in a policy of trying to resettle gay Muslims fleeing from persecution in Iran and Iraq.
In January he said he "cannot think of a more obvious case of persecution". We guess China's Tibetans and Uighurs are less obvious. Or maybe they just don't have the support of the gay lobby in the government and media elites of Canuckistan.
Today comes an announcement by Mr. Kenney's successor, Chris Alexander, that Canada will be bending over to welcome gays fleeing "persecution" in Russia! In referring to the Russian government's new laws prohibiting pro-queer propaganda, Chris the Boy Wonder said "any refugee claims related to this particular issue will of course be looked at very seriously by [Canada's] very generous system." The italics are Len's.
The mind boggles. Are Canadians really that stupid? Do they not realize that their ridiculously "balanced" immigration system is being gamed by the scum of the entire earth? Does Canada really need more bogus refugees to swell the ranks of hairdressers, interior designers and, yes, welfare claimants in Toronto's Church/Wellesley "community".
Readers' comments in the lamestream media on the REAL Women story, the controversy over the Sochi Olympics, and this latest twist are running heavily against Johnboy and Jason's pro-gay stance. There is an evident disconnect between the words and actions of the Canadian government and the majority of Canadians outside of the chattering classes.
One comment appended to the Globe and Mail's article says "It seems that we live in a democratic laboratory where people are just mice. Maybe once in a while referendums should be organized on hot topics, like in Switzerland. In this way people could have a voice directly and misrepresentation would be avoided (and Baird would stand corrected)."
Indeed, Kudos to "Val Kovacs" for saying what so many Canadians are thinking. But will Steve Harper and his gay caballeros listen? Len thinks there are two chances...
See also "Canadian Conservatives' base divided over government's pushing 'gay rights'"
And, for a chuckle [maybe not? Ed.] don't miss the VIDEO "'Brand new leather jacket'"
Saturday, August 10, 2013
Follow-up: Canadian Conservatives' base divided over government's pushing "gay rights"
The next day Canuck PM Steve "Stephen" Harper joined the war of words. Mr. Harpoon always stands behind his Foreign Minister, which is probably smarter than standing (or bending over) in front of him. Anyway, Steve made it clear that he is all in favour of treating queers just the same as other people. Why, he even has one or two in his cabinet! See today's Huffington Post article, "John Baird's Gay Rights Stance Nothing New For Harper Tories". [What's with the capitalization of every word in the headline? Does no-one follow Strunk & Whyte any more? Ed.]
Also today, Canada's self-styled National Post says "Canadian conservatives divided over Harper government's defence of gay rights". This is news? [Got the capitalization right though. Ed.] We think that if a poll were taken of all Canadians -- not just those of bluish hue -- a majority would agree that Minister Baird is pushing the LGBT agenda more than a bit too hard.
But why would he do that? What we don't understand is how neither the HuffPost nor the NatPost could get through a rather lengthy piece on the controversy without even alluding to Minister Baird's sexual preference. Which brings us back to Wednesday's post. Does no-one in the lamestream media know Mr. Baird's dirty little secret? Or is it just one of those things that we can no longer talk about because we don't want to be accused of being homophobic? Perhaps Mr. Baird should -- as they say in politics -- declare his interest.
Francis, the Party Pope: all style, no substance
Len and Walt are both traditional Catholics, appalled by the changes to the liturgy and indeed the Faith of the Church made in the wake of Vatican II -- "the best council the Protestants ever had".
We are more than a little disappointed in the pontificate of Pope Francis. It seemed to start with such promise. For instance, we were encouraged when, in April, the Holy Father asked the bishops of Portugal to consecrate his papacy to Our Lady of Fatima. See "Pope Francis to move on the Third Secret of Fatima?"
Even then, we were turning our eyes away from the "humbler-than-thou" nonsense, such as giving up the papal apartment in the Vatican, refusing the three-tiered crown, and generally proclaiming his humility and unworthiness (or unfitness?) to be the Vicar of Christ. See Walt's little April Fool "'I am not worthy...': Pope Francis resigns".
But we can no longer ignore the accomplisments of the Holy Father since his election. They amount to... wait for it... Nothing! Nada! Rien.
An article in last week's Economist said that his papacy is more about style than substance, but the fact is, there is no substance. Yes, the emperor does have new clothes -- as we see in this picture -- but underneath, he is all talk and no action.
Let's examine what Pope Francis has done... or not done... about the serious problems besetting the mainstream Roman Catholic Church today.
The most serious problem is the scandal and shame of paedophile and homosexual priests. Benedict XVI at least acknowledged the problem. But what does Pope Francis say? "Who am I to judge?" Click here to read Walt's answer!
Then there's the Vatican Bank. For years now, it had been turned into a money-laudering operation for the benefit of certain prelates and, yes, the Mafia. The Bank of Italy, frustrated with Benedict's failure to clean it up, went so far as to refuse to process bank-card transactions at Vatican ATM machines.
So what has Pope Francis done? He told the international press in July that he has turned over the bank to "trusted" advisors, Monsignori the Church. One of them, Monsignor Nunzio Scarano, was promptly arrested for financial fraud. Another, Monsignor Battista Ricca, was outed by Sandro Magister and L'Espresso, as a flaming homosexual, who regularly used the services of underage boy prostitutes and went so far as to bring his favourite rent-boy with him to the Apostolic Nunciature in Uruguay.
Now it is reported that the Holy Father's vaunted reform of the Curia, mandated by the College of Cardinals, has turned out to be too difficult for him. Francis himself said he was "too disorganized" and was being thwarted by "lobbies", including the notorious gay lobby within the Vatican. He tried to foist the problem onto a council of eight cardinals, but they won't even meet until this coming October.
Many of the other cardinals are getting restless. Cardinal Dolan (doubtless still miffed that he wasn't seriously considered for the position) has been grumbling publicly about the Pope's slowness to deal with the likes of Cardinal Bertone (still the Secretary of State), and Gerhard Muller, Benedict's Prefect of Doctrine, largely responsible for the rupture in negotiations with the Society of St. Pius X.
In the latest post on his Chiesa blog, Sandro Magister says Pope Francis is carefully avoiding reliance on old veterans of the Roman Curia, as he weighs his options for reforms at the Vatican. The Secretariat of State, traditionally the major power at the Vatican, has lost some influence to the small circle of the Pope's trusted staff -- most importantly his secretary, Father Fabian Pedacchio Leaniz. But Francis makes all important decisions himself.
The papacy of Pope Francis is not off to a good start. Good Catholics, please pray every day for the Holy Father, and that the True Faith will be preserved in spite of the failings of the leaders of Holy Mother Church.
We are more than a little disappointed in the pontificate of Pope Francis. It seemed to start with such promise. For instance, we were encouraged when, in April, the Holy Father asked the bishops of Portugal to consecrate his papacy to Our Lady of Fatima. See "Pope Francis to move on the Third Secret of Fatima?"
Even then, we were turning our eyes away from the "humbler-than-thou" nonsense, such as giving up the papal apartment in the Vatican, refusing the three-tiered crown, and generally proclaiming his humility and unworthiness (or unfitness?) to be the Vicar of Christ. See Walt's little April Fool "'I am not worthy...': Pope Francis resigns".But we can no longer ignore the accomplisments of the Holy Father since his election. They amount to... wait for it... Nothing! Nada! Rien.
An article in last week's Economist said that his papacy is more about style than substance, but the fact is, there is no substance. Yes, the emperor does have new clothes -- as we see in this picture -- but underneath, he is all talk and no action.
Let's examine what Pope Francis has done... or not done... about the serious problems besetting the mainstream Roman Catholic Church today.
The most serious problem is the scandal and shame of paedophile and homosexual priests. Benedict XVI at least acknowledged the problem. But what does Pope Francis say? "Who am I to judge?" Click here to read Walt's answer!
Then there's the Vatican Bank. For years now, it had been turned into a money-laudering operation for the benefit of certain prelates and, yes, the Mafia. The Bank of Italy, frustrated with Benedict's failure to clean it up, went so far as to refuse to process bank-card transactions at Vatican ATM machines.
So what has Pope Francis done? He told the international press in July that he has turned over the bank to "trusted" advisors, Monsignori the Church. One of them, Monsignor Nunzio Scarano, was promptly arrested for financial fraud. Another, Monsignor Battista Ricca, was outed by Sandro Magister and L'Espresso, as a flaming homosexual, who regularly used the services of underage boy prostitutes and went so far as to bring his favourite rent-boy with him to the Apostolic Nunciature in Uruguay.
Now it is reported that the Holy Father's vaunted reform of the Curia, mandated by the College of Cardinals, has turned out to be too difficult for him. Francis himself said he was "too disorganized" and was being thwarted by "lobbies", including the notorious gay lobby within the Vatican. He tried to foist the problem onto a council of eight cardinals, but they won't even meet until this coming October.
Many of the other cardinals are getting restless. Cardinal Dolan (doubtless still miffed that he wasn't seriously considered for the position) has been grumbling publicly about the Pope's slowness to deal with the likes of Cardinal Bertone (still the Secretary of State), and Gerhard Muller, Benedict's Prefect of Doctrine, largely responsible for the rupture in negotiations with the Society of St. Pius X.
In the latest post on his Chiesa blog, Sandro Magister says Pope Francis is carefully avoiding reliance on old veterans of the Roman Curia, as he weighs his options for reforms at the Vatican. The Secretariat of State, traditionally the major power at the Vatican, has lost some influence to the small circle of the Pope's trusted staff -- most importantly his secretary, Father Fabian Pedacchio Leaniz. But Francis makes all important decisions himself.
The papacy of Pope Francis is not off to a good start. Good Catholics, please pray every day for the Holy Father, and that the True Faith will be preserved in spite of the failings of the leaders of Holy Mother Church.
Wednesday, August 7, 2013
Gay Canuck foreign minister condemned by REAL Women
John "John" Baird is Canada's Minister of Foreign Affairs, one of the top three in Steve Harpoon's Conservative cabinet. His bio in Wikipedia says nothing about his wife and kids, for the very good reason that he hasn't got any. Johnboy, you see, is a confirmed bachelor and notorious pillow-biter.It should have come as no surprise, then, to REAL Women of Canada or anyone else, that Baird should have thrown a hissy-fit over the new Russian laws prohibiting gay propaganda. Anytime the LGBT agenda is being defended -- or crammed down our throats [or some other orifice. Ed.] -- you can bet John will get up off his knees and condemn the terrible "homophobes" who dare to suggest that there's something wrong with being gay.
Today, however, the very straight REAL Women of Canada issued a press release, excoriating Minister Baird for defending gay rights on the world stage, saying his views are at odds with Canadian values and even those of his fellow tories (except perhaps for the Hon. Jason Kenney).
According to REAL Women, Johnboy routinely abuses his cabinet post "to further his own perspective on homosexuality." Their criticism is linked to Baird’s defence of same-sex rights in places like Uganda and Russia. As reported here recently, the Russian government has incurred the wrath of the worldwide gay lobby for a new law that criminalizes the promotion of homosexuality and "gay rights", particularly to minors, and outlaws gay rallies and the use of the media to promote the LGBT agenda.
Baird revealed last week that Canada has been working for months trying to convince Russia not to implement the law. In an interview with The Canadian Press, Baird said the “mean-spirited and hateful law” is an “incitement to intolerance.”
Gwendolyn Landolt, national vice-president of REAL Women of Canada, told a Canadian Press interviewer that Baird was "meddling" when he raised such concerns. "It really is offensive," she said. "The issue is really why is he interfering in a sovereign country’s legislation? He really has no business to do that."
"I don’t want other countries to get what we have here where people’s religious values and traditional values are being pushed aside and giving homosexuals priority," Ms Landolt added. "According to Mr. Baird it’s a protection of human rights but it’s not universally accepted. It’s not a Canadian value."
REAL Women's news release says that "homosexual activists" have become a "tyrannical minority" -- not exactly news but it's refreshing that someone had the guts to say it.
Further reading (and REAL Women please take note): "OPEN SECRET: Conservative cabinet minister John Baird outed"
Where have all the Russians gone?
Ed. here. One of my tasks is to have a look, every now and then, at WWW's readership statistics, just to see who's looking at -- and perhaps reading -- what. It doesn't matter, really, as we ended the experiment of allowing advertising some months ago. But Walt (and now Len) like to think that the pearls they cast are being picked up by the... well... you know.
Almost since Day One, and certainly since the Swazi girls first appeared on WWW, the top two countries in which our readers reside have been the USA and Russia, or the other way around. Since we write mostly in English, not Russian, we assume the Russians are looking at the National Geographic-style pix and videos. Checking the most-hit posts would seem to confirm this.
But yesterday, an amazing thing happened. The Russians completely disappeared from our readership tables! I don't mean they slipped into 5th or 10th place. They vanished completely!
As of this moment, Americans make up the greatest percentage of our visitors, by a very long shot. Next, way back there, comes Latvia. Latvia?! Whoda thunk it? Maybe all the Russians moved to Riga?
Rounding out the top ten (plus) we have (3) Canada, (4) France, (5) United Kingdom (tied with Poland and Ukraine), (8) China, (9) Germany, and (10) Sweden.
I can't understand what became of the Russians. When the Chinese aren't in our world, I assume WWW is on the wrong side of the Great Firewall of China because of something we said about the schismatic Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association or freedom of religion or one of the Three Terrible T's.*
So, is there now an Iron Firewall around Russia? Could it be that the KGB (the Russian version of the NSA) thinks Walt is promoting homosexuality? The Russians have a law against that now. If they think that, they haven't been reading very carefully. Or perhaps something is being lost in translation.
Anyone with an answer to this puzzlement is invited to post a comment below. Don't let Walt be the last to know!
* Taiwan, Tibet and Tiananmen Square. You're welcome.
Almost since Day One, and certainly since the Swazi girls first appeared on WWW, the top two countries in which our readers reside have been the USA and Russia, or the other way around. Since we write mostly in English, not Russian, we assume the Russians are looking at the National Geographic-style pix and videos. Checking the most-hit posts would seem to confirm this.
But yesterday, an amazing thing happened. The Russians completely disappeared from our readership tables! I don't mean they slipped into 5th or 10th place. They vanished completely!
As of this moment, Americans make up the greatest percentage of our visitors, by a very long shot. Next, way back there, comes Latvia. Latvia?! Whoda thunk it? Maybe all the Russians moved to Riga?
Rounding out the top ten (plus) we have (3) Canada, (4) France, (5) United Kingdom (tied with Poland and Ukraine), (8) China, (9) Germany, and (10) Sweden.
I can't understand what became of the Russians. When the Chinese aren't in our world, I assume WWW is on the wrong side of the Great Firewall of China because of something we said about the schismatic Chinese Patriotic Catholic Association or freedom of religion or one of the Three Terrible T's.*
So, is there now an Iron Firewall around Russia? Could it be that the KGB (the Russian version of the NSA) thinks Walt is promoting homosexuality? The Russians have a law against that now. If they think that, they haven't been reading very carefully. Or perhaps something is being lost in translation.
Anyone with an answer to this puzzlement is invited to post a comment below. Don't let Walt be the last to know!
* Taiwan, Tibet and Tiananmen Square. You're welcome.
Tuesday, August 6, 2013
Texan responds to proposal for a mosque next to his pig farm - VIDEO
It's fortunate indeed that we have agents keeping their eyes open for items of interest. Somehow both Walt and Len would otherwise miss things that have been read and seen by millions...the world excluding us. [Maybe you guys should get up earlier!? Ed.] This video has been viewed by over 3 million. Thanks to Agent 6 for letting us know.
Here's the set-up. Katy, Texas is a periurban [i.e. semi-rural. Ed.] part of the Greater Houston area. It includes a number of farms, including Craig Baker's pig farm which has been in the same family and the same place for decades.
But Katy did not have a mosque. Greater Houston has something like five dozen mosques, but in Katy there wasn't one. To remedy this dire dearth of suitable places for Muslims to gather, an Islamic association bought an 11-acre chunk of land next to... wait for it... the pig farm.
Yes, they knew their neighbour kept pigs when they bought the land, but the solution seemed so simple. Just get the farmer to move, or maybe get rid of his pigs. Imagine their surprise when the neighbour refused! If anyone's going to move, the farmer suggests, it should be the Muslims because, hey, he was there first!
Here is how Mr. Baker showed his displeasure with the situation, as reported by Fox News.
Here's the set-up. Katy, Texas is a periurban [i.e. semi-rural. Ed.] part of the Greater Houston area. It includes a number of farms, including Craig Baker's pig farm which has been in the same family and the same place for decades.
But Katy did not have a mosque. Greater Houston has something like five dozen mosques, but in Katy there wasn't one. To remedy this dire dearth of suitable places for Muslims to gather, an Islamic association bought an 11-acre chunk of land next to... wait for it... the pig farm.
Yes, they knew their neighbour kept pigs when they bought the land, but the solution seemed so simple. Just get the farmer to move, or maybe get rid of his pigs. Imagine their surprise when the neighbour refused! If anyone's going to move, the farmer suggests, it should be the Muslims because, hey, he was there first!
Here is how Mr. Baker showed his displeasure with the situation, as reported by Fox News.
Monday, August 5, 2013
14-year-old selling chocolate bars victim of sexual assault
Agent 3 sends us a short story from Hamilton, Ontario.
A Niagara Falls man is facing sex charges following an investigation by Hamilton Police involving a 14-year-old.
Police said the investigation looked into complaints said to have occurred between May 2012 and February 2013 when the teen was selling chocolate bars door-to-door and in parking lots in the Hamilton area.
Charged with sexual assault, sexual interference and uttering threats is Maged Younes, 33, of Niagara Falls.
The article in the QMI papers doesn't say who the teen victim was working for, but Len would be prepared to be a chocolate bar that it was Help Kids Canada. See "Chocolate for charity scam still operating?" The answer appears to be "yes".
Also not clear from the story is how the girl could have been assaulted by the same person over the course of ten months. Is it possible the perp was the kid's "manager"?
Another innocent question: What is the accused's immigration status in Canada?
Anyone with further information is asked to call Hamilton police at 905-546-3854.
A Niagara Falls man is facing sex charges following an investigation by Hamilton Police involving a 14-year-old.
Police said the investigation looked into complaints said to have occurred between May 2012 and February 2013 when the teen was selling chocolate bars door-to-door and in parking lots in the Hamilton area.
Charged with sexual assault, sexual interference and uttering threats is Maged Younes, 33, of Niagara Falls.
The article in the QMI papers doesn't say who the teen victim was working for, but Len would be prepared to be a chocolate bar that it was Help Kids Canada. See "Chocolate for charity scam still operating?" The answer appears to be "yes".
Also not clear from the story is how the girl could have been assaulted by the same person over the course of ten months. Is it possible the perp was the kid's "manager"?
Another innocent question: What is the accused's immigration status in Canada?
Anyone with further information is asked to call Hamilton police at 905-546-3854.
Saturday, August 3, 2013
Big brother knows what you mean... you religious pervert!
What do these vanity licence plate "numbers" all have in common...
ILVJESUS, BLSSDX2, PSALM82, PROV 31, TR1N1T1, MATH 633, PRAISGOD, AVAMARIA and IWRK4GOD.
Answer: They were all refused -- not issued -- by the nannies in the Ontario Ministry of Transport. They're all objectionable, you see (don't you?) because they're religious.
And it's not just Christian references that are "0UTLAW3D". Also on the fecal roster are
FAUST666, LUC1F3R, HANUMAN, HOSANNA, FATIMA14, 1MUZZIE (eh?), SREEHARI, and BSMLLH.
Let it never be said that there's discrimination in Ontario!
But it's not just religious references that get rejected by the bureaucrats at the Kremlin. [Queen's Park, surely! Ed.] Your request can be refused if the combination of letters and numbers refers to: sexual meaning and eliminatory functions (like PIPICACA); violence/criminal activity (05 BUBBA ???); "human rights discrimination" (GONSYCHO); drugs/alcohol (JUSTRX, more ???) or if it contains "abusive/obscene language [or] derogatory slang" (C00N).
And if they don't get ya for any of those types of political incorrectness -- God forbid we should mention religion [Ooops! Ed.] -- there's the catch-all "clarity and readability", which the pencil-necks have used to ban BE4R, LE4F5, DBB88888, and 4Y (for why??!!).
The Toronto Star used a freedom of information request to get access to the MoT's database. Click here to see the complete list of 3315 no-nos, searchable by reason for rejection.
Footnote: Every now and then, a politically incorrect plate gets out to the public. Evidently there are no Ukrainian speakers at the Ontario MoT, for they allowed Agent 1's father to get XIMHO.
ILVJESUS, BLSSDX2, PSALM82, PROV 31, TR1N1T1, MATH 633, PRAISGOD, AVAMARIA and IWRK4GOD.
Answer: They were all refused -- not issued -- by the nannies in the Ontario Ministry of Transport. They're all objectionable, you see (don't you?) because they're religious.
And it's not just Christian references that are "0UTLAW3D". Also on the fecal roster are
FAUST666, LUC1F3R, HANUMAN, HOSANNA, FATIMA14, 1MUZZIE (eh?), SREEHARI, and BSMLLH.
Let it never be said that there's discrimination in Ontario!
But it's not just religious references that get rejected by the bureaucrats at the Kremlin. [Queen's Park, surely! Ed.] Your request can be refused if the combination of letters and numbers refers to: sexual meaning and eliminatory functions (like PIPICACA); violence/criminal activity (05 BUBBA ???); "human rights discrimination" (GONSYCHO); drugs/alcohol (JUSTRX, more ???) or if it contains "abusive/obscene language [or] derogatory slang" (C00N).
And if they don't get ya for any of those types of political incorrectness -- God forbid we should mention religion [Ooops! Ed.] -- there's the catch-all "clarity and readability", which the pencil-necks have used to ban BE4R, LE4F5, DBB88888, and 4Y (for why??!!).
The Toronto Star used a freedom of information request to get access to the MoT's database. Click here to see the complete list of 3315 no-nos, searchable by reason for rejection.
Footnote: Every now and then, a politically incorrect plate gets out to the public. Evidently there are no Ukrainian speakers at the Ontario MoT, for they allowed Agent 1's father to get XIMHO.
Friday, August 2, 2013
"Incidences" from the Zimbabwean election
As reported here on Wednesday, there was an election -- of sorts -- in Zimbabwe this week. Walt, who is an ex-resident of one of the darkest spots on the hide of darkest Africa, watched the proceedings with interest, to see if the people of the last country on the list would put an end to the 33-year reign of Comrade Robert Gabriel Mugabe.
They did not. Latest results from the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (R. Mugabe, Prop.) show Uncle Bob re-elected in a landslide, and his thuggish, incompetent and corrupt party, ZANU-PF, winning about 2/3 of the seats in Zimbabwe's parliament. If they get 2/3 or better, as projected, they will be able to amend (again) the country's constitution. They could even make Bob "President-for-Life". As it is, he will be 95 at the end of his new term -- a bit old, surely, to have to fight another election.
Of course he wouldn't have to fight too hard. He and his cronies are past masters of coercion, rigging and election fraud. Case in point: this election's vanishing voters roll.
All parties contesting the election were to receive a copy of the roll prior to the election. MDC, the main opposition party, got its copy on the very eve of polling day. And it was hard copy too, impossible to check for duplicates and residents of graveyards, of which there were seen to be many 1000s.
But never mind. That's par for the course for an African election. Although the MDC and local impartial observers declared the exercise a sham and a farce, monitors from other African organizations -- SADC and the African Union -- declared the election "free and peaceful". Notice they didn't say "fair". Here's part of an article on the BBC website.
African Union (AU) mission head Olusegun Obasanjo dismissed the complaints of fraud, saying the election was fair and free "from the campaigning point of view".
He acknowledged incidents "that could have been avoided and even tended to have breached the law" but added: "All in all, up to the close of the polls, we do not believe that these incidences [incidents] will amount to the result not representing the will of the people. The former Nigerian president added: "I have never seen an election that is perfect. The process continues and we have to limit our comments."
Monitors from the Southern African Development Community (SADC) described the elections as "free and peaceful" but said it was too early to call them fair. "In democracy we not only vote, not only campaign, but accept the hard facts, particularly the outcome," said SADC mission head Bernard Membe.
Which brings me back to the point I was making on Wednesday. The correction shown in brackets -- "incidences [incidents]" -- was made by the BBC, not Len or Ed. I quite believe that Mr. Obasanjo said "incidences", and that the BBC's stringer in Harare wrote it that way, because -- I repeat -- the misuse of "incidence" for "incidents" is so widespread, even amongst supposedly educated people, that it seems futile to point out the error. [So shut up then! Ed.]
They did not. Latest results from the Zimbabwe Electoral Commission (R. Mugabe, Prop.) show Uncle Bob re-elected in a landslide, and his thuggish, incompetent and corrupt party, ZANU-PF, winning about 2/3 of the seats in Zimbabwe's parliament. If they get 2/3 or better, as projected, they will be able to amend (again) the country's constitution. They could even make Bob "President-for-Life". As it is, he will be 95 at the end of his new term -- a bit old, surely, to have to fight another election.
Of course he wouldn't have to fight too hard. He and his cronies are past masters of coercion, rigging and election fraud. Case in point: this election's vanishing voters roll.
All parties contesting the election were to receive a copy of the roll prior to the election. MDC, the main opposition party, got its copy on the very eve of polling day. And it was hard copy too, impossible to check for duplicates and residents of graveyards, of which there were seen to be many 1000s.
But never mind. That's par for the course for an African election. Although the MDC and local impartial observers declared the exercise a sham and a farce, monitors from other African organizations -- SADC and the African Union -- declared the election "free and peaceful". Notice they didn't say "fair". Here's part of an article on the BBC website.
African Union (AU) mission head Olusegun Obasanjo dismissed the complaints of fraud, saying the election was fair and free "from the campaigning point of view".
He acknowledged incidents "that could have been avoided and even tended to have breached the law" but added: "All in all, up to the close of the polls, we do not believe that these incidences [incidents] will amount to the result not representing the will of the people. The former Nigerian president added: "I have never seen an election that is perfect. The process continues and we have to limit our comments."
Monitors from the Southern African Development Community (SADC) described the elections as "free and peaceful" but said it was too early to call them fair. "In democracy we not only vote, not only campaign, but accept the hard facts, particularly the outcome," said SADC mission head Bernard Membe.
Which brings me back to the point I was making on Wednesday. The correction shown in brackets -- "incidences [incidents]" -- was made by the BBC, not Len or Ed. I quite believe that Mr. Obasanjo said "incidences", and that the BBC's stringer in Harare wrote it that way, because -- I repeat -- the misuse of "incidence" for "incidents" is so widespread, even amongst supposedly educated people, that it seems futile to point out the error. [So shut up then! Ed.]
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)