Monday, January 31, 2005

CBC Pushes the Mainstream Media Agenda of Discrediting Iraqi Elections

The CBC’s coverage of the Iraqi election was an all too common example of the mainstream media’s agenda to discredit all that America is doing in that country. Millions of Iraqis turned out to vote in the first election in over 50 years on January 30th. Thousands of Iraqis danced in the streets and celebrated. They proudly showed their blue stained fingers, evidence they voted, to cameras with no fear of reprisal by insurgents. Many Iraqis even shed tears of joy, grateful that democracy and freedom has come to their country. Yet for the CBC, it’s just another chance to point out all the negative of the situation in Iraq.

‘The National’ delivered a documentary report spinning the happy reality of that historic day. Peter Mansbridge led the story with all the doom and gloom predictions of the critics who would downplay this election saying, “The critics of the election have been harsh. They say holding an election in Iraq is a futile effort in a country out of control; a country suffering from shortages of oil, electricity and jobs”. He goes on to say that, “Everyone agrees on one thing; yesterday’s vote was a major step, it’s where it leads that remains in dispute.”

The story was then passed to Brian Stuart. Brain continued with the sentiment of critics even as the video footage of happy Iraqis was shown celebrating the election. It did not take long for the story to turn negative. Dramatic video footage of mortar rounds exploding on a city street was shown. A woman tugs on the arm of a lifeless corpse lying in the street. Other scenes were shown with abandoned corpses lying about. The shrill screams of Arabic women could be heard in the background wailing at the violence.

After a short interview with an expert who talked about some of the positive details of this event, Brian Stuart said, “But these alone will not be enough to pull off the immensely difficult task of building a democracy.” He then went on to detail some of the waypoints in Iraq’s democratic future including the drafting of a constitution, the ratifying of that constitution in a referendum and another vote to elect a constitutional government. At that point he said, “Iraqis must do all this during an insurgency in a country dangerously split.”

The mainstream media’s campaign to highlight sectarian differences were not lost on the CBC as they pointed out that voter turn out was high among Shiite and Kurds, but low among the Sunnis who used to dominate. “And unless brought on side; Sunnis, the chief sponsors of the insurgency could still scuttle progress.”

The negative tone of this piece was constant throughout. The CBC even went so far as to interview an ordinary Iraqi who blamed the government for the long line ups at the gas pump. Speaking through an interpreter the man said he would give the government one year to fix the problems in Iraq. If they do not, he will join the insurgents.

Count on the CBC to show every negative aspect of a happy and historic event

Sunday, January 30, 2005

Could The 2016 Olympic Games Be Held In Babylon, Iraq?

The story of old tells of a people with one language who decided to build a great city with a tower that could reach up to the heavens. The Lord said, “If as one people speaking the same language they have begun to do this, then nothing they plan to do will be impossible for them.” [Genesis 11:6]

Today the people of Iraq are speaking the same language. Iraqis in every part of the country have turned out to voice the language of freedom. They have defied insurgents and terrorists by casting ballots in the first Iraqi election in over 50 years. They have taken an important step toward a more peaceful and prosperous country. The sky is now the limit for the people of Iraq and the nation as a whole.

An Iraqi blogger named Husayn Uthman writes, “It will be a day forever remembered. My voting was only a simple act, I went, I identified myself, got my finger stained, filled out a ballot, and dropped it in a box. It is not a complex or grand process to the eye, but it is one that I will forever remember and will recount to my children, and their children. And God willing it will be remembered through the ages.”

There is a lot of work ahead for the people of Iraq, but this is history in the making. The 275 members that will be elected will be charged with the task of drafting a permanent Iraqi constitution between now and August. Then Iraqis will go back to the polls in a referendum to decide if that constitution should be passed. From there the Iraqi people will go back to the polls again in December to elect a proper constitutional government. From that point on, nothing will be impossible for a free and democratic Iraq.

Who knows, we may even see Iraq rebuild the ancient city of Babylon and watch it host the Olympics in 2016. Wouldn’t that be something?

Friday, January 28, 2005

Toronto Shooting Spree Not Stopped by Registry

Students at George Brown College in Toronto expressed fear this morning after two women were shot near the downtown campus last night. Both attacks appear to have been random. Neither of the victims were were killed.

The question is, why did the gun registry not prevent these attack? The liberals passed a bill that requires gun owners to register their guns back in 1998! That was seven years ago. Canadians have paid well over $2 billion for that registry, in spite of the liberal promise that it would cost only $85 million! Yet the registry has been utterly useless at reducing gun crime.

In fact, gun crime is up 21% since the registry was put in place. Of that number, 60% of gun crimes involve hand guns, which Canada has been registering since 1930.

Now that we have proven that the gun registry was a waste of money, can we please have our money back?

Thursday, January 27, 2005

Remembering the Wannsee Conference and the Liberation of Auschwitz

This article is posted as part of the January 27, 2005, BlogBurst, to remember the liberation of the Auschwitz death camp, sixty years ago, on January 27, 1945.

January 27, 2005, marks the 60th anniversary of the liberation of Auschwitz in 1945. On January 20th, we marked the anniversary of the 1942 Wannsee Conference. In the course of that Conference, the top figures of the Nazi hierarchy formalized the plan to annihilate the Jewish people.

The Wannsee Conference was convened on January 20, 1942, for the purpose of preparing a final solution to the Jewish question in Europe. The final solution involved evacuating all Jews in Europe to transit ghettos, from which they were to be transported to concentration camps in the East.

"The Fuehrer (Adolph Hitler)... expressed his determination to clean up the Jews in Europe... "Not much will remain of the Jews. About sixty per cent of them will have to be liquidated; only about forty per cent can be used for forced labour."

Those at the meeting eventually decided on what became known as the Final Solution. From that date the extermination of the Jews became a systematically organized operation. It was decided to establish extermination camps in the east that had the capacity to kill large numbers including Belzec (15,000 a day), Sobibor (20,000), Treblinka (25,000) and Majdanek (25,000).

Auschwitz was the single most notorious death camp of them all. It is estimated that somewhere between 2-3 million Jews were destroyed in this camp alone during its brief five year history. Shortly before the camp was liberated by allied forces, the camp commander sent every prisoner who could move (about 66,020 people) on a forced death-march to the west. On January 27, 1945, Auschwitz came under control of the allies where only 7,000 prisoners were left behind. Of those prisoners that remained, not all could be saved.

The hatred of the Jews down through history is well documented. The desire to exterminate the Jews continues today with radical Arabs using terror attacks and suicide bombers to destroy the will of Israel and kill its people. Europe is once again standing against the Jews by siding with the Palestinians. The Palestinians work toward statehood in the historic land of Israel from where they plan to continue the Jihad (holy war). Russia is exporting stinger missiles to Israel's arch enemy, Syria. Iran is working toward building nuclear weapons. Egypt continues to facilitate the smuggling of weapons into the Gaza strip. The United Nations continues to pass non-binding, anti-Jewish resolutions, including the resolution last year calling for Israel to tear down the separation barrier which serves as Israel's last defense against Arab suicide bombers and terrorists.

The secular world has been against the Jews since the beginning. The God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob with be with the Jews until the end. On what side do you stand?

Monday, January 24, 2005

National Daycare is No Substitute for Caring Parent – Says Lydia Lovric

For a second day this week, the Winnipeg Sun has put out good commentary. This time around it was Lydia Lovric weighing in with a piece about stay at home parents vs. childcare. She writes:

“In the ongoing debate on national daycare, one issue is glaringly absent. It's something we all know and yet most of us are afraid to admit. When it comes right down to it, there is simply no substitute for a loving mom or dad.”

Lydia, we could not agree more

Sunday, January 23, 2005

George Bush Bullied Canada on Missile defense - Says Liberal Left

The left-wing media is out in full force today with a salacious story accusing George Bush of bullying Canadian Politicians over missile defense in his meeting last month. The articles from the typical worst offenders of liberal spin, including The Globe and Mail and Toronto Star, have all put out the story.

The stories revolve around an unidentified Canadian official who claims he was in the room while Mr. Bush waved off their attempts to explain how contentious the issue is for Prime Minister Paul Martin's minority government.

"[Bush] leaned across the table and said: 'I'm not taking this position, but some future president is going to say, Why are we paying to defend Canada?' " the official was quoted as saying.

"Most of our side was trying to explain the politics, how it was difficult to do," he said.

But Mr. Bush "waved his hands and remarked: 'I don't understand this. Are you saying that if you got up and said this is necessary for the defense of Canada, it wouldn't be accepted?' "

This is where Mr. Bush misses the whole point of Canadian politics and Canada's left in general. Liberals do not stand up to criticism to say what is necessary for the defense of Canada. Liberals stand up for the loudest critics and make decisions against the silent majority because their primary concern is appearing popular. If a hard decision needs to be made, like same-sex marriage, liberals get the Supreme Court to do their dirty work until they think popular opinion has swung their way. Missile defense is not something the Supreme Court can decide on the liberal's behalf. What is worse is that popular opinion will never swing their way with the vocal minority screaming out against missile defense.

The extreme left in Canada, the socialist NDP, have already screamed out at the top of voices to paint weapons in space as the ultimate desecration of all that is sacred and pure. No weapons in space is Jack Layton's biggest fetish. Even though the silent majority knows that missile defense involves only ground based intercept missiles employing hit-to-kill technology and no explosives, the radical anti-war advocates have convinced too many people it involves putting everything, up to and including nuclear warheads, in orbit.

The liberals do not have the guts to stand up to criticism and say missile defense is in Canada's interest. They do not respect the intelligence of ordinary Canadians enough to tell us the truth about what missile defense involves. Doing so would open the liberals up to possible criticism which they are afraid to do in a minority government situation. When confronted with a tough dicision like missile defense, the liberals do the only thing they know how. The liberals call in the mainstream media to give them an out...a way to save face.

The psychology of the left wing media in printing this story is obvious. If the liberals say no to missile defense, then Paul Martin comes off as a champion of Canadian sovereignty that stood up to George W. Bush the most powerful man on earth. If the liberals say yes to missile defense, it will further the already overblown anti-American hatred the liberals keep fomenting, because George Bush bullied us into it. Until then, the Prime Minister will keep his mouth shut and refuse to tell Canadians what his firm position is on missile defense.

In the meantime Canada sits like a monkey in the middle between America and the worst rogue nation in pursuit of nuclear weapons and ballistic missiles. If North Korea ever launches a nuclear barrage from Pyongyang to Washington, the people of Toronto can only pray that missile does not fall short. That missile would only need to fall short by 5% of its flight path to annihilate everyone in the GTA.

When America gains the ability to intercept incoming ballistic missiles and some future president asks, 'Why are we paying to defend Canada?', before that warhead lands on Toronto, we hope his advisor's answer is, 'because Canada took part in missile defense'.

Saturday, January 22, 2005

Words of the Wise on Same-Sex Marriage

If you have been following the same-sex marriage debate in Canada's mainstream media, you have no doubt noticed how one sided the stories tend to be. Gay marriage advocates are always portrayed as intelligent, noble and tolerant, while opponents are labeled hatemongers and bigots. Those of us on the right side of the fence know the truth to be almost the exact opposite. Michael Coren wrote an article recently which draws attention to a group that wrote a wonderful declaration that defends traditional marriage.

The group is called Enshrine Marriage Canada. Below is some of what they have to say.

"All human beings are born of a mother and begotten by a father. This is a universal biological reality and the common experience of all people. The state supports the institution of marriage because it promotes and protects the father-mother-child relationship as the only natural means of creating and continuing human life and society.

"Marriage in Canada has always been defined as 'the union of one man and one woman,' the chief function of which is to promote the biological unity of sexual opposites as the basis for family formation. Governments may want to support other relationships, but these should not be called 'marriage,' or confused with it.

"Marriage is a child-centered, not an adult-centered, institution. No one has the right to redefine marriage so as intentionally to impose a fatherless or motherless home on a child as a matter of state policy.

"Marriage is a solid social structure resting on four conditions concerning number, gender, age, and incest. We are permitted to marry only one person at a time. They must be someone of the opposite sex. They must not be below a certain age. They must not be a close blood relative.

"Those who satisfy all these conditions -- each of which safeguards the well-being of children, the family, and society -- have a right to marry. The removal of any of them threatens the stability of the whole structure.

"All government policies are intentionally preferential. If we want welfare or veterans' benefits, or child-support, or marital benefits, we have to qualify for them. Such policies are ordinary forms of distributive justice through which, for its own good, the state discriminates in favor of some people, and some relationships, and not others. So an absence of 'equality' is not a good argument against such policies.

"As same-sex partnerships already receive the same benefits as marriages, however, something else is at issue: an attempt to persuade the public that such partnerships are of the same value to society as marriages. But they can only be made so by denying the unique contribution of marriage as a biologically-unitive, child-centered institution.

"The fact that two people say they love each other does not, in itself, justify a right to the benefits conferred by the state on married couples. The only justification for a state interest in the privacy of love flows from the connection between the political fact that the state has a fundamental concern for its own survival and well-being, the biological fact that all human beings require someone of the opposite sex to create life, and the social fact that children have a natural claim to the love and support of their own mothers and fathers.

"Accordingly, the only kind of private love that is of justifiable public concern is the love that occurs between two people who qualify for marriage according to the four conditions mentioned above.

"Marriage is an institution that has arisen from long-held beliefs and customs of the people that are prior to all states and all courts, and are essential to the very fabric of society.

"Any attempt by unelected officials of the courts or by any other branch of government to claim ownership of marriage, to alter it without the support of a significant majority of the people, or to diminish the father-mother-child relation in favor of the state-citizen relationship, usurps the natural rights and freedoms of the people and constitutes a serious breach of the public trust."

It is good to know there are angels among us.

Friday, January 21, 2005

Possible Early Election to be a Referendum on Same-Sex marriage

Mr. Martin told reporters in China Friday that he feels so strongly same-sex marriage should be protected under the Charter of Rights and Freedoms he would go to the polls over the issue.

Conservative party leader Stephen Harper delivered a press release today welcoming the news.

"I find Mr. Martin’s statement difficult to understand. While he promised that the upcoming vote will be free for his backbenchers, he now appears to be threatening them with an election should they vote against his legislation. I thought Mr. Martin had an agenda that he was planning to legislate, but if he wants to call an election on this issue, so be it. I am confident that our position on this issue is supported by a majority of Canadians."

This is an interesting turn of events.

Thursday, January 20, 2005

Freedom & God: Our Founding and Our Destiny - George W. Bush

Today marked the inauguration of George W. Bush's second term as President of the United States of America. To conservatives the world over, Dubya is a man of great love who believes strongly that we were all created equal and yearn to be free. This was the theme of the 2005 inaugural address as he delivered his speech, "Freedom & God: Our Founding and Our Destiny".

Like words of wisdom that need no interpretation, here are some excerpts from his speech:

"We are led, by events and common sense, to one conclusion: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. The best hope for peace in our world is the expansion of freedom in all the world."

"The great objective of ending tyranny is the concentrated work of generations. The difficulty of the task is no excuse for avoiding it. America's influence is not unlimited, but fortunately for the oppressed, America's influence is considerable, and we will use it confidently in freedom's cause."

"All who live in tyranny and hopelessness can know: the United States will not ignore your oppression, or excuse your oppressors. When you stand for your liberty, we will stand with you."

The rulers of outlaw regimes can know that we still believe as Abraham Lincoln did: "Those who deny freedom to others deserve it not for themselves; and, under the rule of a just God, cannot long retain it."

"All Americans have witnessed this idealism, and some for the first time. I ask our youngest citizens to believe the evidence of your eyes. You have seen duty and allegiance in the determined faces of our soldiers. You have seen that life is fragile, and evil is real, and courage triumphs. Make the choice to serve in a cause larger than your wants, larger than yourself - and in your days you will add not just to the wealth of our country, but to its character."

"And all the allies of the United States can know: we honor your friendship, we rely on your counsel, and we depend on your help. Division among free nations is a primary goal of freedom's enemies. The concerted effort of free nations to promote democracy is a prelude to our enemies' defeat."

There is no mistaking the warning this speech sends to Iran and North Korea. On January 30th, the Iraqi people go to the polls to elect a governing body that will oversee the drafting of a new Iraqi constitution. Sometime in the coming year, this constitution will be unveiled and Iraqis will have the opportunity to ratify it in a nation wide referendum. With this document in place, Iraq will again go to the polls in December to elect a constitutional government. By then the job in Iraq will be done and America's military will be free to continue the fight.

The 21st century has seen America and her allies bring freedom to over 50 million people in Afghanistan and Iraq. America has always considered Canada a good friend, relied on our counsel and depended on our help.

For the sake of God and freedom, we hope this continues.

Tuesday, January 18, 2005

Harminder Singh Brar Confirms Judy Sgro is Lying

The hole Judy Sgro dug herself got a lot deeper today when a Canadian Press reporter interviewed a friend of Harjit Singh, the now famous pizza man. Harminder Singh Brar told a Canadian press reporter that he was at the meeting between Harjit Singh and Judy Sgro during the last election. Sgro continues to deny this meeting took place.

"I was there during the meeting," Brar said. "She was saying, 'As long as you give us volunteers to do the work in our campaign, we'll look after your immigration papers -- we'll see what we can do.'" Singh, who owns Pizza Market in Brampton, sent pizzas and chicken wings to Sgro's campaign office every evening. Brar said a senior political aide was also at the meeting at Sgro's north Toronto office, as was Brar's teenage son.

Sgro strenuously denies making any such promise or having even talked to Singh. Brar countered by saying he has TV news footage showing Sgro standing with Singh. Singh said when he met with Sgro he had to sign in at the campaign office.

The most damning evidence of all from this article is the fact that Sgro asked Singh for a police clearance from India, which court documents show was provided to her constituency office.

The evidence is overwhelming, even a liberal couldn't lie their way out of this one.

Monday, January 17, 2005

The Plot Thickens in the Judy Sgro Scandal

The game of he said she said took an interesting turn today when Harkamal Virk was interviewed by a reporter with the Globe and Mail. Ms. Virk is the daughter-in-law of Harjit Singh, the infamous pizza man who's allegations last week cost Judy Sgro her cabinet position. Ms. Virk said she was with Harjit Singh when he met the former Immigration Minister, Judy Sgro, which contradicts Sgro's claim that no such meeting took place. Ms. Virk says the meeting took place at midday in Sgro's campaign office in north Toronto during last year's federal election campaign. She insists that before that meeting took place, Sgro was already familiar with her father-in-law's situation.

Ms. Virk also gives names of other people in attendance that day including Ihor Wons, Ms. Sgro's former chief of staff, and a member of the Sikh community, Arminder Brar, who had posted an immigration surety bond for Mr. Singh. Judy Sgro called Mr. Singh's accusation "ridiculous" and said, "These are false allegations from a desperate man who is going to be deported." This quote draws an erie parallel to one of the Harjit Singh bashing articles The Toronto Star published in its two day scandal whitewash campaign January 15-16.

Sajiv Kumar, of the Montreal-based Punjabi Human Rights Action Committee, said Mr. Singh is being made a scapegoat in federal government circles, and it is igniting concern in Canada's Sikh community. He said that although Mr. Singh was a "perfect case" for immigration acceptance, Ms. Sgro "became panicky about the case" because she was already under investigation by the government's ethics commissioner.

But the story doesn't end there. Commenting on a damning story published by the Toronto Star which accused Harjit Singh of being a fraud artist, she said news media stories falsely implicated her father-in-law in a credit-card scam and bank fraud when it was really her husband who was involved. "My father-in-law had nothing to do with it." (Her husband was found liable in a civil fraud case.)

She also told the story of how her mother-in-law died of kidney failure last year because, although she had a kidney donor for transplant, the operation couldn't be performed because she didn't have landed immigrant status -- and thus no health insurance -- in Canada. Apparently America isn't the only place people with no health insurance are left to die.

This woman sounds completely credible and gives names of other credible people to back up her story. With one interview she has driven another nail in the Liberal's coffin, proven once again that the mainstream media is in bed with the Liberals (none more so than the Toronto Star) and completely destroyed the myth that Canada's health care system is the most compassionate in the world.

Can we have the next election now please?

Sunday, January 16, 2005

The Toronto Star Spins the Sgro Scandal to the Max

No newspaper in Canada is doing more to spin the Sgro Scandal than the Toronto Star. The Toronto Star is doing everything to discredit Judy Sgro's latest accuser while championing Judy Sgro and the Liberal party at every turn. Typing the search word, "Sgro" in the 7-day search box at the Toronto Star website yields the following articles. Comments about each articles follows the headline.

Improving opportunity for immigrants - Canada's immigration department will get even better now that Joe Volpe is taking over. Poor Judy was just working too hard.

Sgro's accuser fights deportation ... Again - Yes, again. He doesn't deserve to be here, but he's a desperate man who will do or say anything to avoid being deported.

Martin slow off the mark - Jean Creitien made governing so easy! Paul Martin is doing an awesome job in spite of minor setbacks like another small scandal.

A well-earned reputation as a battling politician - Let's not hold back any flattery from the woman that brought the best strippers to Canada from around the world.

Accuser a fraud artist - Judy's accuser is a fraud artist! Guilty! He's a witch, burn him!

Defiant Sgro comes out fighting - Judy is a great woman of character determined to clear her name from this baseless attack.

Honesty threshold cries out to us all - Let's not get into details about the scandal, her actions fall just a teeny tiny bit short of that overwhelmingly high moral standard the Liberals have set.

This is only two days worth of articles from the Toronto Star covering January 15-16. When you hear conservatives talk about bias in the mainstream media, this is what they mean.

Friday, January 14, 2005

Aborting Gays - This Author's Opinion

Laurent Moss wrote an incredibly thought provoking piece over at the Western Standard under the title Aborting Gays. The article explains part of the history behind the notion that people are born gay. This argument is widely used in the gay community to explain why homosexuals should receive the same rights as people born of a certain race or gender, things which people have no control over.

The question then arises. If scientists actually do identify the gay gene, will this lead to more abortions?

Certainly some members of the gay community think so and they have rallied behind a gay and lesbian pro-life group to prevent homosexuals from becoming extinct. The Pro-Life Alliance of Gays and Lebians wrote a January, 1997, op-ed on this subject. In it they wrote, "If gays and lesbians want to object to aborting the gay and lesbian unborn on grounds that we are persons of worth and dignity who have a right to grow up and lead productive and fulfilling lives, then we have another issue to confront. Because if we have a right to life, doesn't every other unborn child have that same right?

Certainly, this argument can be made in America where their constitution affirms that all men were created equal with certain inalienable rights, but this is Canada. Canada is not about equality. Canada is about protecting the rights of minorities through affirmative action. Canadian lawmakers increasingly reject creation based moral values as they grope around in the dark for an intellectual version of morality.

With that in mind, there are two options. You can make it illegal for doctors to tell mothers that their fetus has the gay gene, which would not stand a challenge under free speech laws, to say nothing about enforceability, or you can make it illegal to abort a fetus where the doctor has advised the mother the fetus has the gay gene.

It is conceivable that a fetus could be protected under section 318 of Canada's criminal code, now that Svend Robinson's Bill C-250 has amended the law to protect homosexuals from possible genocide. There would be no need to protect the unborn without the gay gene since there is no fear straight people will be completely eradicated.

All you would need for this to happen is for one liberal activist judge to uphold a woman's right to choose, but restrict that right where the judge perceives it promotes genocide of a protected group, in this case homosexuals. The judge could make this ruling and use both the criminal code and charter of rights to back him up.

The idea that mothers could abort everyone but gays may sound far fetched, but who would have thought moral relativism would have gone this far?

Thursday, January 13, 2005

Racist Hiring Policies Continue in Winnipeg

The Winnipeg Sun is today reporting a story about more racist hiring policies, this time from Winnipeg City Hall. The new mayor has it in his head to increase the amount of natives on the city payroll. It seems natives can't get jobs in the city based on merit so the city has to hire them for being natives.

Winnipeg Mayor Sam Katz said, "the goal is to beef up the Metis and First Nations component of the city's 8,000-strong workforce to 7.7% from its current 5.3% -- about 420 aboriginal employees. Our goal is to be at or above the labour market".

So what Sam Katz is doing to show people he is not a racist is this. Winnipeg has figured out how many people of the native race other employers in Winnipeg's labour market have hired. To show that the city of Winnipeg is less racist than all the other employers in the city, it is going to single out people based on race and hire only them, until they have as many natives or more natives than other employers in the labour market.

This news comes less than a week after the Winnipeg School Division posted a position on the federal governments Job Bank website.

Canada's Left - A Never Ending Affair with Racism

Canada's left always talks about how it wants to end racism, but living in a truly color blind society cannot be something we are always striving for. It must be something we eventually achieve. If the left thinks that hiring people of one specific race is the way to end racism, they are wrong.

We cannot get there from here.

Wednesday, January 12, 2005

God Willing! Why the Infidels are Winning the War on Terror

A very common belief in the Arab world can be summed up in the phrase God Willing. Moslems believe strongly that when two enemies engage in conflict God picks the winner. You see this alot when a new video comes out with Osama Bin Laden saying he will destroy all the infidels and Jews, God Willing!

The Islamic religion is based on total submission to the will of God and adhering to the highest moral standards of behavior. Western popular culture is based on the selfish pursuit of happiness. Moslems do not drink, do drugs or engage in abominable sexual conduct. America is home to bars, drug dealers, strip clubs, XXX video rentals, the gay rights movement and child porn.

Four years ago George W. Bush was elected president of one of the few countries supporting Israel. Yassir Arafat the peacemaker was the world's most despicable terrorist. The Taliban ruled in Afghanistan where Osama Bin Laden moved freely and trained for Jihad. In Iraq, Saddam Hussein ruled like a king with almost 30 palaces. Today, Saddam is in jail, Osama is hiding in a cave, the Taliban is gone, Arafat is dead and George Bush has been elected to four more years.

If God really does pick the winner of conflicts, why then does the infidel west win every battle against the religiously pure? Here is a thought.

Imagine yourself to be a father and your 7-year-old daughter comes home from school. She hands you a picture she made in art class. It is a picture as wonderful as only a 7-year-old can make. With crayon rainbows and macaroni bits glued on it. She has a big beautiful smile on her face and she says, "happy fathers day daddy," then gives you a big hug. You hug her back and weep a little, before putting it on the fridge with other pictures your daughter has made for you over the years.

Now imagine your daughter went to school on father's day. The teacher accused her of stealing a crayon and cut off her hand. Then your daughter was raped and beaten for mispronouncing words during the morning prayer. She didn't wear her bourqa at school properly so she was beaten some more. She learned in school that martyrdom is the best way to heaven. Imagine your daughter came home, with bruises and swelling, broken bones, and handed you the same picture with her hand that was not cut off. Would you feel the same amount of pride?

Yes it is true, people in the west have the freedom to do whatever they want. They have the freedom to get drunk every day, freedom to go to strip clubs and the freedom to have sex whenever and with whomever they please. Yet, in spite of all that freedom, many people in the west still live a life of morality and show their Father genuine love and respect because they want to, not out of terror or a fear for their lives.

Islamic radicals are right when they say God willing, but they may want to stop and consider why God's will has them losing every single battle of the war.

Tuesday, January 11, 2005

Liberal Media Spins Events of Sponsorship Inquiry

Headlines out of Canada's mainstream media today are all alledging impartiality on the part of those looking into the $250 million dollar sponsorship scandal. The Liberal media is doing its very best to shift the focus of the investigation away from the politicians that blew taxpayer money and onto Justice John Gomery.

At issue are some comments Mr. Gomery made about some witnesses during an interview. The Justice was also criticized for calling the sponsorship program a managerial catastrophe.

The list of media outlets pushing this story is a who's who of the Canadian liberal spin machine, including:

This is a conflict of interest of epic proportions for our media. Canada cannot expect to hear the truth about the sponsorship scandal when the media outlets who benefited most are the same ones Canadians depend on for their news.

Monday, January 10, 2005

Jack Layton is Taking His 'No Weapons in Space' Fetish Way Too Far

The one sided debate in Canada's mainstream media about missile defense is continuing today with comments made by American Ambassador Paul Cellucci. According to the ambassador, the United States expects Canada to sign on the missile defense within months. Canada's media is talking non-stop about all the non-sense opposition there is to this plan.

There is no doubt that the two countries who pose the biggest threat to world peace at the moment are Iran and North Korea. The international Atomic Energy Agency is pretty sure Iran has a program to develop a nuclear weapon. North Korea on the other hand, is already believed to have nuclear weapons and be in the process of making more nukes which they are proudly bragging about.

North Korea is a communist country with the worlds most oppressive totalitarian leadership. Their policies have starved millions of their own people to death. If this is how they treat their own, how can they possibly care about the outside world?

North Korea decided to test a missile in 1998 by launching it over Japan's head and into the Pacific Ocean on the other Side. Imagine if the United States tested a cruise missile by launching it from New York, over Toronto and Ottawa, to see if they could hit the Hudson Bay! This action by North Korea was a complete provocation.

Why then is the socialist NDP talking about outer space like it is some holy temple not to be defiled with weapons? Jack Layton talks about weapons in space as if it is the ultimate sin, but he never explains why. There is no way to explain Jack Layton's 'no weapons in space' fetish except to understand that Canada's socialists have always believed pacifism equals peace.

Pacifism in this case is not good enough. If North Korea starts launching nukes, Canada will be right in the middle. A direct path between Pyongyang, N. Korea and Washington D.C takes you right over Toronto, Ontario.

The total distance between Pyongyang and Washigton is 6,766 miles. Given that ballistic missiles travel at about 15,000 miles per hour, a launch from North Korea would take only 27 minutes to reach its target. If that missile falls just 359 miles short, one minute sooner, Toronto, Ontario, along with over 3 million people, will be dead! What will Jack Layton say if that happens, "oh well, at least we don't have weapons in space"?

If this world has to fight World War III, it would be better to fight that war in outer space, or on the face of the moon, rather than here on Earth where the lives of over 6 billion people are at stake. Canada is being handed a golden opportunity to share its common defense with America, Britain, Japan and many other nations without the need for a go it alone solution to this problem.

Jack Layton's 'no weapons in space' fetish is just pathetic.

Sunday, January 09, 2005

Alberta Premier Ralph Klein on Goodwill Tour of Canada

It is a sad day in Canadian politics when the most successful province in Canada's history has to engage in a goodwill tour with the rest of the nation. This coming week Alberta Premier Ralph Klein will visit Ontario and Quebec to try and counter the opinion that Albertans are not very caring or sharing.

When Ralph Klein was first elected in 1992, Alberta's debt was $23 billion dollars. That amount worked out to $8 400.00 for every person in Alberta. Not only has Alberta been able to pay off that debt, but it did so while sharing its wealth with all the have-not provinces including the biggest have-not province of all, Quebec. Now the Alberta Premier who lead this turn-around for Alberta has to journey to provinces like Quebec to offset Alberta's image problem.

It seems there are too many people in this country that despise Alberta. They think Alberta's oil and gas revenues are the only reason the province was able to retire its debt so easily. Too many Canadians think that Alberta's success was the result of undeserved luck and that their success came on the backs of all other Canadians. This Communist/Socialist mentality is all too prevalent in a nation that despises success of any kind by anyone, but the truth needs to be told.

One of the first things Ralph Klein did when coming to power in 1993 was to pass the Deficit Elimination Act. It required by law that the government implement an aggressive program to reduce the deficit and eliminate it by 1996-97. The Liberal party reluctantly supported the legislation. Not surprisingly, the New Democrats did not.

The second major initiative was to eliminate the pension plan for MLAs. The Pension program was eliminated retroactively to 1989. Instead of a government funded pension, MLAs now had to take care of their own pension responsibilities, as did most Albertans. By comparison, Federal politicians enjoy one of the fattest pensions on Earth which they qualify for after only TWO years of service!

When the Alberta Conservatives went to the polls the mainstream media was full of spin, predicting a huge loss for the Conservatives and a major victory for the liberals. Instead, the Conservatives won 51 seats, the liberals won 32 and the radical socialist left-wing extremists of Ray Martin's NDP were completely wiped out.

Once elected, Ralph focused on eliminating the deficit with deep cuts in spending and no increase in taxes. Ralph Klein was the first to acknowledge that Albertans had to make sacrifices. Every area of government was affected by budget cuts, which forced departments to find new and better ways of doing things. In some cases entire hospitals were closed and demolished.

The people of Alberta did something few Canadians, and certainly no left-wing politicians are willing to do, which is make sacrifices. When Paul Martin as liberal finance minister turned budget deficits into surplus he did it by raising taxes and offloading the problem on the provinces. Even he would not make sacrifices of his own.

Yet now, because Alberta did make sacrifices, Ralph Klein must tour the nation to rebuild Alberta's poor image. The whole thing is just sick.

Alberta should serve as a model for the other provinces in Canada, it should not have to kiss up to them..

Saturday, January 08, 2005

Judicial Activism Debate on Decline?

A story published in today's Globe and Mail, is a glowing example of liberal spin. The entire article from start to finish extols the virtues of liberal activist Judges, while brushing aside criticism as coming from right-wing lobby groups. When the article does lend criticism, it does so only to point out where the bench is not doing enough to rewrite our laws.

The whole point of living in a democracy is that one person gets one vote to say how they wish to be governed. Elected officials are accountable, because if they do the opposite of what they say or what they stand for they get voted out. Liberal activist judges are not accountable. Voters do not get a say as to who becomes a judge. When a judge strikes down a law, or rewrites a law through opinionated rulings, it renders irrelevant the whole concept of democracy.

Take the example of child pornography. The vast majority of Canadians would agree we do not want adults having sex with our children. We do not want adults taking pictures of our children posing naked and we do not want adults writing fantasy stories about romantic encounters of adults engaging in sex acts with our children. We elect politicians to write laws to protect the children of our country and we expect the judges to enforce the laws that our politicians write. The British Columbia Supreme Court ruling in R v. Sharpe struck down Canada's child porn law, saying it violated a persons freedom of expression. Robin Sharp, the subject of the case was quoted as saying, "A person should be allowed to possess anything, even if it's images of an eight-year-old being raped and cut up."

Not everyone has a long memory and alot of the most distasteful examples judicial activism are now a few years old. The anger of Canadians may have even subsided a little, but this not the beginning of a downward trend.

The Globe and Mail should not confuse a perceived decline in the debate over judicial activism with the calm before a storm.

Thursday, January 06, 2005

NDP Continues is Wasteful Spending Ways

NDP governments have always been unable or unwilling to balance a budget. When inheriting governments with surplus money they spend that money and more, borrowing as they go. Today the story continues in Manitoba and Saskatchewan. Out on the prairies, Manitoba's Gary Doer and Saskatchewan's Lorne Calvert are showing what NDP finances are all about. Both turned black ink into red, while saying the difference between surplus and deficit depends on what system of accounting you use.

The socialist NDP in Manitoba has been lying to the voters for three years now, this time telling Manitoba it has a $13 million surplus. The reality is quite the opposite. Manitoba's auditor Joe Singleton explains the reality, that the government is actually running a deficit over $600 million a year, and hiding its debt in government run companies. Although the debt is on the books of crown businesses like Manitoba Hydro, the taxpayer is still responsible for that debt.

Saskatchewan Lorne Calvert's NDP are doing the exact same thing. After inheriting a $400 million dollar surplus, Saskatchewan socialists also turned their finances into a $600 million loss for the year. In the last two years Saskatchewan NDP has added over $1 billion to its provincial debt.

In both cases it was the auditor general who provided the last glimmer of truth, even when the elected politicians flat out lied.

Member of Parliament Pat Martin (NDP) got his 15 minutes of fame when he suggested a fix for the governor General's outrageous spending. He said, "she [Adrian Clarkson] might have to switch to a different brand of caviar."

If that is true, maybe the NDP should switch to a different brand of calculator.

Wednesday, January 05, 2005

Canada's Left - A Never Ending Affair with Racism

The left in this country just can't seem to get over its love affair with racism. The most famous example is Liberal cabinet minister Hedy Fry using her position as Minister for Multiculturalism to convince Canadians "we can just go to British Columbia where crosses are being burned on lawns as we speak".

Before that, the most radical quota system of government imposed racism ever proposed was almost made law by Bob Rae's socialist NDP in Ontario. His plan was to make employers fill quotas based solely on race, age, sex and disability through legislative force. Only an election call and a resounding rebuke from Ontario voters put that nightmare to rest.

Today, government continues to set the example as the worst offenders of race based hiring policies. The trick for them has always been to put a colorful face on every department without getting stuck with a full blown status indian on the payroll. How else can you explain the Winnipeg School Division #1 making a job posting today asking for someone "age 30 or under and must be Metis, Inuit or non status"?

It used to be governments hid their shame by saying, "we are an equal opportunity employer". Then when you came down to apply, they would put a gold star on your application if you were a woman or visible minority. Now they don't even try to hide anything. They simply post exactly what demographic they want on the Federal Government's website.

Canada's left always talks about how it wants to end racism, but living in a truly color blind society cannot be something we are always striving for. It must be something we eventually achieve. If the left thinks that creating hysteria then advertising jobs solely for minorities is the answer, they are wrong.

We cannot get there from here.

Tuesday, January 04, 2005

Liberal Gay Marriage Bill is Only the Next Battle in War on Religion

January is upon us, and the Liberals have promised Canada a gay marriage bill this month. The legislation the Liberals plan to introduce will, Paul Martin says, satisfy two important conditions. The bill will enshrine the right for same-sex couples to marry and will allow ministers the right to discriminate by not performing gay marriages.

In a non-binding opinion released Thursday December 9th, 2004, the The Supreme Court of Canada reaffirmed religious freedoms under the Charter, saying religious officials opposed to same-sex marriages do not have to perform them. By stating this opinion, the Supreme Court is saying that ministers will have the freedom to discriminate against homosexuals by refusing to perform marriage ceremonies to gays and lesbians. Will Canadians really have the right to refuse a service to others based on their sexual orientation?

If history is a guide, the answer is no. The precedent has already been set with Scott Brockie a Toronto area printer. Although the case was in front of the human rights tribunal and not the criminal courts, the circumstance was the same. Brockie maintained that his Christian beliefs compelled him to reject a request by the Canadian Gay and Lesbian Archives in 1996 to print materials for the group. The Toronto-based CGLA provides information about homosexuals and their history. He lost his case and was fined $5,000.00 on April 15, 2004.

Since the Scott Brockie case, even more rights for homosexuals have been added to Canadian Law. On April 29, 2004, Svend Robinson's Bill C-250 (hate crime legislation) was given Royal assent. We are now fast approaching the point were fines become a prison sentence for anyone criticizing the lifestyle of gays and lesbians.

Do people have the right to speak out against homosexuality or even make a reference to someone else that does? The answer again is no. Hugh Owen learned this the hard way when he took out an add in the local paper. All he did was list references to 4 passages in the bible (he did not quote the text). Then using an = sign, he drew two male stick figures with a prohibition sign overlaid. For this he was found guilty of incitement to hatred. Although this case was also only before the human rights tribunal, this case would have lead to a criminal conviction under the new law, section 319.1 of Canada's Criminal Code.

A gay marriage bill will not be a final settlement in the conflict of religion versus same-sex rights. The gay and lesbian community does not want a two state solution with religious intolerance, they want to drive religion into the sea.

Happy New Year, Canada.

Monday, January 03, 2005

Today's NDP, Yesterday's NDP...What's the Difference?

If you ever wanted to know what the socialist NDP is all about, you need only look at their most ardent supports. Today's NDP, much like yesterday's NDP, is made up of elitists in the labour movement and the bulk of their support comes from labour unions. The NDP has always considered itself a champion of the working poor and heralds unions as the advocate of workers all across Canada. Who benefits most from labour unions?

Today's article from the Toronto Star: 'Illegal' tradesmen marked for exploitation.

A Toronto-based labour union has been exploiting undocumented construction workers from Central and South America. The Universal Workers Union Local 183 had a policy, the union's investigators claimed, of collecting dues from undocumented workers but denying access to benefits. Undocumented workers were left off union invoices that would entitle them to benefits, and those benefits and credits were then collected by other union members, primarily piecework contractors employing such "phantom" workers.

If the poorest workers don't benefit from unions, who do labour unions really fight for? Well, if the National Hockey League Player's Association (NHLPA) is any indication, the wealthiest employees in the land! As the 2004-2005 NHL season lays on its death bed, Canadians can only wonder if there will be NHL hockey next year. The prospect doesn't look good as the NHLPA fights tooth and nail to avoid any salary cap that would restrict how many millions of dollars a player can earn each year.

Today's NDP, yesterday's news.

Sunday, January 02, 2005

Punishment as Deterrence "UnCanadian" Says Left - Really?

An interesting story out of Alberta this week in the The Globe and Mail. Members of an RCMP detachment in Ponoka, Alberta were surprised when a group of youths showed up to confess to a break-and-enter. What was surprising for the police was that there was no report of a break-and-enter and these youths were so eager to confess. It turned out that the home these youths broke into was one of Canada's many marijuana grow operations. This is not the government grown stuff the Liberals are making in Flin Flon my friends, this is the real thing! The reason this group of youths were so enthusiastic about being arrested was because they feared retribution from the owners of the house.

Police said one of the youths had already been visited by the homeowners, who allegedly brought five friends to beat him with bats, fists and boots. At one point, the youth said, the female homeowner grabbed his testicles and ordered one of the others to fetch a knife.

Naturally, these young people feared they would actually be punished and went straight to the police. Once charged, they can look forward to all the wonderful rights and privileges our youth receive under the 'Youth criminal justice Act' including not having their names released to the public. Maybe if these adolescence are girls they may even get a spa day in jail with free manicures and pedicures to boost their self esteem.

The Liberal left has made a sanctuary out of our criminal justice system. They have always had this belief that punishment is bad and ineffective. The NDP believe crime is the result of poverty and we should give people money to stop committing crimes. In fact, in October, 2003, Mr. Paul Burstein (Director, Criminal Lawyers Association) addressed a special Parliamentary committee looking into the 'Non-medical' use of drugs (Bill C-38). Talking about the use of the Canada's criminal justice system to curb marijuana drug use he said, "It is unnecessary, it is unfair, it is ineffective, and I suppose to put it bluntly, it is in my view unCanadian."

Canada's Liberal left can say what it wants about punishment as a deterrence, when a woman has your manhood in her hand and she is fetching for a knife, you will change your ways.

Saturday, January 01, 2005

Big Governments Don't Go to Heaven

It is judgment Day in Heaven and two people stand before God on trial. One a liberal, the other a conservative.

God turns to the conservative and asks, "When I was in need what did you do for me?"

The conservative listed all the charities he gave to, and all the places he volunteered his time. He mentioned the time he saw someone sleeping at the bus stop and he missed a day of work finding him a home. He also tells the story of how he gave his last $8 to buy candy for a family at Christmas. Of course he regrets he couldn't do more saying, "I did live in Canada after all and you know what our taxes were like."

God nodded since he knew that truth all too well. Then he turned to the liberal and asked the same question.

The Liberal replied, "Well, I paid my taxes......And I would have paid more were it not for this conservative."

The moral of this story is a sad but true one. Many people support Liberal politicians, because Liberals raise taxes and promise to cure all the social problems of people. However, the plight of the poor is our concern and not simply a problem for government. Private charities with a sense of community have always been the best address to the poorest among us. Their help has rescued many lives, even while Canada's social programs have destroyed the independence of generations.

As the relief efforts for the 2004 tsunami disaster are well under way, we are again witnessing the kindness and generosity of Canadians. Even as our Liberal politicians stayed on holidays, Canadians all across the country volunteered their time, effort and wealth to the relief effort. Canadians are making a big difference as they have following one disaster to the next.

The saying is true, "Governments don't go to Heaven, people do." Thank goodness this truth is not lost on the Canadian people.