Recent Comments
RSS feed
Dan Hannan: the ‘Sir Humphrey argument’
February 15, 2012 — xanthippa
Also, there is an excellent, 1/2-hour long speech by Dan Hannan on America and Europe – check it out on JR’s site. I love Mr. Hannan’s well constructed phraseoplogy and impeccable delivery, but keep coming back because of the excellence of his ideas.
Ending race-based policing in Ontario – let us hope we are one step closer
February 15, 2012 — xanthippaI received an email which I would like to reproduce in its (almost) entirety, because it not only speaks for itself, it also includes the most-important links….and, it does raise a ray of hope!
Here it is, in its (almost) entirety (I only redacted a phone number):
1. Just days after our Queen’s Park news conference –‘Ending Race-Based Policing: The Caledonia Act\,’ – where we were joined by speakers from the pro-Israel Never Again Group and the International Free Press Society, MPP Toby Barrett has issued a call for strong action re the Caledonia occupation, and praised our efforts and ideas for reaching a resolution…
“Barrett credits Gary Mchale and CANACE for keeping the issue alive in the media and in the limelight, suggesting a lot of McHale’s ideas have been ‘pretty good’.” They include having more oversight from the Ontario Ombudsman with respect to the OPP and more protection for whistleblowers in the Police service.
It was Toby Barrett who made the Queen’s Park Media Studio available for our news conference, as he has done in the past.
2. You can read the Caledonia Act recommendations here:
3. See also TobyBarrett.com: Occupy Caledonia will be six years February 28
This is the first time that Toby has publicly complimented our work to the media, and we hope it is a sign of good things to come.
Thank you Toby.
Mark Vandermaas
VoiceofCanada.ca
IpperwashPapers.ca
ConservativesAgainstFantino.ca
HelplessByBlatchford.ca
IpperwashPapers.ca
ConservativesAgainstFantino.ca
HelplessByBlatchford.ca
Jason Kenney defunds ‘Palestine House’
February 15, 2012 — xanthippaOK – the credit for this one goes to BCF!
He did all the investigative journalism, the documentation and he exerted the political pressure necessary for the Minister to be able to do his job!
Well done, BCF!!!
Of course, in a just world, these would be criminal charges – not just a simple de-funding. But, as ‘they’ say, Harper is an incrementalist – and this is a first tiny little baby step in the right direction.
Warrantless surveillance is becoming a reality in Canada
February 14, 2012 — xanthippaOh, I know I cannot write this up in a way to do this topic justice – mostly because it sends my blood pressure so dangerously high. After all, blind rage is the only reasonable response to a minister claiming that those whodare to voice reservations about a proposed law that would make mincemeat out of civil liberties are no better than child molesters.
Because that is exactly what he is saying.
OK – I’m about to loose my temper…again…and not finish this post…
ARRRRGGGHHHH!
Resorting to the ‘do it or you hate children and kick puppies’ is the last resort of a bully who knows he cannot defend his position based on the issues!
AAAAAARRRRRGGGHHHH!!!!
YES! It actually IS supposed to be difficult to deprive people of their liberties: that is why cops have to follow all them silly rules!!! Taking the rules away will not make one child safer, while at the same time, it will make all of us a little less safe!
AAAAAAAAAAARRRRRRRRRGGGGGGHHHHHHH!!!!!
Michael Geist has a good write-up on this – with lots of excellent and informative links. Read him – it’ll make more sense than I can.
As you ponder this, also take a peek at this.
THAT is the root of the problem: the system lacks accountability!
Actually, that article just might explain a lot about the minister’s attitude: they have already started to build a huge electronic surveillance system. Parts of it have been operational for years!
All the bluster now is to hide that they have as yet to pass the laws to make it legal…
Thunderf00t: The BEST emotional PORN
February 14, 2012 — xanthippa
He is right, of course!
In a similar vein…
People often justify ‘religion’ by saying that ‘it brings people comfort’. Quite aside from the validity of the justification, I am begining to doubt the truth of the statement.
Let me explain…
Many of my friends are religious – and yes, they do claim that their religious beliefs bring them ‘comfort’ and make them ‘feel better’. Not being religious myself, I have simply accepted this assertion at face value. While I never bought in to the claim that it is ‘good’ to promote/accept things simply because they make you ‘feel good’, I had never questioned the assertion itself.
Until, that is…
A friend of mine got hit by a truck while riding her motorcycle. She was really lucky – not only did she survive, thanks to medical advances, she did not loose the leg that was so badly injured in the crash.
This friend also happens to be deeply Catholic.
One day, her (then very pregnant) daughter and I visited her in the hospital. My friend had already had one surgery to screw the bones of her leg back together, but was still waiting for more surgeries, including the one that would use a skin graft to try to close some of the biggest wounds. (Sorry to go into this much detail – it goes to ‘state of mind’… My friend was hurting, afraid, and had almost died in a crash before her first grandchild was to be born.)
While we were putting on a brave pretense of lighearted banter to relieve my friend’s discomfort, a volunteer had come into her room. This woman offered to pray with us – which my friend and her daughter gladly accepted. At the end of the prayer, whe did some sort of a blessing and handed each of them a consecrated host. Both my friend and her daughter said they were greatly comforted, we thanked the woman, and she left.
The thing is – I don’t think that it did make them feel better!
No, I am not accusing them of lying – I think they truly believed they ‘felt better’. But their behaviour betrayed their actual state of mind.
Both their demeanours changed – for the worse. Instead of talking about how lucky my friend was, that she survived the crash, she was tearful, saying things like that since her soul has been cleansed, it would be OK for her to die now…which brought hysterical crying from her daughter, and then it spiralled downwards from there.
They were certainly not ‘feeling better’!
There was a disconnect between how they believed religion made them feel and how it actually did make them feel. Sure, it can make some people feel better at some times – but, we need to treat self-reporting in this area in the same way as we treat self-reporting in other fields…with a very healthy dose of skepticism.
By constantly focusing the mind on physical death and ‘fear of God’, ‘religion’ brings terror, not comfort, to the people who fall for it. And they don’t even realize it themselves…
Thunderf00t compares ‘religion’ to ‘spiritual masturbation’ – and I can certainly understand his point. But, having thought about it, I am wondering if it would not be more accurate to see ‘religion’ as ‘picking on a spiritual scab’: it is hard to stop doing it, even when you know it is bad for you!
If the USA declared a ‘War on Drugs’, do ‘international rules of war’ apply?
February 13, 2012 — xanthippaOne of my favourite thinking games is taking words and looking at all the different layers of meanings in them – along with why certain of their meanings form the dominant interpretation at any given time.
Hours of fun – and anyone can play!
For example, I absolutely love the word ‘authority’: it means quite literally, that we – as a culture – accept that ‘power’ flows exclusively from Thor. Au Thor-ity. Coming from Thor. (This is particularly amusing when coupled with the term ‘divine’ – as in, ‘divine authority’. If someone claims their god has ‘divine authority’, whether they are aware of it or not, they are literally saying that their god derives all of its power from Thor…which is fascinating when monotheists who deny the very existence of Thor do it. Yes, it does not take a lot to amuse me…)
One thing I find very annoying are the ‘grand declarations’ of ‘war on …’ – especially ones that do not really have proper meaning. For example, ‘The War on Terror’ is a nonsense-statement.
‘Terror’ is a feeling – a state of mind. To wage a war on it would mean trying to make people feel better, perhaps by medicating them into a state of non-fear. It certainly does not mean waging a physical war, with soldiers and guns.
Declaring war on terrorist organizations would make more sense…
Now, how about ‘The War on Drugs’?
Again, the jingoism of the slogan is non-sensical, at best. ‘Drugs’ are not something that is capable of fighting back, it is just stuff. Inanimate objects. It makes even less sense to claim to wage a war against inanimate objects than it does to wage a war against a state of mind. It does, however. bring up the image of one ’tilting at windmills’…
Except, of course, that the term ‘War on Drugs’ does not mean a war on drugs as such: it means a war on the organizations that handle certain drugs currently prohibited by the government.
Ok – so we have deciphered what the ‘Drugs’ in the statement means: organizations which are involved in the production and distribution of substances classified as ‘illegal’ by the US government. (Yes, I am intentionally not addressing why these laws are ‘illegal’!) So, what does the word ‘War’ mean?
This is, by far, the more interesting part of the phrase.
What, indeed, is meant by the word ‘War’?!?!?!?
Typically, ‘wars’ are fought by armies – not police forces. Yet, the ‘War on Drugs’ is being fought by non-military police officers. That is curious, to say the least. (Some would claim it is illegal – but that is a differen discussion.)
It would, of course, explain why the various police forces across the USA are becoming increasingly militarized: sometimes, it seems that cops are more military-like than the military itself! This would, indeed, be a more-or-less necessary outcome if the police were, indeed, waging ‘a war’… at least, according to my understanding of the ‘conventional’ meaning of the word ‘war’.
So, let us look at whom the ‘war’ is being waged against: the ‘drug gangs’. Are these, in any way, shape, or form ‘an army’?
A good case could be made that ‘drug gangs’ are, indeed, ‘armies’. If my memory serves me right (I have lost all of my bookmarks again, so I am not including links – please, check up on me!), according to international laws, ‘an army’ is defined as an organization must have:
- a well defined chain-of-command
- defined markings/insignia worn by its members to make them recognizable and differentiate them from civilians
Drug gangs most definitely satisfy this definition. Their chain-of-command is very well defined. And, all gang-members do wear specific ‘colours’, or symbols, which identify them clearly and unambiguously as members of that particular gang. Many gangs go a step further than most conventional armies – they not only wear their gang insignia, they have them tattooed into their very skin, so no disguise is possible!
In other words, the ‘drug gangs’ are more of an ‘army’ (under international law) than ‘terrorist organizations’, which do not wear identifying insignia and pride themselves in hiding among the civilian population. Honestly, the ‘War on Drugs’ adheres more closely to the definition of ‘war’ under international laws than ‘War on Terror’ does – yet the ‘War on Terror’ has been used, successfully, to justify (internationally) at least two extra-territorial wars that the US got involved in.
So, why is this an issue I bother thinking about?
Well, it does have some very interesting LEGAL implications….
If this is, indeed, a ‘War’ – then the ‘international rules of war’ automatically kick in!!!
It means that each and every person arrested in the USA under the ‘drug laws’ MUST be treated as a prisoner of war – and is not subject to any criminal laws!!!
Yes, please, do think about it!
Frankly, I find it difficult to believe that no enterprising lawyer has not thought of this yet…
The US government cannot have their cake and eat it, too. (OK – ‘the cake is a lie’….but that does not take away from my point!)
The US government has openly declared ‘A War’ on all organizations even peripherally involved in the drug trade. These drug organizations straddle national borders. This means that the international ‘rules of war’ most definitely kicked in once US made their declaration of war!!!
Under international ‘rules of war’, if you capture ‘a soldier’ from the opposing side, even if that person had indeed brutally killed many, many people, they cannot be tried as ‘murderers’! Rather, they must be given all the privileges attached to Prisoners Of War!
To re-phrase: because the US government has openly declared ‘War on Drugs’, is it now violating the Geneva Convention every single time it applies criminal law to anyone arrested on any drug-related charges?
Please, think about it!!!
OpenMedia.ca: Which Telecom Giant thinks you should pay more?
February 6, 2012 — xanthippaFrom OpenMedia.ca:
The Big Three are ripping us off and using the money to manipulate Canadians and the government.
As we’ve been saying, the Big Three cell phone companies have a plan to price-gouge Canadians by shutting out small competitors1. Now they’re unleashing a misinformation campaign to muzzle your voice.
For example,
- Rogers recently bought and paid for a trumped-up study2 that wrongly implies Canadians (you) can afford to pay more for telecom services.
- Rogers just took to the courts to argue that Canada’s false advertising rules violate the telecom giant’s freedom of expression! This after being caught red-handed and fined $10,000,000 dollars for misleading cell phone advertising.3
Will you let them get away with it?
With these two acts of extreme arrogance, Rogers has demonstrated that they will go to ridiculous lengths to tighten their stranglehold on communications and raise prices.
Some say mobile is the future of the Internet and communications. We have to stop the Big Three from creating a command and control communications market with tight contracts, content controls, price-gouging overage fees, and disrespectful customer service.
The government could make a decision on this at any moment. Sign the Stop The Squeeze petition now.
With hope and determination,
Steve, on behalf of your OpenMedia.ca Team
P.S. Unlike Big Telecom, we listen to Canadians. Some of you have expressed that we should provide more details in our messages. We heard you—here’s some more detailed background information:
- Cell phone companies require low-frequency wireless spectrum to deliver the latest mobile devices to customers. There is a new block of 700 MHZ spectrum that will be available for use through an auction later this year and the government is about to decide who will have access to the spectrum.The Big Three providers are sitting on more than enough spectrum to do deliver their services to Canadians (including those in rural areas). They want the government to take a do nothing approach and allow the Big hree to control essential spectrum and shut out independent competitors. You can also check out CTV News coverage of this issue here.
- Lemay Yates recently released a report, bought and paid for by Rogers, that suggests Canadians have better Internet speed, availability and pricing than our global counterparts. But this research directly contradicts many other independent reports (from the OECD, Harvard, the New America Foundation, Akamai, and more) that show Canada falling woefully behind on key metrics like price and speed.
- According to the Vancouver Sun: “Rogers Communications Inc. is asking an Ontario court to strike down part of a federal law requiring a company to have ‘adequate and proper’ tests of a product’s performance before advertising claims about the product — on the grounds that it violates its freedom of expression.”
Now that you know the details, it’s time to act.
| Support OpenMedia.ca |
| OpenMedia.ca is a non-profit organization that relies on donations from people like you to operate. Our small but dedicated team ensures even the smallest contributions go a long way to make your voice heard. Please donate today. |
Xanthippa's Chamberpot 