Omar Khadr is NOT a ‘Child Soldier’ – as per UN laws

August 25, 2009 — xanthippa

Just about everyone has heard of Omar Khard:  the one Canadian languishing in Guantanamo Bay detention camp.

Most people – whatever their views and opinions are on the circumstances that lead to his current predicament – agree that his situation is quite tragic.  The kid never had a chance to grow up ‘normally’.

Born into a family which was legally in Canada, emotionally in Pakistan and philosophically in 8th century Arabia, his childhood could not be considered ‘normal’ by any standards.

Both his parents were religious fanatics (his mother still is, his father gave his life to conduct violent jihad).  He was physically bumped around, from living in the ‘Secular West’ at some points to a Muslim school in Pakistan to terrorist training camps.  His sister was given in marriage at the age of 15 to an Al-Qaeda buddy of her father (the wedding is said to have been attended by Osama himself), his brothers actively conducted violent jihad (not all survived), and so on.

It really is a sad story.  I can understand why it pulls at all our collective heartstrings!

Currently, the public debate is focused on what is to be done with young Omar now?

This is a very, very important decision:  whatever action is taken (on not taken) on behalf of Omar Khadr will set THE legal precedent for future situation that are similar.

So, let us get it right!

In order to make the best possible decision, we must objectively examine what Omar Khadr is – and what he is not.

This is an essential step, because it will define under which circumstances the legal precedent set by the ‘Omar Khadr case’ will be applicable.

The most common description of Omar Khadr one hears in the MSM (mainstream media) – as well as one often repeated by his defense lawyers – is that Omar Khadr is a ‘Child Soldier’.

So, let us examine if this is the case:

Is Omar Khadr a ‘Child Soldier’?

The definition of ‘Child Soldier’ has two parts:  ‘Child’ and ‘Soldier’.

First:  is Omar Khadr a ‘Soldier’?

No, he is not.

At least, not according to the UN laws on the matter (or any other law I am aware of which defines who is, and who is not, a ‘soldier’).

The UN laws were written in order to protect the innocent civilians who get in the way of a war first, then the protection of legitimate soldiers second.  And, they are very clear on who is and who is not a ‘soldier’ (again – basic Wikipedia search provides clear answers – but much more material confirming this is easily available through any major search engine…):

‘To qualify under the Third Geneva Convention, a combatant must have conducted military operations according to the laws and customs of war, be part of a chain of command, wear a “fixed distinctive marking, visible from a distance” and bear arms openly.’

Omar Khadr, unfortunately, does not satisfy these qualifications.

Not only was he not a part of a recognized military ‘chain of command’, and not wearing any ‘badges’ or ‘distinctive markings’ that could, even remotely, be construed as ‘uniform’ or ‘fixed distinctive marking’:  the crime he is accused of having committed is against the laws and customs of war.  ( I can expand on this, at length, if asked, in the comments sections.)

Therefore, Omar Khadr DOES NOT satisfy the qualifications of having the status of a ‘soldier’.  Therefore, he cannot be treated as a ‘soldier’:  a ‘Child Soldier’, an ‘adult soldier’, or any other kind of ‘soldier’.

But, even if Omar Khadr were a ‘Soldier’:  would he qualify as a ‘Child Soldier’?

This is a more difficult question – but there is a legal answer!

Omar Khadr was aged 15 when he was detained by UN troops and when the premeditated murder of a UN non-combatant medic, which he is accused of having committed, occurred.

Different people mature at different rates:  at 15, some people really are still children while others are quite adult.  Both individual maturing rates and cultural influences are important in determining if a 15-year-old is ‘an adult’ or ‘a child’.  What does the law say?

Omar Khadr straddled two cultures:

  • In Canada, a 15-year old is, legally, a child.
  • Still, 15-year-olds are able to become emancipated, and legally become adults.
  • Under some circumstances, non-emancipated 15-year-olds are charged with crimes as adults – so the ‘legal precedent’ can be applied both ways:  it is a bit of a legal ‘gray area’ in Canada.
  • In Islamist culture, a 15-year-old is considered to be an adult, without any reservations.
  • The Khadr family certainly considers 15 years of age to be ‘adult’ – that is the age at which their daughter was given away in marriage!

It is obvious that in his own eyes, as well as according to the culture of his family, Omar Khadr is ‘an adult’. And, in our multicultural society, would it not be offensive to dismiss Omar Khadr’s minority cultural view of his status at that time?

OK, ok – so, the ‘multiculturalism’ thing is kind of messed up – and we all know it.  Let’s look elsewhere:

What does the International Human Rights Law have to say on the subject? (The following is a cut-and-paste of what Wikipedia has to say on this:  I usually like to paraphrase things, but I could not hope to make it more clear than they had…)

International humanitarian law

According to Article 77.2 of the Additional Protocol I to the Geneva Conventions of 12 August 1949, and relating to the Protection of Victims of International Armed Conflicts, adopted in 1977:

‘The Parties to the conflict shall take all feasible measures in order that children who have not attained the age of fifteen years do not take a direct part in hostilities and, in particular, they shall refrain from recruiting them into their armed forces. In recruiting among those persons who have attained the age of fifteen years but who have not attained the age of eighteen years, the Parties to the conflict shall endeavour to give priority to those who are oldest.’

Well, that seems rather clear:  once a person has reached the age of 15, he/she cannot be considered to be a ‘Child Soldier’ – even though it’s better to recruit people who are over the age of 18…. 15-year-olds are ‘regular soldiers’!

Omar Khadr HAD ‘attained the age of fifteen years’ – so he IS, according to international law, ‘regular soldier’!

In other words, legally, Omar Khadr CANNOT be considered a ‘Child Soldier’, because he is not a ‘Child’:  he would have had to have been FOURTEEN years of age or younger in order to be considered a ‘Child Soldier’!

OK – so we are nowhere closer to the answer of what Omar Khadr actually is:  but, I have (hopefully) demonstrated that whatever he is, he is NOT a ‘Child Soldier’!

I know – the facts of the situation are unlikely to affect the direction of the public debate…. I have no illusions about it.  People who point out the laws and the rules are nowhere near as interesting – and nowhere near listened to – as people who play on our emotions…

But, we MUST TRY, mustn’t we?

Posted in freedoms, opression, politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , , , , , , , . 17 Comments »

A chat with Lisa MacLeod

July 27, 2009 — xanthippa

What interesting times we live in!

Tonight, Lisa MacLeod – the newly named Finance critic in Tim Hudak’s shadow cabinet – hosted a meet-and-greet with Tim Hudak.

It was very lovely.   Truly.

And while I spent most of my time talking with other attendees – especially with fellow immigrants to Canada – about our negative experiences with official Apartheid Multiculturalism policies (the latest honour dishonour killings made people – and not just us, immigrants – very, very angry), I did get to exchange a word or two with a few of the celebs there.

It’s been a very long day – and my stamina is still very low – so this will have to be a very brief post.  Yet, these little bits are well worth mentioning!

Mr. Pierre Poilievre was there and we exchanged a few words about the latest lawfare suit launched by one of ‘The Sock Puppets’ against Ezra Levant.  (Aside:  Wednesday, July 29th 2009, there will be an online fundraiser for Mr.Levant’s defense fund at Mark Steyn’s online store .  He is fighting this battle for all of us!  Thanks to BCF and 5’ofF for the tip!)

Then, I had a little chat with Lisa MacLeod, my host.  She was, well, to put it mildly, not impressed with what I have written about her in the past.  I can’t say I’m surprised, or that I blame her!  What can I say – she makes very lousy 1st impressions…which I did mention, unless I am much mistaken…

I must say that her reaction surprised me a little.  I was expecting her to be most upset by my criticism of her conduct as a politician…which we went into, very briefly.  Yes, the tention in the air was, as they say, palpable.

Still,  it was my criticism of her parenting that really, really upset her.  I must admit, I was not willing to  back down – I write what I see, as I see it;  no more, no less and I asked her if what I wrote was incorrect.  This seemed to upset Ms. MacLeod:  the anger seemed to dissipate and be replaced by a different kind of  ‘upset’.  That is good:  it showed me that beneath the ‘thick-skinned politician’ veneer (which I was so turned off by), there may be a truly genuine person who cares about the important things in life!

At this point, Ms. MacLeod excused herself and went  to watch her daughter play at the nearby playstructure.

Now, I am thinking that I may have been too quick to judge her:  that I fell for the image she tries to project (not one I would advise projecting) and failed to see the person behind it.  If she convinces me I was wrong about her, I’ll write about it.  

IF she convinces me!

Posted in freedoms, immigrants, perceptions, politics. Tags: , , , . 1 Comment »

‘Communion scandal’ improves Harper’s image

July 21, 2009 — xanthippa

Perhaps this is obvious to everyone, perhaps it has been written about and I have missed it…

Did the ‘Communion scandal‘ actually improved Prime Minister Harper‘s image?  Is that, at least partially, why the polls are saying his popularity is up by 7 points (as per Angus Reid poll, reported on CFRA today)?

Let me explain my reasoning…

Steven Harper is a lot of things:  an awesome economist (and, in these turbulent times, most of us prefer to have an economist rather than a lawyer or an academic without any experience outside the College campus.).  That is a big plus for Mr. Harper.

But, his political opponents have always successfully exploited the fact that, for ever, Steven Harper will be associated (in the minds of most urban Canadians, especially those in Ontario and Quebec) with the ‘Evangelical’ taint his Reform Party past brings.  Rightly or wrongly, the Reform Party could not shake the kind of ‘Sarah Palin-type- thingy’ (please excuse the technical jargon…):  right on so many things, but, kind of scary when it comes to ‘faith issues’….

In some places, politicians are ‘expected’ to be ‘religious’:  it ‘proves’ to the ‘little people’ that they are ‘humble’ and ‘pious’….  This is still true of ‘US conservatives’ – at least, this is more true of them than any other Western ‘group’.

Why these ought to be good qualities in a political leader, I don’t know!

As a matter of fact, I seriously question whether people who are willing to put religious faith above facts and reason – and, especially above the will of voters – ought to be in any positions of power whatsoever.  After all, I would like the laws governing my country to be reasonable – not faith based!

Here, it is important to note that this ‘faith’ could be religious or ideological – it does not make an iota of difference in the practical impact of ‘faith-based’ laws on our society!

Though Canadians are very poor in recognizing ‘ideological faith, we are very sensitive to ‘religious faith’. Therefore, any suggestions that a politician might be so religious as to obey the tenets of his religion over the will of his constituents when drafting laws and policies harms that politician.  It makes it very unlikely that he/she would get a majority, because the large urban areas will not take what they perceive as that big a risk.

And, more and more Canadians are aware of just how many religious leaders abuse their power.  This is not specific to any one faith – one could easily find examples of abuse from just about every religious sect.  Rather, more and more people suspect that the fault lies in allowing any man or woman to exercise power over another, using spirituality as the ultimate weapon:  obey, submit, behave this way and believe this dogma – or you will suffer eternal torture…

That is why most organized religions in Canada are loosing members:  dogmatization of spirituality is becoming more and more unacceptable to urbanized, mainstream Canadians!  And that includes Canadians of all political bends…

When the Roman Catholic Church said that priests ought to deny ‘Communion’ to any politician who does not vote to ban abortion, there was a serious backlash against the Roman Catholic Church.  This was widely understood to be ‘spiritual blackmail’ of the politician:  threatening him/her with eternal damnation of his’her soul UNLESS he/she placed the Papist dogma above the will of their constituents!

The ‘little ‘l’ liberal’ Canadians are loath of any erosion in the ‘secularity’ of our laws: they will never support a politician whom they suspect of having a religious agenda!

Perhaps not surprisingly, there are more and more ‘non-religious’ ‘little ‘c’ conservatives.  People who do support many core conservative values, but who are very uncomfortable with the ‘religious’ component of today’s Conservative movement.  Very, very, very uncomfortable!

Just remember John Tory!

Steven Harper – with all his good and bad points – had a problem shaking the ‘religious’ image of the old Reform Party.  And his political opponents exploited it very, very skilfully.

Now, to this ‘Communion scandal’:

Some Roman Catholic Cleric attacked Steven Harper for his conduct during a Catholic funeral mass which Steven Harper attended.  It would appear that the priest walked up to the people sitting in on the benches in the church.  Steven Harper offered him a hand for a handshake – that is what politicians do, they shake hands as a symbol of greeting or acceptance or a number of other things.

The priest, instead of shaking the offered hand, stuck a communion wafer in it.

Now, the PM was ‘damned if he did/damned if he did not’ do just about anything.

Had he rejected the wafer and tried to give it back to the priest, he would be committing a grave offense:  he would be ‘rejecting Jesus himself’!

Had he tried to minimize damage by pocketing the damned thing and giving it back to the priest later, he would create horrible offense:  one does not ‘stick Jesus in a pocket’!

And, had he committed ritual cannibalism and eaten the ‘literal flesh of Christ’ – as Roman Catholics believe they are doing when they consume a Communion Wafer – he would be giving great offense because non-Roman Catholic Christians are not allowed the salvation which eating the flesh of a dead guy is supposed to bring, according to the RC dogma.

The PM took the latest option.  And, was immediately attacked for not being a fine young cannibal!  A bunch of RC clerics attacked him, for ‘offending their faith’ – while not saying a peep about the latest child sex-abuse scandal in the Roman Catholic Church became public that day!

Steven Harper’s political opponents – seeing an opening to attack – made the most of the story.  The one about the PM accepting a communion wafer – not the one about more RC priest pedophiles.  They ‘shouted it from the rooftops’!  They got it into all kinds of papers, so no Canadian could remain unaware that Steven Harper is insensitive to religion!

Wait a minute!

Steven Harper was trying to shake the ‘he’s too easily influenced by religion’ image – especially among the urban folk.  And now, his opponents are announcing to everyone that Steven Harper is not religious enough???

What an effective way to allay those fears of people who liked him, but worried he might be a religious freak!  He’s just a normal guy, after all!

No wonder that Steven Harper’s popularity went up!

Posted in freedoms, human nature, ignosticism, perceptions, politics, religion, society. Tags: , , , , . 8 Comments »

Just Right: ‘Obama’s America ‘going Canadian’ on hate crime’

July 21, 2009 — xanthippa

How many ways are there of saying:  NOT GOOD!  NOT GOOD!  NOT GOOD!

Just Right has the story – with the video:

Sneaking it in under cover of a defense authorization bill with debate scheduled for the wee hours of the morning the Democrats succeeded in passing sweeping new federal hate crimes legislation.

Just as the ‘general awareness’ of this intrusive oppression is rising in Canada, Americans are going to be blindsided by it!

Of course, the majority of Americans will remain oblivious to the danger, thinking their constitution will protect them and their rights… till one of these neo-fascists smiles primly at them, explaining that ‘Freedom of speech is not an American concept’…or some such thing.

They’ll never believe it could happen to them – even though it already has!

Ayayayayay!



Posted in freedoms, opression, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , , , , . 5 Comments »

Who benefits from the ‘Larry O’Brien trial’?

July 8, 2009 — xanthippa

Yes, this is more ranting about what is happening in Ottawa… so many eyes will glaze over and click over to another, more ‘global’ post elsewhere…

BUT…

This is more than just ‘local politics’.

If one follows the proverbial ‘money’, it becomes clear that this show trial is less about the figures involved (as fun as it is to pull them apart) and more about – labour unions.

Because it was the labour unions who had declared a war on this rookie Mayor – a successful hi-tech business guy – for winning on a platform to ‘reign in the unions’…  And the unions all around the country are watching the legal precedent this sets!

Does this seem far fetched?

Let’s connect the dots….

I’ll intentionally strip out the details, to reduce the ‘noise’ and make the facts stand out.

The Union of Unions laid the complaint….few months into the 4-year-Mayoral term.

The police (belonging to the Union of Unions) investigated the complaint….for over a year.

The civil servants (belonging to the Union of Unions) decided to lay charges….against the advice of their own prosecuting attorneys, none of which would take the case.

The civil servants (belonging to the Union of Unions) scheduled the trial a year later:  for a time when most of the city union contracts are up for renewal…coincidence?  Really?

During the Mayor’s leave of absence – for the trial – the city unions (belonging to the Union of Unions) negotiate ‘new contracts’ which are much more generous (money and control) to them than could ever happen if the Mayor were in his chair…..and even gave back concessions the Mayor had won earlier, when he refused to give in to a winter bus-strike.

By now, the Mayor has effectively been crippled by this lawfare for most of his term in office…and the next race has already begun!

Whether the Mayor is found guilty or innocent, it seems to me that the Union of Unions – the Canadian Labour Congress and its constituents and minions – have already won!

The end…

…of a lot of things!

Posted in freedoms, opression, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , , . Leave a Comment »

McGuinty’s ‘all-day schooling’ harms low-income women

June 23, 2009 — xanthippa

This rant is a follow up to my State is Mother, State is Father… and Why young kids should not be ‘institutionalized’.

Why the rant?

The Premier of Ontario, Dalton McGuinty, had – on the advice of an ‘educator’ – suggested that children should be put in schools from 4 years of age:  from 7:30 in the morning to 6 in the evening (yes, that is a 10.5 hour work-day for the child), 50 weeks per year (only 2 weeks of holidays per year)…

There are many motives for doing this:  McGuinty’s announcement said that he would begin implementing this program in areas where school enrolement was falling, and in economically depressed areas.

In other words:  Canadians are having fewer children, so the school enrollment is falling.  That means fewer jobs for teachers – like the premier’s wife!  So, he is doing something about it: if you have fewer children going to school, then to keep the number of teaching jobs up (or even raise it), you must increase the number of hours the kids are kept there!

This is a make-work-for-teachers program! Nothing more!

The kids are just pawns!

What will be the impact on our society?  It will make it more and more difficult for parents to look after their children themselves… It will be another nail in the coffin of the ‘nuclear family’!

Please, consider the following:

Our tax system penalizes families which choose to have one parent stay at home to raise their kids.  These families are taxed at a much higher rate than those who choose to use daycare (the cost of which is, in many cases, also subsidized from taxpayer dollars).

In order to make ends meet, many young mothers (it is mostly mothers) who choose to stay home to raise their young children will start a small, home-based daycare.  They’ll take in two or three other kids, pick them up from the schoolbus and care for them after school in their home.  I have seen these home based daycares – several of them.

They are loving homes and, in most cases, the care-giver and the child develop strong bonds. This is good:  small, home-based daycares mimic the ‘extended family’ scenario in which children have traditionally grown up and which, in my never-humble-opinion, is the best social setting for the healthy social growth of a young child.

What will happen under the newly proposed McGuinty plan?

McGuinty will have destroyed thousands of small, women-run business!

McGuinty will take away their jobs and give them to the teachers!

Because now, parents will not pay a neighbour or a friend to look after their child:  it will be cheaper and more ‘convenient’ to just put them into school for 10.5 hours!  And the taxpayers will pay for it all – so, why not?

And the women whose daycare income (now gone) used to allow them to stay at home will have to pay higher taxes, to pay the salaries of teachers (who get paid much, much more per hour than the caregiver was) who stole her job from her!!!

These women will be forced to work outside of home to make ends meet….and their own children will end up in the educational institution as well…because they will no longer be able to afford to look after them themselves.

In one punch, McGuinty has destroyed the ability of many parents to raise their kids themselves by depriving them of income and raising their taxes all at once!

People do not get rich running small, home-based daycares!  Their income is pretty low – just enough to let them ‘make ends meet’, so they CAN raise their children themselves, with the love their children deserve!

Taking away from low-income women and giving to the fat-cat unions!  That is ‘education – McGuinty style’!

add to del.icio.usDigg itStumble It!Add to Blinkslistadd to furladd to ma.gnoliaadd to simpyseed the vineTailRank

Posted in education, freedoms, politics, society. Tags: , , , , . 2 Comments »

I might just vote Liberal in the next federal election

June 19, 2009 — xanthippa

Yes – it’s true!

I JUST MIGHT!!!

OK – I am suspending my rant against institutionalizing young children, in order to comment on something WAY OVER THE TOP!!!

Yesterday, our Conservative Ministers of Justice (!) and Public Safety (Rob Nicholson and Peter Van Loan, respectively) have announced sweeping new legislation which would give police the power to snoop on all internet traffic – and the identity of people on the net – WITHOUT A WARRANT!!!

From The Canadian Press:

The proposed legislation would:

-enable police to access information on an Internet subscriber, such as name, street address and email address, without having to get a search warrant.

-force Internet service providers to freeze data on their hard drives to prevent subscribers under investigation from deleting potentially important evidence.

-require telecommunications companies to invest in technology that allows for the interception of Internet communications.

-allow police to remotely activate tracking devices already embedded in cellphones and certain cars, to help with investigations.

-allow police to obtain data about where Internet communications are coming from and going to.

-make it a crime to arrange with a second person over the Internet the sexual exploitation of a child.

Did you notice that???

They ‘tack on’ the last one – protecting children from sexual exploitation – on to a whole set of really, really oppressive things.  This way, if anyone speaks up against it – they can SMEAR him/her by saying he/she does not want to ‘protect our children’!

I don’t even know where to begin my rant!!!

Do I start with the oppressive police-powers, or do I start with how the issue was intentionally manipulated, using our children’s well-being as a guise to strip us of our rights!!!

OK, I am a ‘little’ angry.

And I think I am right to be angry!  And every Canadian ought to be bloody angry about this, too!!!

The Harper government has repeatedly failed to reign in the Stalinist HRCs – which have now been shown to be staffed with political activists, religious extremists and corrupt ex-police officers, and which are trampling on REAL human rights in this country!

It is frightening that the federal Conservative Finance Minister’s wife, Christine Elliot, is running for the leadership of the Ontario Provincial Conservative Party leadership:  this kind of ‘political dynasties’ are bad for everyone….and I cannot believe that Conservatives (I am a ‘little ‘c’ conservative – so it is not my place to do so), in Ontario AND federally, have not caused major fuss about this.  But, her stand on the HRCs is truly frightening:  it is not’ politically expedient’ to reign them in – and the people be damned…this is about ME getting elected!!!

Now, it appears that her shalowness and political opportunism are a reflection of her husband’s federal Conservative policy… and THAT explains why the HRCs are allowed to rattle their sabres and continue to persecute anyone who dares to speak up against them!!!

SHAME, SHAME, SHAME, SHAME!!!

But, even worse, now federal CONSERVATIVES(!) are planning to pass LAWS which would make it easier for the HRCs to abuse people who have committed thought crime – and will give such corrupting power to the police forces, too!

I don’t even know what is happening any more…

How could they?!?!?

Has Ezra’s lesson not sunk in?!?!?

How DARE they?!?!?

This is one lesson that if we wait until after we have learned what it means, it will be too late to ‘undo’ it!!!

What the (insert expletive of your choice) is going on?!?!?

Will I be forced to vote Liberal?

Damn them all!



add to del.icio.usDigg itStumble It!Add to Blinkslistadd to furladd to ma.gnoliaadd to simpyseed the vineTailRank

Posted in freedoms, opression, politics, society. Tags: , , , , . 2 Comments »

State is Mother, State is Father…

June 17, 2009 — xanthippa

My dog loves the sofa.  He also loves blankets.

He absolutely relishes sleeping on the sofa – and this is one dog that has elevated ‘sleeping’ into an art form. Really – I have known many dogs, and owned a few, but I have never met a dog who relishes sleep like this crazy canine does!

Also, he does not like strangers to sit on his the sofa.  He’ll watch to see if the person gets up for some reason – even for a moment, sneak in behind them, steal the spot and immediately start pretending that he’s asleep, has been asleep in that spot for a very long time, and why is everyone getting all worked up about this?

He also loves to steal blankets:  and has been known to quietly grab a corner and, slowly but steadily, sneak off with the blanket of an unwary person lying down on the sofa, watching TV late at night.

When my son and I came home Monday, he greeted us with great enthusiasm.  He slithered off the sofa, stretched slowly and thoroughly, and wandered over to the front hallway to greet us.  Honestly – this passes as ‘enthusiastic’ from him:  sometimes, he just lifts his head off the sofa’s arm-rest and wags his tail a tiny bit to show he’s noticed you came in.

So, today’s was an enthusiastic greeting!  Then, after he followed me to the kitchen and stopped in front of the fridge, hoping that his beautiful brown eyes would hypnotize me to give him a pepperette, when – suddenly and visibly – a though struck him.

Quite suddenly, he abandoned begging communicating and, with unusual swiftness, he ran to the living room.  OK, we knew when we adopted him that he was ‘special’ and, though incredibly good natured, he was no border collie in the brain department – so I thought nothing of it.

Later, when I came into the living room, I noticed that he was not lying down on the sofa, but on a chair.  And he was not really lying down in his usual way… instead, he was more ‘splayed’:  all four paws spread as far apart as possible, his centre of gravity as low as he could get it.  His head was not resting, but just slightly elevated in a high-strung sort of way.  And his eyes…

His eyes were priceless!  They were ‘big’ – his ‘vigilant look’ (well, as vigilant as he gets) – with lots of ‘white’ showing.  And they were flashing, side to side – in a particularly self-pleased way!

Had his behaviour not been so ‘obvious’, I would not have looked around too closely to see what he was doing.  But, his very demeanour gave away that he was ‘being tricky’:  that he had ‘done’ something naughty and thought he was getting away with it!

It turns out that my son – in a fit of insomnia – brought his blanket down, watched some TV, then forgot his blanket on the chair.  The dog knows ‘bed blankets’ are off limits to him:  but this blanket was not on a bed, was it?  So he lay down on it, spread his body as wide as possible to hide the fact that he was indeed occuppying a ‘bed blenket’ which was currently ‘not a bed blanket’…  The dog was very, very pleased with himself!

So, what does this story have to do with my post today?

Yes, it was a bit of a long segway, and this story took me a few days to write up, but…

Monday, Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty made an announcement.  Some person whose makes his living ‘educating children’ released a report today, saying that ‘children need more educating’!

Why, that is almost as convincing as a ‘Cure-all’ salesman saying this potion in this here bottle will ‘cure all’!!!  Better buy a few!!!

And, Mr. McGuinty, he is so concerned about the welfare of children, he’ll have to do what is best for all of the children! (Will somebody please shut up the parents of those pesky Autistic kids?  They’re not even photogenic:  no photo-ops from that lot!)

As I was saying:  Mr. McGuinty, he is so caring, he only wants what is best for the children!  And since that report by a guy who gets rich by sticking EVERY child into a ‘one-size-fits-all’ ‘institutions of teaching’, that is exactly what this kind and caring man announced he would do!!!

Aside:  make no mistake!  Our public schools are ‘institutions of teaching’, NOT ‘institutions of learning’!!!  They are centered around the needs and desires of teachers, whose powerful union regularly holds the whole population hostage by refusing to ‘teach’ unless it is ‘on their terms’ – ONLY!  Therefore, schedules, methodology, material and just about every aspect of ‘teaching’ you can name is tailored to suit the comfort of teachers.  Students, who have no union to represent them, are just pawns to be cycled through the system – a pesky annoyance to be minimized and with which the teachers have to put up with as a minor part of this ‘education system’…

So, what is it that this caring, loving man (who is reportedly married to a teachers’ union activist) proposing to do???

He wants to institutionalize our children for 10.5 hours a day, 5-days per week, 50 weeks per year, from toddlerhood on!!!

Of course, the words he used to make his announcement were not as direct as my statement of it is – but the meaning is identical.  His version is all about ‘what is best for the children’!  And he has that ‘study’ (by a guy who, among others, will have an increased revenue stream if McGuinty institutes) this to back him up!

Here is the video – I invite you to watch the body language:

Did you notice it?

The way he shifts his eyes, the way he enunciates certain words, the way he uses his whole body to help him spit out some ‘concepts’?

It’s that SAME body language my not-so-bright (but way more lovable than McGuinty) dog used when he was trying to ‘pull one over’!

This sent me ‘looking for’ what it is that is ‘the loophole’ here:  what is this man ‘pulling over’ on us?

I’ll rant more on this tomorrow….

add to del.icio.usDigg itStumble It!Add to Blinkslistadd to furladd to ma.gnoliaadd to simpyseed the vineTailRank

Posted in education, freedoms, human nature, philosophy, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , , , , , . 1 Comment »

It sounds like little Ms. Lynch is pouting….

June 15, 2009 — xanthippa

Little Miss. Ms. Lynch says those nasty bloggers have unmasked discredited her nice little minions…

BCF has the scoop!

Posted in freedoms, opression, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , , . 1 Comment »

What is wrong with the Human Rights Commissions?

June 12, 2009 — xanthippa

One of my young American friends has asked me an honest question:  “What is wrong with the Ontario Human Rights Commission?”

Where do I begin?!?!?

But, it is my bane that I always seem to think that if I know something, then it must be clear and obvious to everyone else!  Of course, this is not so – and I KNOW that… I just forget it sometimes and do not explain things as thoroughly or clearly as I ought to.  My apologies!

The topic of our Human Rights Commissions is less clear to people who do not live in Canada and have not been following what has been happening to our rights and freedoms…. but it is NO LESS important to them, because these things are spreading in Medusa-like fashion and subverting the very foundations on which our ‘Western’ civilization is built.

So, here is a little explanation (sorry if it is a bit of a rant – I get very emotional about this!)

OHRC is called ‘Ontario Human Rights Commission‘.  It is a fancy name which suggests that its aims are to protect human rights: and, it – along with it mother-organization, the Canadian Human Rights Agency and sister ones, one for each Province and Territory in Canada – was created with that in mind.  It was meant to be a non-threatening place that people who were denied housing or jobs because of the colour of their skin could go and record their grievance.

This was especially aimed at the less-privileged members of society who would not be able to afford an attorney and try to get justice in court.

So, the theory goes, the agency accepts the grievance/complaint, investigates it on its own and, if it finds it meritorious, it is then supposed to (somehow – without ever going to court) figure out a way to fix the problem.  The solution it decides on then becomes legally binding, as if it were a declaration of a real court.

In effect, the ‘Human Rights Commissions’ – and/or their tribunals – become the complainant, the investigator, prosecutor and judge…  It answers to nobody!

Can you spot the problem?

What has happened with Canadian HRCs – federal and provincial/territorial – is that they have been staffed with people who ‘have causes’.  And these people are promoting their ’causes’ at the expense of REAL human rights.

Their main line is that ‘human rights’ have to be ‘balanced’ against the need of the society to ‘promote tolerance’.  In other words, anything which these people find ‘rude’ or ‘intolerant’, they have the power to censor, ban and so on.

Here is a recent example from the Ontario HRC.  A guy was smoking pot in the doorway of a restaurant.  Pot is, of course, illegal – but this guy had a ‘medical exemption’.  Smoking, however – inside and within 2 m (I think – this does vary from place to place) of a restaurant (or any other place where people work) is forbidden.  The law does NOT specify cigarette smoke or pot or whatever else.

The ‘no smoking’ laws came about because people insisted that EVERYONE has the RIGHT to work in a smoke-free environment.  And, nobody has the right to CHOOSE to work where people smoke, because ‘poor people’ might be coerced….  OK, so we all banned smoking in or near workplaces.

Now, this restaurant owner finds himself in front of the OHRC, because he asked a guy NOT to smoke within the legal ‘no-smoking’ boundary.  He ended up – when it was all over – with tens of thousands of dollars in legal costs….

And, he lost:  the OHRC said that because the guy has a ‘medical exemption’, he can smoke his pot anywhere he wants to – including INSIDE this guy’s restaurant.’

A couple of weeks later, the ‘no-smoking enforcement’ people show up at the restaurant for inspection, and see this guy smoking pot.  They cite the restaurant owner for violation of the rights of his workers to work in a smoke-free environment – and the restaurant owner looses his liquor license….

The OHRC people are enforcing THEIR ruling and care nothing about the smoking bannies laws.  The smoking bannies are enforcing THEIR laws, and don’t care about the OHRCs ruling – not their jurisdiction!

The poor sap gets caught in the middle – and pays, pays pays legal fees,  fines and eventually looses his right to run his business (his type of restaurant cannot survive without a liquor license!).

But THAT is just ONE of MANY such cases.

And these HRCs have the right to issue a lifetime gag-order on people:  forbidding them from speaking, writing, or communicating in any way, shape or form, publicly or privately, on specific topics.  These lifetime gag-orders, once issued, are legally binding!

If you thought things could not get worse….

The ‘double jeopardy’ – where you can only be tried for a crime in one jurisdiction – does NOT APPLY with HRCs in Canada.  For example, MacLeans magazine was charged – for the same complaint – in three different jurisdictions:  Ontario, BC AND federally!  And, they HAD TO prepare a defense – and pay lawyers – for each one of the three trials!

Recently, the OHRC’s head, Barbara Hall, has been making noises about expanding the scope of the ‘transgressions’ they will assume jurisdiction over.

Oh – by the way – TRUTH is NO DEFENSE against the HRCs!

The complainant does NOT have to prove anything.  And, even if the defendant proves that what they said/did was TRUE, it does not matter – IF it has a POTENTIAL to harm someone by making them FEEL discriminated against!

So, no CRIME, no HARM is needed:  only the POTENTIAL for ANYONE to PERCEIVE something MIGHT be hurtful or seen as discriminatory is sufficient to find one guilty…

Another thing I revile these organizations for is that they are often used at the tool to enforce linguistic apartheid which is like a cancer on our Canadian society.

The people running this – the investigators AND the ‘judges’ – do NOT have to have ANY training in law whatsoever.  Many don’t!  Evidence has shown that a cop dismissed for some serious corruption is now a mover and a shaker at the Ontario HRC… As well, some evidence seems to be coming that several of these HRCs have been infiltrated by radical Islamists who find anything short of instituting Sharia to be ‘offensive’!

Just think about it:  extrajudicial process – with none of the restraints cops and real trials have (the HRCs can enter your premises and seize things without a warrant or notification to you – and you are NOT presumed innocent until proven guilty – and truth is no defense…), in the hands of people who think that individual rights are things that must systematically bow and be supplanted by ‘community needs’.

THAT – ALL of the things I listed above…and much more – is why so many of us want to get rid of these corrupt, un-accountable, oppressive organizations who now have the power to limit our human rights at their whim to serve their own special interests!

Posted in freedoms, opression, politics, society. Tags: , , , , , . 7 Comments »
« Older posts
Newer posts »