Electronic Election Problems in Quebec

Following the US from one disaster to the next :

The election was an expensive disaster marked by errors, which produced inaccurate numbers and unreliable results, the report said. And the new electronic system is to blame, it adds.

I guess seeing every election in the US that used electronic voting machines become complete messes wasn't enough to keep Montreal from going the electronic route!! Smart move jackasses!!

But here's the real kicker :

But it's too late to question the results, Blanchet concludes.

This is according to Quebec's chief electoral officer, Marcel Blanchet.

Are you kidding me? You tell us that the results are not reliable, but not to question them because it's too late?

It's never too late to assure the voters that their votes were counted properly - this is a democracy after all! Without voter confidence the word 'democracy' means absolutely nothing!

Of course, I don't personally think too many folks in positions of power are very concerned with true democracy anyhow...

For the Things We Do....We Blame YOU!!

What is with the Americans? Are they completely insane and think their outrageous lies and distortions don't get noticed, or is it that they know they can get away with it due to a lapdog western press?

Here we have the invading and occupying American army and one of their Iraqi puppets blaming Iran and Syria for the violence in Iraq!

To put this as plain as possible.... America invaded a stable Iraq and overthrew the stabilizing government, but it is Iran and Syria's fault that Iraq is now unstable.

Huh? Pass me your pipe man!

...and...

I wonder if the time line being reported here starts and ends with an American withdrawal? It is obvious to most able-minded people that most of the violence is due to the illegal US occupation.

Personally, I'm not sure why most people are unable to look at the actions and ignore the propaganda, but I think it has something to do with underlying and unrecognized racism, and the need to believe that 'we' are not capable of the things we blame 'them' of doing - which of course is also a form of racism.

Canada's Politicians Kneel Down to Zionist Israel

Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper proved yet again yesterday that he is a reactionary, and very clearly showed his (likely religious-based) bias and blind support for Israel in the face of the reality and history of the Middle East tensions.

Harper said he disagreed with a statement made by Liberal leadership hopeful Michael Ignatieff while on a french language radio show. Ignatieff had the audacity to declare that Israel's bombing of Qana "was a war crime", and that he "should have said that" in the summer rather than actually saying that he was "not losing sleep" over civilian deaths during the Israeli Defense (yeah right!) Forces attack on Qana, Lebanon.

Harper went a few steps further however, stating that he "think[s] that this is consistent with the anti-Israeli position that has been taken by virtually all of the candidates for the Liberal leadership", and that it's not "helpful or useful". I guess Harper didn't see this.

You've got one thing right there George W. Harper, criticizing Israel certainly isn't 'helpful or useful', being that you have already stated that your policy - and now Canadian government policy - is to ignore the reality that is American backed Israeli state terror.

Mr. Harper and the rest of the Canadian Neocons from the religious right who hijacked the Conservative Party of Canada are following U.S. policy in siding with Israeli war crimes over the justice desired by most of the world, and certainly by international law. In their black and white worldview, since the Liberals don't seem to be vociferously approving Israels every action - they must be anti-Israel.

G.W. Harper's assertion that anti-Israeli bias is an issue with the Liberals is completely baseless and without fact, unless we disagree that Canadian politicians should put Canada first, and international law second. He is framing it so that the only way Liberals wouldn't be anti-Israeli would be to support Israel even if they break international law.

This is a classic tactic of the pro-Zionists in the U.S. If you choose to side with international law and right over wrong, rather than Israel - regardless of their actions - you're labelled anti-Israeli, or more commonly - anti-Semitic.

It is intentionally divisive, and designed to break the discussion down to either 'you support Israel no matter what they do' or you are 'anti-Israeli'. It intentionally doesn't leave any room for you to say that you support Israel's right to exist securely, however even they can commit violations of international law, and you are against that.

As I right this, Ignatieff is on TV stating that Hezbollah is a terror organization, while Israel is a democratically elected government; that he and Canada stands 'shoulder to shoulder' with Israel; blah blah blah we love Israel crap. Never mind that Hezbollah is actually a movement dedicated to resisting Israeli occupation of Arab lands (South Lebanon 1978-2000, Palestine 1922-present and Syria's Golan Heights 1981-present), or that Israel is not a true democracy and has at least 65 United Nations resolutions against them since 1955.

With the way support for Israel is becoming an issue that politicians feel they have to make overly clear to the public, I almost feel as if I woke up in the U.S. I really hoped overt bowing to Israel wouldn't make it's way into our political discourse, however it seems we Canadians are not so lucky.

US/UK Bigger Mass Murderers Than Saddam Ever Dreamt Of Being

A new study to be published in the The Lancet this Thursday will link approximately 655,000 deaths in Iraq to the illegal US/UK invasion and occupation. The study is a follow up to the one published October 29th, 2004 in the The Lancet which conservatively estimated Iraqi deaths directly linked to the US-lead war at 100,000.

To those who support the illegal war on Iraq, obviously these figures cannot possibly be correct. After all - they have their own sources. Oh wait - the US refused to acknowledge the deaths directly attributable to them by refusing to keep statistics on any casualties other than their own soldiers.

This new figure is equivalent to 2.5% of Iraq's population. To make this clearer to those in the West, this would be 7,500,000 Americans killed due to an illegal invasion of their country. In Canada - 800,000, the UK - 1,515,000.

Yup, America has proven once again that it is number 1 - in causing death and destruction on a massive scale.

It makes me want to believe the old saying 'what goes around comes around', but I wouldn't wish this kind of hell on anyone.

Blind America - Self-Censorship on the Home Front

It's no wonder a portion of the American public will support their crazy foreign policy...it's results are being hidden by their mainstream media. Here is a glaring example, courtesy of MSNBC/Newsweek. Take a look at the different editions covers along the left-hand side of the page.

The cover story for the international editions shows (what I assume to be) an Afghan (Taliban) fighter, with the title 'Losing Afghanistan', while the U.S. edition focuses on a much more important issue...the life of a photographer named Annie Leibovitz.

Could media self-censorship get any more open and blatant? Un-frigging-believable!! They must be going with the 'what they don't know can't hurt them' philosophy. In this case the 'they' is the American public, while the 'them' would be the government.

Ottawa Sun Editorial - Information Without Context

An editorial that appears in the Sept. 22/06 issue of the Ottawa Sun uses polished, intentionally misleading statements to hold wavering public support of Canada's mission to Afghanistan. This isn't a surprise, however I am seeing more and more of this starting to appear in Canadian media. They must have been taking notes during the American media's campaign to build support for the Iraqi debacle, as it is the exact same types of statements being used.

Here is the full text of the editorial from today's Ottawa Sun :

No doubt many Canadians were surprised to see Prime Minister Stephen Harper appearing before the United Nations General Assembly yesterday to talk about Canada's military role in Afghanistan.

What, they might well ask, was our PM doing addressing the UN about that country?

After all, isn't Afghanistan, just like Iraq, "George Bush's war," as we've been told ad nauseam by various NDP, Bloc and Liberal politicians? And isn't Harper just following in lock-step with Bush in Afghanistan? Uh ... no and no.

Unlike Iraq, the UN has sanctioned the military mission in Afghanistan, undertaken by the 37-member NATO International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), which has about 20,000 soldiers, 2,300 from Canada.

And yes, the U.S. is also a member of ISAF.

So are -- ready? -- Albania, Australia, Austria, Azerbaijan, Belgium, Bulgaria, Croatia, the Czech Republic, Denmark, Estonia, Finland, France, Germany, Greece, Hungary, Iceland, Ireland, Italy, Latvia, Lithuania, Luxembourg, the former Yugoslav Republic of Macedonia, the Netherlands, New Zealand, Norway, Poland, Portugal, Romania, Slovakia, Slovenia, Spain, Sweden, Switzerland, Turkey and the United Kingdom.

Note the presence of France and Germany.

Not in Iraq, in Afghanistan -- just like Canada.

Note the presence of Sweden and Switzerland.

Not exactly war-like nations -- just like Canada.

That said, it is time for more ISAF members to put more troops on the front lines in Kandahar, where our soldiers are fulfilling the ISAF mission of "assisting the Afghan government (which has requested this help) in extending and exercising its authority and influence across the country, creating the conditions for stabilization and reconstruction."

As Harper noted yesterday, it's hard to reconstruct a country, if, say, every time you build a school, the Taliban blow it up.

Finally, for those opposition MPs complaining that Harper cares only about our military role in Afghanistan and not humanitarian efforts, Canada is contributing almost $1 billion over 10 years in development assistance to the people of Afghanistan.

Just thought you'd like to know.

Here is my letter to the editor :

I would just like to add some context to the editorial of Sept.22/06 titled 'Force is with us', as the author couldn't do so without undermining their own argument. The first is the notion that we are "assisting the Afghan government (which has requested this help)...". This is a ludicrous statement. The US installed a puppet government run by a former big-oil man that is accepted by a minority of the population. Of course that puppet government is going to 'invite' us to stay - they need our protection! Second, the author notes that we have commited "almost $1 billion over 10 years" to help with development assistance. Wow!! This is equal to $32.26 per Afghan over 10 years, or $3.23 a year per person!! It is fantastic that we are commiting this money, however small an amount it is, but let's not congratulate ourselves for something we have yet to carry through on, and that is unlikely to make any noticable difference. I fully support our troops, and agree completely that they are the bravest among us, but buying into feel-good (and false) statements about being 'invited' and that 'we can't leave Afghanistan to the terrorists' which are designed to make us equate supporting the troops with keeping them there regardless of the circumstances is not fair to them and their willingness to sacrifice.

It likely won't be printed, however as a citizen who doesn't want to see more young Canadian soldiers killed to defend oil routes in the middle east, I feel a need to at least try to add some context and straight talk to the debate.

**update** They actually did publish the above 'letter to the editor' I sent them, on Saturday Sept. 23rd.

Mahmoud the Iranian Madman? Hardly.

"We love everyone in the world — Jews, Christians, Muslims, non-Muslims, non-Jews, non-Christians," he said. "We are against ugly acts. We are against occupation, aggression, killings and displacing people — otherwise we have no problem with ordinary people."

So said Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad when asked about past comments which were misinterpreted (mistakenly??) in the western media as meaning he wanted to destroy Israel.

I'd like to see how they spin this in order to make him seem like a 'madman', and get the masses to back war with Iran "to stop this 'madman' from getting a nuclear bomb". Or energy .. depending on whether you believe the Iranians who are within the NPT, or the Americans who lied their way into Iraq and are selling nuclear material to India - who is one of three confirmed nuclear powers who hasn't signed the NPT.

Oh yeah, when the west says Iran is disobeying the world community - they are lying. Iran has the support of 118 of 202 sovereign states.

To be honest, Ahmadinejad seems to be a joyful character compared to those in the Bush regime who are constantly attacking the character of their political enemies, without actually refuting the substance of their arguments.

Harper to America : We Will Lie To And Kill Our People For You

Well, it looks like Harper is taking another page from the book of Bush. According to Harper's speech to American business leaders, our troops will remain in Afghanistan regardless of what the polls say, because in his mind we are there "for absolutely the right reasons, with our international allies, with the United Nations, the world community."

According to Harper, "we will not, and nor would any responsible Canadian prime minister, ever leave this mission until we are successful in achieving its security and its development objectives".

Let's see. The Afghan mission started out as a response to the role the Taliban played in allowing the attacks of 9/11. However, as has been proven, the US planned on invading Afghanistan before 9/11. 1, 2

For those who have seen the evidence that directly refutes the official version of the events of 9/11 and are open minded enough to see it as plausible, we know that 9/11 could not have happened without at least complicity by parts of the US government aparatus. For those of you who have yet to see this very compelling evidence, start your eye-opening journey by watching 'Loose Change - 2nd Edition' (buy, view online).

Once you watched that video, hit the alternative media on the web. Here are some you should visit. 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6. There are many more....you should be getting all your news from the alternative - or at least read it to balance the corporate-mainstream-government mouthpeice media.

Once you research the events of 9/11, and take into account all the other coincidences tied into 9/11, you have no choice to see US government complicity. Once you reach that point, you have no choice but to admit that our government, and the majority of governments and mainstream media outlets around the world are complicit in covering up the truth.

So here is my point. As of this writing, 36 Canadian soldiers have been killed in Afghanistan. Or, put another way, our government has lied to us in order to get our support to send troops to Afghanistan, where 36 of our soldiers have been killed. Dead based on lies. Here they are.

Some Canadian Views on Afghanistan

The Toronto Star asked its readers for their comments on whether Canada's military was on a mission impossible in Afghanistan. Here are some of the responses, with my comments on each :

We should do what the Americans did in Vietnam: Declare victory and get out quickly. Allan Eizinas, Simcoe, Ont.

Subtle sarcasm. I like it! Problem is, everyone except the Americans knows they lost in Vietnam.

Mission Impossible, no ... Stay the course, cut off their weapons supplies, burn the opium crops and cut off their income, create safe zones and build hospitals and schools, and the war is winnable, in time. Gerald L. Sedore, Keswick, Ont.

A few things....

First - If we burn the opium crop, we cut off the supply of money to the warlords who are currently supporting us. They are only supporting us because we ousted the Taliban - who had almost eradicated the opium crop - therefore restoring the warlords power. Will they still support us after we cut off their supply of money, which gets them guns, which gets and holds their power? Not likely.

Second - Our bases are barely 'safe zones', so how does this guy recommend creating them? Occupying every square foot of Afghan soil?

Third - How much Canadian blood and treasure is this guy prepared to spend in order to 'win' this war "in time"?

As I see it, we have a choice to make: Do we fight the terrorists in Afghanistan or in downtown Toronto? Bill Rhude, HRM, N.S.

No comment. This guy speaks for himself. Or wait, is he speaking for George Bush?

Parents are loosing their sons and daughters and then have to listen to the NDP and other left wing factions carry on. Shame on this country. Gary Haller, Guelph, Ont

The NDP and "other left wing factions" are carrying on? And here I thought they were simply trying to have an open debate on the reason those parents are loosing their sons and daughters. This is, after all, a democracy. Perhaps Gary Haller would enjoy living in a country where the government does what it wants without debate. Like say North Korea.

Canada should get out now. I have always thought that this is the wrong mission for Canada and is NOT making us safer, just the opposite.
Steve Lawson, Toronto

Finally some common sense!

No it is not impossible and given time they will succeed. However there is nothing more cheerful for our troops over there than a bunch of do-gooders giving comfort to the enemy by saying the mission is impossible and the Taliban will win.
Arnold Adams, Amherstview, Ont.

Another George Bush talking point repeated without actually thinking about what is said.

Of course it is. The Russians tried for years and gave up in defeat. Our original position was as peacekeepers, now it's all-out war. Stephen Harper will answer to the voters for this terrible mess.
Jackie Stockley, Orillia, Ont.

One can only hope! Those who voted for an extension on our mission should be voted out, regardless of party affiliation! Here is the breakdown of the vote.

One more that I really like :

This mission is guaranteed to fail. The only ways the politicians will pull our troops out is when their own kids are asked to signup for service.
Roy Hallagan, Oakville

Average Citizen Finally Waking Up?

I must have woken up in an alternate universe this morning. I Just came across two web polls showing very surprising results (to me anyhow). I'm really hoping it is a sign that people are starting to again think for themselves, rather than allowing government and media to spin them in the direction they want them to go.

The first is from a Toronto radio station, AM640 :

It is really nice to see a mainstream radio station in Canada's largest city first of all asking the question, and second, getting such an overwhelming response in favour of the more provable alternate theories on 9/11. Unfortunately I cannot figure out the date the poll was up, and how many votes they tallied.

The second poll that I found a little shocking was on the Canoe site :

Although it is a pretty small sample size, I find it reassuring that the majority of those who cast a vote realize that taking guns away from private citizens is not going to keep criminals from getting their hands on illegal guns. We'll see how long it takes for the gun control advocates to take advantage of the latest school shooting in Montreal.

Mainstream Media 9/11 'hit-piece' on CBC's 'The National'

Tonight on the CBC National news telecast, reporter/commentator Rex Murphy used his 'Point of View' commentary segment to launch a completely fact-free and transparent smear job directed at those of us who don't believe the official government issued 9/11 conspiracy theory. You know - the one that is refuted by hard facts!



Here is the transcript posted on the CBC website.

Here is the rebuttal I sent off to national@cbc.ca :

Rex Murphy's commentary of Sept. 12 regarding so called 'conspiracy theories' and those who believe them is a poor attempt at an obvious hit piece. He mentions some of the most far-fetched, lunatic fringe 'conspiracy theories' such as aliens - and then works to link belief in alternate theories regarding 9/11 to belief in them. Then he uses the very fringe theory that it was "missiles wrapped in holograms" that hit the WTC rather than planes, ignoring other highly credible fact-based theories, in order to paint all 9/11 theories as crazy. To him, it is absurd that sitting American leaders would plot to attack and kill their own citizens. I guess Rex has never heard of Operation Northwoods. Google it. In his transparent attack piece, he has labeled many much more credible people on this subject than himself as conspiracy cooks, and judging by his tone, as terrible people for even discussing a theory other than the official, government delivered, Swiss cheese version.

What I was basically trying to say, said much better here.

The Latest "Terror Plot"

So yesterday we hear more booga-booga from the scaremongering UK and US governments and media. They arrested 24 suspects who they say were involved in a plot to blow up planes flying between the UK and the US.

"Mass murder on an unimaginable scale" said UK police.

"Islamic fascists...will use any means to destroy those of us who love freedom" says GW Bush.

According to authorities, the plot involved sneaking liquid explosives onto the plane disguised as regular things such as drinks, hairspray/gell and whatever else.

Now these types of items are not allowed on any flights originating from or destined for these countries, and passengers are being forced to dump them into the garbage, as seen in the following images :


I just have one question. If these liquids are potentially too dangerous to bring on the plane, why is it okay to just dump them into the garbage cans and recycling containers at the airports?

Of course, the common person wouldn't even realize that they should be questioning this, as this would take common sense. Most sheople would rather let the government and media do their thinking for them.

Too bad they aren't thinking nice things like truth, justice and peace. Instead it is death and destruction based on lies, partial truths, and petty scare tactics. But like I always say - stick with what works!

A Reminder (mostly to myself)...

From the Jerusalem Post

Not all Jews are Zionist racist assholes :

'Reservist officer Captain Amir Paster was sentenced on Sunday night to 28 days in a military prison for refusing to take part in the fighting in Lebanon.'

'Paster, 28, arrived at his base after being drafted and told his soldiers that he refused to take part in operations that harm innocent civilians.'

Canadian (Harper) Government to Israel....

Kill our citizens - no problem!

Kill our soldiers posted with the UN - no problem!

We still side with you in your "measured" response to the rockets coming from south Lebanon.

...on the side to CSIS :

What? The rockets didn't start being fired until after Israel started bombing? Doesn't matter. Remember, they changed their reason...it is now a response to the kidnap of Israeli soldiers from Isreali territory. What? The israeli soldiers were actually inside Lebanon? Doesn't matter. Remember, the mainstream media has cleaned the story for them, and most of the peons - er - I mean people believe anything they are told by the newpapers and TV.

Israel to Investigate Itself Over UN Post Attack

Hmm. I wonder if they'll find themselves guilty?! Since when do you get to investigate yourself in a possible homicide/war crime? I hope next time i'm speeding I get to decide whether or not to pull myself over and issue myself a ticket!

On top of this, they are trying to say the UN will not be allowed to move peacekeepers in southern Lebanon. I guess they think they have the right to decide international affairs all on their own! Damn they have balls!

What The Hell is This?

I don't know for sure, but this certainly doesn't look like a normal rocket/bomb/missile. It looks to me like a weapon that releases something - like a gas maybe?

And look at those crazy Jew bible thumpers - or in this case Talmud thumpers. I didn't realize their 'God' condoned cheering on death and destruction.

Just another reason to NOT believe in 'God'....along with common sense.

The Liars and the Idiots

It's lucky for the politicians and talking heads who support the US/Israel terror alliance that most people are idiots, otherwise their lies and misinformation would make them look ridiculous. Here are a few examples from The Ottawa Citizen today :

1) Retired Major-General Lewis MacKenzie, while speaking to a rally in Toronto supporting Israel :

''If Hezbollah truly cared about civilian casualties, they would get their butts out of the residential areas of South Lebanon and fight man to man,''

You mean sort of how the Israelis fight man to man? Like from the cockpits of bombers and fighter aircraft? Or like the Israeli soldiers firing artillery from miles away?

This guys comment reminds me of how the mouthpieces in the US call their enemies cowards for blowing themselves up, meanwhile their army drop bombs from 10,000 feet.

What takes more balls - pressing a button in the cockpit at 10,000 feet and not even seeing the death and destruction you cause, or pressing a button and blowing yourself up to cause the death and destruction?

2) Prime Minister Stephen Harper, when asked if he agreed with UN Secretary General Kofi Annan's assessment that the Israeli strike on a UN observation post in southern Lebanon may have been deliberate :

''I certainly doubt that to be the case, given that the government of Israel has been co-operating with us in our evacuation efforts, in our attempts to move Canadian citizens out of Lebanon, and also trying to keep our own troops that are on the ground involved in that evacuation out of harms way. So, I seriously doubt that,''

First off, Israel striking a UN post on one hand and 'co-operating' with evacuation efforts on the other have nothing to do with each other. At all. Second, I guess he missed the part about the warning calls to the IDF from the UN post itself, and from the UN headquarters in New York. Oh yeah, and the part about Israel using precision weapons.

3) Alan Baker, Israel's ambassador to Canada :

''What earthly reason would Israel have to deliberately target a UN post,"

Hmm. Let's see. Perhaps they had evidence supporting reports that Israel is using banned weapons in its offensive. Perhaps they wanted them out of there before an upcoming event in order to ensure there were no credible witnesses. I'm not saying definitively that this is the case, however it shows that there would be an 'earthly' reason.

Like I said at the outset, most people are idiots without the capacity for critical thought, so when statements such as above are made, they are rarely if ever called on them. The world is run by hate-filled liars, who know the majority will believe what they are told without even thinking about it.

How is it that lies, double standards and idiocy are winning over truth, justice and intelligence?

Perpetuating misinformation in the Ottawa Citizen

This is an editorial published today in the Ottawa Citizen :

Hezbollah's miscalculation

The Ottawa Citizen

Published: Tuesday, July 25, 2006

Any survey of great misjudgments in the history of the Middle East must now include Hezbollah's attack on Israel.

As an exercise in recklessness, Hezbollah's aggression ranks up there with Samson's falling for Delilah or Billy Hayes's attempt to smuggle hashish out of Turkey (see the film Midnight Express for more on Mr. Hayes).

The July 12 murder and abduction of Israeli soldiers on sovereign Israeli territory was a colossal miscalculation in several ways. In a speech six years ago Sheik Hassan Nasrallah, Hezbollah's leader, likened Israel to a spider web -- it looks strong, but one poke and it falls apart. Back then Israel had voluntarily withdrawn from southern Lebanon, and Mr. Nasrallah saw that as a sign of weakness.

He was wrong. As of this writing, Israeli troops continue to pursue Mr. Nasrallah's fighters across Lebanon. Dozens of Hezbollah men are said to be dead. Although civilians on both sides also are dying, the Israeli public is overwhelmingly behind their prime minister. Some spider web.

Hezbollah's real miscalculation, though, wasn't the assumption that Israel had become too soft and decadent to defend itself (an assumption Islamists make about all western societies). No, Mr. Nasrallah's real miscalculation was his expectation that the usual suspects would naturally align against Israel.

Trouble is, Hezbollah crossed an international border to attack Israel -- a border recognized by the UN itself. The first sign that Hezbollah had miscalculated came in the form of a remarkable statement from Saudi Arabia. The Saudis denounced Mr. Nasrallah -- a fellow Arab -- for his "rash" adventure and said that Hezbollah alone "bear(s) the full responsibility of these irresponsible acts."

International diplomats, though unsettled by the outbreak of violence, have quietly given Israel a free hand to cleanse Hezbollah from south Lebanon. They've done this not just because Hezbollah so clearly seeks the destruction of Israel, but because the international community is largely responsible for the current crisis. When Israel withdrew from south Lebanon six years ago, it was assured that Hezbollah would be kept in check. A UN Security Council resolution was even passed ordering the disarming of Hezbollah.

Unfortunately, the UN and Lebanon let Israel down. Hezbollah was able to operate freely in the south, amassing weapons and building fortifications, all in preparation for a showdown with Israel -- a showdown that Hezbollah initiated this month.

And that's where we are today. Despite perfunctory calls for a "cessation of hostilities," no one, not even the UN, wants a ceasefire just yet. It's understood that Israel needs to weaken Hezbollah before an international force can secure the border.

In 1981 Israel destroyed Saddam Hussein's nuclear reactor before the thing became operational. Now Israel is dealing with Hezbollah, because no one else wanted to. Soon it may fall upon Israel to confront Iran. Presumably Israel is tired of being the world's counterterrorism unit, though this time around it's nice to see that an increasing number of observers recognize that Israel is doing us all a favour.

Here is my letter to the editor :

re: editorial with title 'Hezbollah's Miscalculation'

I have two issues with this editorial. The first is the fact that you chose to ignore the many reports from international media indicating that the Israeli soldiers where actually captured inside sovereign Lebanese territory. The Associated Press even reported this.

The second is the idea that Israel is "the world's counterterrorism unit" and is "doing us all a favour". Why are we in the West constantly being told that Israel’s enemies are our enemies? These groups attack Israel because of its policies past and present, and for whatever reason Western leaders want to place their own citizens in harms way to support Israel’s policies.

In short, they become our enemies because we force them to with our unwavering support of Israel – right or wrong.

I understand why you would continue to perpetuate this misinformation however, as reporting that it may have been Israel who initiated hostilities by sending a commando team into sovereign Lebanese territory would make it hard for you to stand so firmly with Israel, and show that their actions are most certainly not a justified and 'measured' response.

Heaven forbid a news organization from giving all sides of a story and letting the reader decide for themselves...it may lead to people understanding that the poor forever victim state of Israel is actually very rarely the victim.

We'll see if it is published....

Further to Yesterday....

http://www.washtimes.com/national/20060316-114755-3306r.htm

Maybe this is why the Chinese are increasing their defence budget...man the Americans are something! One day they ask why the Chinese are increasing their defence spending, and want "transparency"...basically want to know what the money is being spent on - the next they release a report saying they are moving their weapons closer to prepare for conflict with China!!

America In The News....

Translation from sugar-coated bullshit to what they are really saying...

US backs first-strike attack plan

Stressing US preference for "transformational diplomacy" and coalition building, but not necessarily within United Nations or Nato frameworks

...means : since we cannot get our traditional allies in Europe to support us, we will consider it a coalition even if it us just us, the Brits, and any other 1st or 3rd world country that we can bribe into join us with economic and military aid.

Criticising the lack of democratic freedoms in Russia and China

...meanwhile the Bush administration cracks down on government employees and journalistss who blow the whistle on undemocratic actions by the government.

Branding Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez a "demagogue" aiming to destabilise the region

...translates into : South America is coming together and freeing themselves from the economic stranglehold of corporate America. Hugo Chavez is an outspoken leader of this policy of keeping the wealth of South America in South America for their citizens.

The policy of the US, according to the opening words of the 49-page document, is "to seek and support democratic movements and institutions in every nation and culture, with the ultimate goal of ending tyranny in our world".

...meaning that we will break internation law and meddle in the political affairs of sovereign nations if their government does not allow us to pillage their wealth.

"If necessary, however, under long-standing principles of self-defence, we do not rule out use of force before attacks occur, even if uncertainty remains as to the time and place of the enemy's attack,"

...meaning : the U.S. considers a 4 year old policy as long-standing, and that no evidence of a pending attack is evidence that they are hiding the planning for an attack, and that justifies our attack on them.

Tehran Willing To Talk With U.S. About Iraq

Washington broke ties with Tehran in April 1980 after the Islamic revolution that ousted the US-backed shah

...should read : Washington broke ties with Tehran in April 1980 after the Islamic revolution that ousted the US CIA-installed puppet government of the Shah.

...fierce anti-Western rhetoric and his defense of the country's nuclear program.

...should read : fierce anti-Imperialist rhetoric and his defense of the country's civilian nuclear program.

US leaders have accused the Islamic republic of meddling in Iraq

...the US broke international law when they invaded and occupied the sovereign nation of Iraq, however it is Iran who is meddling in Iraqi affairs.

...Iran is secretly seeking to develop the nuclear bomb, accusations vehemently denied by the clerical regime in Tehran.

...should say : ...Iran is secretly seeking to develop the nuclear bomb, accusations vehemently denied by the clerical regime in Tehran, and not supported by the evidence obtained by the IAEA.

Iran and America were close allies before the fall of the shah in 1979.

...should say : Iran and America were close allies until the Americans overthrew a democratically elected government and installed the shah as their puppet in Tehran.

China Military Build-up Concerns U.S., Iran "Central Banker of Terrorism" : Rice

"We've said we have concerns about the Chinese military build-up. We've told the Chinese that they need to be transparent," she said.

"I heard there's going to be a 14 percent increase in the Chinese defence budget -- that's a lot -- and China should undertake to be transparent about what that means."

...so lets get this straight - the U.S. is light-years ahead of the rest of the world in current military capability and military spending, and they think they have a right to know what the Chinese are spending their defence budget on? You show us the books for your military spending, including all your 'top secret' development sites like the so called 'Area 51' and other weapons programs, and i'll then agree that you should be able to see how the Chinese are spending their money.

Damn the Americans are hypocrits, liars and double-speak artists!! I wonder if they found a way to bring Orwell back to teach them this crap!

Chef - C'mon Man! Celebs Are Making Scientology Look Worse Than it Already Is!!

http://articles.news.aol.com/tv/article.adp?id=20060313163309990010

So Isaac Hayes is leaving Comedy Central's 'South Park' due to what he calls "intolerance and bigotry towards religious beliefs". He continues by saying "Religious beliefs are sacred to people, and at all times should be respected and honored". Sounds like an acceptable and perfectly logical reason to quit right?

According to the entertainment news sources, he made this decision due to a show satirizing his so called 'religion' - Scientology - that aired last November. (see it here)

According to one of the show's creators Matt Stone, Hayes' reasoning has nothing to do with anyone's religious beliefs but his own. "This is 100 percent having to do with his faith of Scientology... He has no problem - and he's cashed plenty of checks - with our show making fun of Christians."

If Isaac Hayes is concerened with intolerance and bigotry towards religious beliefs, perhaps he could use his celebrity to defend a religion that has been around longer than weird Hollywood actors and is taking a beating from all sides...Islam.

I didn't see any comments coming from him after papers around the world printed the cartoons depicting the Prophet Mohammed as a terrorist.

And by the way, South Park makes fun of everyone and everything. If making fun of Scientology is the only thing the show has done that made you want to quit, it doesn't say much about you as a human being.

Marriage, And How the Majority is Losing

During the debate in the news and in the public on whether to legalize gay marriage or not, I made a statement to many friends and coworkers...if they legallized gay marriage, it would be less than 10 years before the polygamists had their day in court.

Using the same argument as those pushing to legallize gay marriage, the polygamists will be the next ones to broaden the defenition of marriage.

And so it begins.....

The Editor & Publisher - John Tierney Backs Polygamy as HBO Series Debuts

MSNBC - After Gay Marriage, Polygamy Activism Rises

This Joke Says It All.....

A little boy goes to his dad and asks, "What are Politics?"

Dad says, "Well son, let me try to explain it this way:

#1. I'm the head of the family, so call me The President.

#2. Your mother is the administrator of the money, so we call her the Government.

#3. We're here to take care of your needs, so we'll call you the People.

#4. The nanny, we'll consider her the Working Class.

#5. And your baby brother, we'll call him the Future.

"Now, think about that and see if it makes sense."

So, the little boy goes off to bed thinking about what Dad has said.

Later that night, he hears his baby brother crying, so he gets up to check on him. He finds that the baby has severely soiled his diaper.

So, the little boy goes to his parent's room and finds his mother sound asleep. Not wanting to wake her, he goes to the nanny's room. Finding the door locked, he looks in the peephole and finds his father in bed with the Nanny. He gives up and goes back to bed.

The next morning, the little boy says to his father, "Dad, I think I understand the concept of politics now."

The father says, "Good, son, tell me in your own words what you think politics is all about."

The little boy replies, "The President is screwing the Working Class while the Government is sound asleep. The People are being ignored and the Future is in deep shit."

It Must Be So.....

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20060309/ap_on_go_co/us_iraq

U.S. Secretary of Defence Donald Rumsfeld and Secretary of State Condolezza Rice say that despite growing sectarian violence in Iraq, the creation of a stable government is moving ahead just fine. This is on March 9th in testimony before Congress.

Meanwhile, back on planet earth, Rice's own State Department released a report March 8th which states :

“Additionally, the misappropriation of official authority by groups – paramilitary, sectarian, criminal, terrorist and insurgent – resulted in numerous and severe crimes and abuses,”

and

“The vast majority of human rights abuses reportedly carried out by government agents were attributed to the police,”

and

“Large-scale financial, as well as political, personal corruption in the government remained a severe problem,”

So apparently Rice didn't read the report that her department compiled and release before her testimony, or she was completely full of shit in her testimony.

There was at least one person in the room during this Congressional sharade with a grasp on reality - during Rice's opening statement a man stood up and yelled "How many of you have children in this illegal and immoral war? The blood is on your hands and you cannot wash it away."

Obviously being that the U.S. government doesn't answer to the people, he was escorted out of the building by security. On the way out he added "Fire Rumsfeld."

Hey Dick - Go Pound Wood

How many times does World Anti-Doping Agency chief Dick Pound have to make accusatory statements based on his opinions and suspicions - lacking supporting evidence - before that agency does something to muzzle him?

His leadership of this agency, and the agency itself didn't hit my radar screen until he accused up to one third of NHL players of being on performance enhancing substances back in November of 2005. Back then of course there was strong reaction from the NHL, the NHLPA and the players themselves. Not to mention the cold reaction of hockey fans in general. NHL deputy commissioner Bill Day had this to say :

"I would respectfully suggest that Mr. Pound's comments have absolutely no basis in fact," Daly told The Canadian Press. "I find it troubling, to say the least, that he would find it necessary to comment on something he has absolutely no knowledge of."

Executive Director of the NHL Players' Association Ted Saskin followed with :

"Dick Pound's comments are incredibly irresponsible and have no basis in fact," said Saskin. "He has no knowledge of our sport and our players and frankly has no business making such comments."

Some prominent players added their thoughts :

Jarome Iginla of the Calgary Flames - "I think it's unfair."

Ryan Smyth of the Edmonton Oilers - "We don't have any troubles here. I don't know what goes on around the league, but I talked to a few players and by and large I think this is false information."

Matthius Ohlund of the Vancouver Canucks - "I've played for eight years and I haven't see anything around our team," said Vancouver Canucks defenceman Mattias Ohlund. "I'm sure there will be some out of 700 who are taking something but to say that there's one-third is obviously ridiculous."

Now ol' Dick is at it again after some cross-country skiers were found to have high levels of hemoglobin just days prior to the Olympics. The International Ski Federation(FIS) has listed 12 skiers as having the higher levels, and has stated that the higher than normal levels of hemoglobin were most likely caused by high altitude training.

Dick Pound, obviously a previously unknown expert on how altitude affects the human system says :

"This is not a particularly high altitude. If you went to Machu Picchu (in Peru) for nine months you might get it..."

and :

"They (FIS) might be afraid that they are not able to prove that they were drugged."

Perhaps he went through the same 'diplo-speak' training as the Bush Administration....make an accusation which isn't supported by evidence, and then use the fact that the accused cannot prove the accusation false as proof you are right.

This is like me saying that you killed your neighbors cat, and you must have done it unless you can show me your neighbors cat alive. Of course I made the accusation knowing full well that your neighbor doesn't have a cat and never did.

This type of blame/negative-proof game has worked fairly well for the Bushistas - take Iraq having to prove they didn't have WMD's. Let's see how it works for Dick.

For a world body which obviously would like to be taken seriously, they certainly don't seem to understand that they risk becoming 'a boy who cried wolf' too many times to be taken seriously if they don't ensure they have proof to back up their public accusations.

Bush Admin Lies Openly. Will They Get Called On It?

The Bush administration just never stops amazing me with their nonsense. Here they are now trying to block the release in the U.S. of more images of torture from the Abu Ghraib prison in Iraq, which of course they were/are trying to pass off as the work of a few 'bad apples'. Their reasoning is that their publication could provoke antagonism towards the U.S.

If you can't figure it out, they are saying that allowing Americans to see these previously unpublished photographs will cause antagonism towards Americans. Huh?!?

Obviously they are not worried about outrage being directed at America from abroad, they are worried about how the American people will react when they see that their military is ripe with the kind of people who will commit torture, and that the leadership lied and tried to cover up how widespread the torture was.

So who is going to call them on it? My guess is many bloggers and some alternative press, but you certainly will not see Wolf Blitzer or Anderson Cooper asking them to clarify it.

America - a shining light of freedom/truth/justice - we've heard them all before. Now that the curtains are being pulled back on the U.S., the world is finding out that 'America the beautiful' is actually just a really nice cover. Like the saying goes - don't judge a book by its cover.