Today's oped defends a totally asinine point of view with respect to citizenship and the Al-Kadr family. The article just screams to be fisked and that's what I'll do informally.
First of all, damn right the al Khadr family has shown odious ingratitude. Canada opened its doors to a family that had to leave its country of origin. The parents couldn't feed themselves let alone their children. The family comes here and instead of showing gratitude by integrating, they take up arms and actively seek the overthrow of Canada's political regime. Last time I checked the Criminal code, that's high treason which includes th lesser and included charges oftreason, sedition, membership in an armed organization and so on.
Second, WTF?! Zundel was booted out of the country for his Holocaust denial. Surely if Zundel never fitted in nor accepted Canadian values, why should the al Khadr family get a pass for actually commiting high treason? And yeah there are political beliefs and social customs that are permenantly incompatible with Canadian values; so the immigrants must give them up if they us to accept them.
More importantly, we mustn't tolerate Elsamnah's hateful opinions because contrary to Jane's disingenious remarks, Elsamnah has advocated violence and hate. For fuck's sake look at the husband's and the sons' own acts and she did nothing to alert law enforcement. She's as guilty as the men in the family.
Finally Jane is beside herself that many people want the al Khadrs to lose theri citizenship. I have a much better idea: introduce the national indignity that the French created in the aftermath of WW II. Many Vichy collaborators who didn't commit war crimes but nonetheless actively assisted the regime, had their citizenship neutralized. They were banned for life in holding any public job no matter how insignificant, they couldn't vote for life, they couldn't testify in a court as their testimony had no probitive value, were denied their pensions and so on. Such a status would serve the same purposes just as effectively as stripping one's citizenship.
I passed by the Corner when this post caught my eye.Outstanding! The jingopundits have again increased their latest bad guy list with Honduras.
Its political leaders decided to leave with Spain. Never mind that Honduras is a small country with a relatively modest economy. Americans often forget that their country is so astronomically wealthy that a company like Microsoft is richer than all of Central America combined Consequently, sending troops halfway around the world is an immense expenditure.
So much so that Spain has had to provide Honduras' logistical requirements. Now that Spain will pull out its troops the Hondurans will also leave as they can't sustain the committment. Instead of persuading the Hondurans to stay with offers of American logiscal support, the jingopundits not only insult the Hondurans with utter ingratitude but even threaten to wreck havoc on the society by booting out the large number of Hondurans out of the country.
I'll be uncaracteristically blunt: America doesn't deserve the allies and sympathetic countries that have rallyed to its cause of combatting islamojishadists. The current administration and the jingopundits have consistently mishandled every opportunity for allies and sympathtic countries to join in this war. They've insulted when they should've praised, bullied when they should've negotiated; ignorned when they should've listened; sanctioned when they should've persuaded.
Is it any wonder so many countries want to bail out of their committments with the Americans, refuse their requests and reluctant to help out?
Laurent a post? un bref article en d?fense du syst?me parlimentaire britansique que le Qu?bec- puis qu'il a ?t? le premier en Am?rique du Nord en 1792- et le Canada on h?rit? des Anglais. Laurent d?fend avec vigeur le pr?sent syst?me ?l?ctoral. En g?n?ral, je comprende sa r?ticence mais je crois qu'il a tort lorsqu'il pr?sume que les alternatifs ?l?ctoraux sont ax?s pour mieux scrut? 'la volont? publique' mais pour une raision plut?t pragmatique: l'?quit?.
Je pense notamment des r?sultats des ?l?ctions f?d?rales de '93 quand les Conservateurs avaient re?u entre 30-40% d'intention des votes mais n'a gagn? que 2 si?ges. Les cons?quence ont ?t? n?fastes car les Conservateur ont batu pour survivre et les autre partis ont ?t? assez divis? que celle-ci aura permise le Lib?raux ? se corrompre. Pire encore, les resultats avaient fauss? les clivages politico-id?ologiques pour donner une h?g?gomie illusionaire d'unit?. Donc le consensus de citoyen est beaucoup plus fragile qu'on laisse croire. Le gaspilliage du registre des armes et le scandale des commandiataires en sont les exemples les plus accablants. Je pense qu'un syst?me de repr?sentation proportionelle serait plus ?quitable en d?montrant les clivages l?gitimes qu'il existent dans ce pays. Bien sur, on ne peut pas les tous r?presenter mais on peut quand m?me trouver des m?canismes de contr?le tel qu'on fixe un pourcentage comm les font beaucoup pays europ?ens
I visited Language hat which link to a post by Greg Pullman. Pullman writes that at one time Nebraska prohibited the learning of foreign languages. That tidbit has really surprised me and I reacted by saying: no way!
The niave question is why? Many Canadians complain of Quebec's Law 101 but no government has ever prohibited foreign language learning. Finally there's a theme that Pullman raises and I shere his irritation. It's towards Teresa Heinz de Kerry. There may be legitimate grounds to question her political comittments and ideological worldview; however, far too many rightwing American commentators fixate on the fact that he's a foreigner- she's Mozambiqian- is fluent in 5 or 6 languages and seems far too comfortable in European circles than with Americans.
Given her background and interests, I can certainly sympathize if she doesn't go shopping at the local Walmart nor doesn't come as a NASCAR spectator. Personally, I'm tired with this peculiar American penchant for popular snobbery. That you're only a real American if you shop at Walmart, go to racecar competitions, watch Paris and Nicole Hilton's reality shows and brag about one's provincialism.
Passava pels blogs espanyols i el sitits nocticiers quan lleg? sobre la decisi? de treutre els soldats espanyols el m?s r?pid possible. Aix? em cagu? molt mal perque Zapatero havia dit el 1 juliol i si no hi havia una nova resoluci? de l'ONU per? ara havia decidit de treure els soldats espanyols.
Edwardarticula el meus sentiments llevat un: No m'il?lusiova de res que els socialistes canvarien vis-a-vis les autonomies, aix? es podia veure venir. Per? que em irrita el m?s es que Zapatero ha rastrat els peus; no he llegit en cap lloc que dongu?s instrucci? al ambassador espanyol a l'ONU que s'espavilli i comen?a a negociar ambs els pa?sos per presentar la resoluci? volguda al Consell de Seguretat. Era absolutament passiu gaireb? panxa al sol i es queixa que una resoluci? de l'ONU no arrivar? abans del date termini del 1 juliol
En tot cas, no es el moment de sortir del pa?s sobretot quan al-Sadar desafia la autoritat de la Coalici? ni tampoc d'haver dexiat caure aquest bomba sense almenys prevenir els altres membres com el brit?nics o italians per quie hagin tingut temps. Zapatero tra?ria tots els esfor?os, morts, esperances iraqis si Irac esdeving?s una teocr?cia integrista a l'Iran.
Thanks to Charles Johnson, he linked to this article about the new Arab way of war. Personally, I'm seeing a bit of the past. Specifically, this new way strikes me as nothing more than the 19th century Anarchists' propoganda by the deed. The deliberate targeting of civilians, no matter how innocuously connected to Property. The islamojihadists have simply substituted Property for Infidel or Zionist-Crusader.
The authour's analysis is quite interesting but I'm unimpressed with his proposal for implementing marketing techniques to undermine islamojishadist sentiment in the Mideast. Victory through marketing! doesn't hvae that noble resonance that allows people to bear any burden, stay vigiliant and defend Western civ with passion. In fact, we should ask tough anthropologial questions: are there any schools of thought within Islam that would allow Mideast society to transform from a honor/shame society to a one of guilt? Indeed, Moselm civilization preserves the Ancient World's morality that St. Augustine ridded Western civilization of.
Would such a transformation be desirable, beneficial to Moslems or not? Also we must study in far greater depth of exactly the role of Arab tribalism and consangious marriages are impediments in Mideastern evolution towards a more peaceful, prosperous, less volatile civilization.