Thursday, October 29, 2009

To Enthios for the Men's Cursillo Weekend


I will be away at the Men's Cursillo 4-Day Weekend, and I will not be posting during that time.

The Cursillo weekends are held at Enthios - a beautiful place 30 minutes west of Calgary

You can read about Cursillo on my previous post, from Monday, September 21, 2009: What is a Cursillo Commissioning? There is a link which leads to the Calgary Cursillo site and explains all about it.



Enthios means something like: breathed by God

Gurth Whitaker
Calgary AB

Wednesday, October 28, 2009

Does the US Want Obama Health-Care Reform?

For Canadians the information has been somewhat distorted; I hear Canadians talking as though there is no safety net in the United States; that is not really true; they have Medicaid and Medicare.
Medicaid is available to certain low-income individuals and families  (see here)
Medicare is for people over 65 and some disabled people (see here)
Both programs are administered by the US Department of Health and Human Services (HHS), both of which are generous programs and certainly not inferior to our general services here, possibly better.

Here's what the HHS says about itself:
The is the United States government's principal agency for protecting the health of all Americans and providing essential human services, especially for those who are least able to help themselves.
My understanding is that there are other safety nets, programs and clinics; stories that people get turned away from hospital and die in the streets are not true.

Canadians also seem to be under the misapprehension that the Republican Party, or GOP (Grand Old Party) as it is sometimes called, does not want reform, but the Obama Government does.

That is incorrect, both the GOP and the Democrats are in favour of reform; the GOP had a 4-point plan proposed by Senator McCain, whereas the Democrats have tried to implement a "universal" or "socialised" health-care system in the past.

President Clinton put forward a plan in 1993, however the Democratic Party itself  offered a number of competing plans of their own, and the plan was declared dead in 1994 by Democratic Senate Majority Leader George J. Mitchell, who is the current special envoy to the Middle East for the Obama administration.

But where do the American people stand in the issue? Here's the results from "Pollster.com".



We see that there is a clear margin of Americans who oppose the Obama plans over those who support it.
Oppose = 47.8%

Favour = 44.9%
A word about the approach used by Pollster.com .
 
They do not conduct their  own polls, but analyze the results from a number of other major pollsters to arrive at a mathematical representation of all the polls under consideration. It is like an average, but it is more mathematically rigorous than that, and uses techniques used in science and statistics to properly treat the data (such as linear regression, least-squares regression); Pollster.com explains their methodology here, and the full result can be found here here.

Both Parties Propose Reform

The Official GOP Plan can be read here, but it's more instructive to look at the commentary by Charles Krauthammer in the Washington Post from August of this year; his opening statement summarises the Obama plans:
In overhauling any segment of our economy, the 1986 tax reform should be the model. Yet today's ruling Democrats propose to fix our extremely high-quality (but inefficient and therefore expensive) health-care system with 1,000 pages of additional curlicued complexity -- employer mandates, individual mandates, insurance company mandates, allocation formulas, political payoffs and myriad other conjured regulations and interventions -- with the promise that this massive concoction will lower costs.
4-Point Reform favoured by Republicans (simplified)
  1. Tort Reform
  2. Real health-insurance reform
  3. Health Insurance Across State Lines
  4. Reduce fraud and waste in Medicare / Medicaid
1. Tort Reform: A significant portion of US health costs result from the huge awards by US Courts in malpractice suits. These awards result in much higher premiums than would otherwise be required, and forces doctors to practice overly defensive, and unnecessary, medicine to reduce the chances of litigation. Kruathammer calls it "an epidemic of defensive medicine that does no medical good, yet costs a fortune."

Tort reform has been proposed by the GOP for some time but it has been blocked by the Democrats because a significant part of their revenue comes from litigation lawyers; the Democrats will not embark on reform to avoid alienating their supporters.

Here's the extent of the problem:
An authoritative (study by the) Massachusetts Medical Society, found that five out of six doctors admitted they order tests, procedures and referrals -- amounting to about 25 percent of the total -- solely as protection from lawsuits.
Defensive medicine, estimates the libertarian/conservative Pacific Research Institute, wastes more than $200 billion a year. Just half that sum could provide a $5,000 health insurance grant -- $20,000 for a family of four -- to the uninsured poor (U.S. citizens ineligible for other government health assistance). 
This one area of reform alone could have a huge impact on US health-care, but the Democratic party blocks it to protect their support base.

2. Real health-insurance reform (see the whole discussion here):
Tax employer-provided health-care benefits and return the money to the employee with a government check to buy his own medical insurance, just as he buys his own car or home insurance.
There is no logical reason to get health insurance through your employer. This entire system is an accident of World War II wage and price controls. It's economically senseless. It makes people stay in jobs they hate, decreasing labor mobility and therefore overall productivity. And it needlessly increases the anxiety of losing your job by raising the additional specter of going bankrupt through illness.
So why doesn't the Obama administration reform it?
Repealing the exemption has one fatal flaw, however. It was advocated by candidate John McCain. Obama so demagogued it last year that he cannot bring it up now without being accused of the most extreme hypocrisy and without being mercilessly attacked with his own 2008 ads.
3. Health Insurance Across State Lines: the current laws prohibit competition across states lines. This adds costs by duplication, causes problems with portability, and greatly adds to costs by eliminating widespread competition ensuring that rates remain high. This approach has also has been previously blocked by the Democrats.

4. Reduce fraud and waste in Medicare / Medicaid: the Democrats have blocked reforms to address this also on previous occasions. But savings have been included as part of the CBO's (Congressional Budget Office) financial plan for Obama's reform. The question is why wait for a massive, complex new bill to reduce fraud and waste? Why not start action on reducing fraud and waste the day after inauguration?

Obama's Plan
The core of Obama's plan is to ultimately replace the the US Medical Insurance industry with a single-payer, government run and controlled plan.

Chief objections to this are:
  1. Governments are inefficient and wasteful, (example Medicare and Medicaid) therefore this will result in far higher costs than from private companies.
  2. Government will be taking over control of one sixth of the US economy; Government control of business is opposed by many Americans on Constitutional grounds
  3. Many people think that their health is a private matter between them and their doctor, therefore the Government should play no part in it. People see this as another intrusion by the Government into their private lives. 
  4. It will be massively expensive (estimates of 1 -2 Trillion dollars, but nobody really knows), and will not reduce costs, which was Obama's original reasons for reform . The actual costs are likely to increase far more than estimated, probably by a factor of 2 or 3 or more (example Maine)
  5. Emphasis should be on other more urgent issues, jobs, the war in Afghanistan, Iran and the burgeoning US deficit
  6. The bill itself is not being developed along bi-partisan lines, and this is causing some concerns not only to Republicans, but also to Democrats. Members of both houses feel that the way to produce pass such major legislation is along bi-partisan lines. That is, both Republicans and Democrats work together to forge a bill.
  7. Coupled with the lack of bi-partisan input, is the concern that the bill is being rushed through, and that such a large piece of legislation, with such major impact to the US economy and the US people, should be given proper time for consideration, debate, development and finally passage into law. Without proper time this presents an unreasonable risk without a corresponding benefit to the American people. The reason for the haste is political.
  8. A very real concern is the complexity of the bill, which exists in 5 different versions and some as long as 1,500 pages. Can the bill administered effectively once passed into law? Or will the complexity lead tp  problems with administering this bill
Finally, Obama promised for open government - that was a very big point in his campaign. Obama said he would introduce a new way of government. In reality this bill and associated negotiations, have been done behind closed doors.

It was requested that the bill would be made available on-line for an adequate period of time to review. This request has been denied; the reason given is that it would be too complicated and too time consuming to do it. This is laughable.

Will it pass? Congressional elections are coming next year and many Democratic representatives fear for their seats and are unwilling to back an unpopular bill, so it is going to be interesting to see how this develops. My own hope is that the final bill is not the socialised form of medical care, but contains the reforms necessary to increase efficiency and lower overall costs, all of which will be good for Canada.


Gurth Whitaker
Calgary AB

US Predominatly Conservative

Report from Gallup issued 2 days ago "Conservatives Maintain Edge as Top Ideological Group" here


Conservatives continue to outnumber moderates and liberals in the American populace in 2009, confirming a finding that Gallup first noted in June. Forty percent of Americans describe their political views as conservative, 36% as moderate, and 20% as liberal. This marks a shift from 2005 through 2008, when moderates were tied with conservatives as the most prevalent group.

Tuesday, October 27, 2009

Toronto Imam - Preacher of Hate?


Last Wednesday the front page of the National Post (NP) had the picture of a Toronto Imam preaching what sounded like hate to Canadian ears. The on-line version posted the YouTube video of the finger-waving cleric's 36 minute-harangue of his 800 - 1,000 strong congregation.
 “Allah protect us from the fitna [sedition] of these people; Allah protect us from the evil agenda of these people; Allah destroy them from within themselves, and do not allow them to raise their heads in destroying Islam.”
The NP  reported that the cleric used the very derogatory term  "kuffar" for Jews and Christians:
Throughout the 35-minute speech he uses the word “kuffar” to describe non-Muslims.
According to Tarek Fateh's rebuttal in the NP "Bigotry Unchallenged" posted today. the "misunderstood" cleric spewed these words of hate:
We have to establish Islam [in Canada]. I wanna see Islam in every single corner of the city; I would like to see niqabis, and hijabis [women wearing face masks and head covering] everywhere in the city. I want to see ‘brothers' [Muslim men] in beards everywhere in the city. Because when they see more of us, they will have more respect for us. They will say, ‘look they are everywhere...we cannot go against them'."
The message is clear, this is not the religion of peace, but a religion whose main purpose is to dominate and take over. That is one of the main ideologies in traditional Islam.

Mr. Fateh states that "every Friday, at almost every mosque in Canada, the clerics make this prayer at the end of their sermon":
"Oh Allah, give victory to Muslims and Islam...Oh Allah, give defeat to the Kufaar and Mushriqeen," he prayed.
I have to applaud Tarek Fateh, he has the courage, the knowledge, and the standing to bring these points into the public view.

This is a particularly damming point, one that should not be forgotten, and nor should those Mosques where this takes place be allowed to forget it either.

It is not so surprising that young terrorists, such as the "Toronto 18" could be spawned if they are fed a diet of this kind of hatred.

Mr Fateh then proceeds to further illustrate the kind of misinformation and white-washing that always surrounds these discussions when radical Islam shows its face:
Since the disclosure, there has been orchestrated campaign by the mosque establishment to deny that the word "Kufaar" means "Jews and Christians".

Mr. Fateh goes on to demolish the red-herring that kuffar does not include Jews and Christians.

The dhimmis pay a special tax for the protection of their Muslim masters, but they do not have equal rights - quite the opposite. In fact dhimmis are very vulnerable under sharia, and any accusation, even false accusations, by a Muslim against a dhimmi, are sure to go against the dhimmi, because he is not equal to the Muslim.

Mr. Fateh continues:
Why then would so many Muslims in Canada be willing to whitewash the truth about the hateful sermons in almost every mosque in Canada?
One would hope that by exposing one imam caught on video praying for the defeat of Christians, Jews, and other non-Muslims, would spur ordinary Muslims to protest this type of bigotry.
Once again I have to applaud the work of Tarek Fateh and commend his excellent piece "Bigotry Unchallenged", which can be read here.

I will close about a fundamental freedom we have in Canada according to the Canadian Charter Of Rights and Freedoms. Under Article 2, fundamental freedoms the Charter provides that:
Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms (a) freedom of conscience and religion
The kind of preaching Toronto Imam Said Rageah engages in, and the kind of prayer that asks for "Oh Allah, give defeat to the Kufaar" is not consistent with the Canadian Charter, because it promotes one religion (Islam) to dominate over the other religions of Canada either by coercion or ultimately by physical force or threat .No other religions seek to do that.

It is contrary to our Charter and a presents a risk not only to Jews, Christians, Hindus, Sikhs, but also to moderate Muslims.


Gurth Whitaker
Calgary, Alberta

Child Warriors - A Moving Letter

On Monday the National Post (NP) published a deeply disturbing article: "Taliban Deploy Children, Military Says"
"... three separate explosions in Kandahar in the past few weeks in which as many as 12 Afghan children were blown up as they were being taught how to make or place improvised explosive devices in what one Canadian officer described as an "IED training camp."
 "IED training camp" (Improvised Explosive Devices), what an obscenity. The depths of evil that Islamic terrorists have descended to; the Taliban and Al-Qaeda in Afghanistan, Pakistan, and India; Al-Qaeda in Iraq; Hamas and Hezbollah in Gaza and Syria, the list of evil goes on.

Today the NP published a letter in response titled "Child Warriors"; I was very moved by this letter so I am posting it in its entirety, and let it speak for itself.
The Taliban's use of children on their front lines is a tactic taken straight from the pages of the Palestinians' jihad manual. For years, Palestinian terrorist groups have used children as human shields, launched rockets at Israel from preschools in Gaza, and sent children out to do the most dangerous jobs, in the hopes that they would die and the Israelis would be labelled "baby killers."
As former Israeli prime minister Golda Meir noted:
"Peace will come when the Arabs love their children more than they hate us."
She also stated,
"We can forgive you for killing our sons. But we will never forgive you for making us kill yours".
Elana Aptowitzer, Ottawa.
It must be said that the Palestinian tactic of using their children to fight a war by indoctrinating them to become suicide bombers has been rewarded by other Arab and Muslim nations by gifts of money, praise and ideological support. Hamas & Hezbollah, are the proxies for Iran and its chief export which is hatred, and the rockets to to kill civilians.

My thanks to Mrs. Aptowitzer for her letter and bringing the quotes of Gold Meir to light, the letter can be read here.


Lux et Veritas: The Couragious Golda Meir: "The Couragious Golda Meir
A wonderful story about the courage of Golda Meir and the cowardice of Austrian Chancellor Kreisky."


Gurth Whitaker
Calgary, Alberta

Sunday, October 25, 2009

Liverpool win 3 in a row against Man U.


Liverpool win at home to Manchester United 2 - 0.

A complete team effort by Liverpool without their injured captain Gerrard, to out-play a full-strength Manchester United squad.

A sterling performance from every member of the Liverpool team at Anfield put a lot of joy in to the hearts of the Reds fans after some recent poor showings.

This makes the third time in a row that Liverpool have beaten their rivals from across the county.

It has to be said, that the great Liverpool fans came full of expectation and full of heart; they were in fine voice and gave great support to their beloved team, who repaid their faithfulness with a great team performance as they outworked and outplayed their illustrious opposition.

It has to be said that the Liverpool fans are amongst the best - none better in my book. 

According to the BBC UK Sports:
Liverpool ended their worst sequence of results since 1987 and eased the pressure on manager Rafael Benitez in the most satisfying manner possible as Manchester United were deservedly beaten at Anfield.
Read the BBC's glowing report here.

Liverpool's bench looks weak compared to Man U. and Chelsea, so despite this great victory today, it does not mean there should be excessive confidence.

But to win under these circumstances shows that the Reds have heart and can play a complete all-round game. The team had the balance and shape they need today.

But, despite their injury problems, and lack of depth, there is some good news; the ex Roma mid-fielder Alberto Aquilani played for the reserves this last week, so it is likely he will make his debut with the team soon, and give them some well-needed help in that area.

Argentinian mid-fielder Javier Mascherano received a red from his second yellow card of the game and will miss the next game. A big loss for Liverpool to be without this brilliant defensive mid-fielder; an unfortunate infraction as he slid in for a loose ball but caught the Manchester goal-keeper who had came a long way out to clear. A slight collision but a fair call by the ref.

Fortunately the Brazilian left-back Fabio Aurelio proves that he is more than capable of the mid-field role as he returns from injury to give an outstanding show of two-way play; his free-kicks and corners were superb and it took a colossal save by Edwin van der Sar to stop Aurelio's curling free-kick over the wall from going into the top right corner.

Read about the teams history here at the Premier League site: Liverpool FC

Gurth Whitaker
Calgary, AB

Friday, October 23, 2009

Pakistan Christian Parties Against Blasphemy Laws

Via the "Pakistan Christian Post" today comes this news: 
All Christian Parties Conference set to launch (a) movement to end the Pakistan Blasphemy law, Islamabad: October 18, 2009. 
Blasphemy laws in Pakistan are not only extremely harsh and unjust, but they are used  in nefarious ways "against Christians (for the purposes of) business rivalry and personnel grudges."

"Blasphemy is subject to capital punishment in Pakistan law - it caries a death penalty". And we know that in many Islamic environments the "kafir" (infidel, unbeliever) has no defence against a Muslim; in fact it is enshrined in sharia law, so it is very easy for a Muslim in such societies to do mortal harm to an enemy by accusing him of blasphemy.

The mobs are so volatile that any such accusation will usually end in the murder of the accused - whether there is any justification or not. If for some reason that doesn't happen, the Christian or Jew will have little chance in a sharia court, and a fatwa by an Imam will ensure that someone will carry it out.
By doing the Imam's bidding, to execute the blasphemer, they believe that they are doing Allah's will .
We have to understand that sharia law is harsh to the dhimmi, or people under the "protection" of Islam. This is a euphemism by our standards, it means that the Islamic regime will not kill them for being non-believers as long as they submit and accept the role of second-class citizens.

Sharia is completely contrary to the law we have in the west which is based on our Judea-Christian principles.  For example, our Canadian Charter Of Rights and Freedoms states that "Every individual is equal before and under the law" this is not so under sharia, for example women do not have equality with men under the law, and kafir do not have equality with Muslims.

The Charter continues that all people have the "right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law ... without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability". This is not so under sharia for the reasons already stated - men are in ascendancy over women, as is the Muslim is in ascendancy over the kafir.

The nature of sharia law is contrary to the mind-set for a reader with a western upbringing, however we have to have some appreciation of sharia to understand how the persecution of Christians in a country such as Pakistan can occur so easily; I have included some notes as an Addendum at the end of this post..

The dire urgency for blasphemy reform is apparent when we consider the brutality of Christian persecutions on blasphemy charges, as the "Pakistan Christian Post" reports:
On accusations of blasphemy Islamic militants have destroyed hundreds of homes and killed dozens in year 2009 (alone), while children, women and elders were burnt alive.
The federal government of Pakistan and Punjab provincial government failed to secure life and property of Christians and to adopt necessary measure to stop violence against Christians.
The extent of the cruelty to Christians in Pakistan has been truly horrific, and not restricted to a few isolated cases. Christian persecution in general receives relatively little attention in the western media, falling outside the favoured liberal topic of the Palestinian question, and of course the Islamic world is not disposed to criticise persecution by Islamic regimes (silence on Darfur for example).

Islamic persecution of Christians has certainly not received the attention it deserves in the western media, and so I intend to cover this topic in more detail in future posts; here I will just note one such horrific incident as reported by the Daily Mail UK in August of this year:
Pope Benedict XVI has condemned the 'senseless attack' in Pakistan in which seven Christians were burned alive.
Hundreds of Muslims torched and looted Christian homes in Gorja. A man, a woman and four children were burned to death in their house, and two other men were shot dead by the rioters.
The killings began after false rumours that the Koran had been defaced spread through a city in Pakistan.
~~!~~
Blasphemy in Canada

How should we consider blasphemy in Canada?

What would be blasphemy under Islam? It would be blasphemy to state that "Mohamed is not the prophet of Allah", or to state that "Mohamed is a false prophet".

Similarly it would be blasphemy to state that "the Koran is flawed" or "the Koran is not the word of God."

I was brought up to give respect for other peoples beliefs and religions, and I still adhere to that today, but respect does not mean I agree with them, nor should I pay lip-service. We have to speak honestly and clearly, otherwise how can we have a reasoned discussion leading to a better understanding of the issue at hand. 

So now let's look at this issue of the prophet Mohamed, and the matter of Koran a little further, and let's also add Islam's teaching on Jesus Christ.

Orthodox teaching in Islam states that Jesus Christ was not crucified, and he did not rise from the dead as the Bible relates.This is what Imams teach their congregations from the pulpit.

Furthermore according to orthodox Islamic teaching, the Imam will also teach that the Bible is a Holy Book but it was tampered with, and therefore it is not the accurate word of God. Furthermore they are dogmatic that Jesus Christ is not the Son of God, they say He is a prophet but he is not deity, he is not both God and man, as the Bible teaches.

Let's step back and consider this matter logically. Looking at this dispassionately we see that the orthodox teaching of Islam is actually a blasphemy to Christianity. We usually do not consider blasphemy charges in Canada, especially against Christianity, but in fact that is what it is - blasphemy.  

Stepping back again let's look at Christianity from a Jewish perspective. Consider Jesus' words in the Bible in the Gospel of John chapter 8:  
"I tell you the truth," Jesus answered, "before Abraham was born, I am!"
But this statement by Jesus, was actually blasphemy to the Jews, because he was claiming to be God. For orthodox Jewish teaching it is blasphemy for a man to claim that he is equal to God.

Summarising: 
  • The fundamental belief in Christianity, the core of the faith, is actually blasphemy according to orthodox teachings of the Jewish faith
  • A fundamental belief and teaching of Islam is a blasphemy according to orthodox teachings of the Christian faith. 
But under our Charter we are all free to practice our religion; just as Jews and Christians live together and respect each other's faiths without blasphemy charges, so Muslims must conform to the same norm if they want to live in Canada.
If an Imam can legally declare from the pulpit that Jesus is not who He says He is, and a Rabbi can say that Jesus is not the Son of God, then a Pastor can say that Islam has it wrong. It is one rule for all ... or for none.

We are all guaranteed the right to practice our religions in Canada under the Charter
Everyone has the right to life, liberty and security of the person and the right not to be deprived thereof except in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice.
As we see core teachings of some religions are blasphemy to others, and therefore blasphemy laws are incompatible with the Candian Charter.

So Canadians in our quest to be fair and just should not give a special privilege to Islam, or for that matter to Christians or Jews; but under according to our Charter we are all equal under the law.

Fundamental justice is a concept that comes from Judeo-Christian principles and it is enshrined in our Charter, therefore let us all remember that this applies to all faiths, all races, and genders; we do not have a special treatment for blasphemy for Islam. (I include atheism as a faith too)
"right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, sex, age or mental or physical disability"
We can practice our religions free from persecution under the law and we can rejoice that we are protected  by our Charter


Gurth Whitaker
Calgary, AB

++++++++++++++++
ADDENDUM: Notes on Sharia Law in general and dhimmi or kafir in particular

Sharia is subject that should get further attention and will be covered in future posts at Lux et Veritas.

The source of the Sharia is the Koran and the Sunna (found in the Sira and the Hadith). Since the Sunni Muslims and Shia Muslims do not agree on which Hadith to use, they have slightly different Sharia systems.


Sharia law covers all aspects of life, including how a man and woman should have sex, for instance. Roughly there are five areas of Sharia law:
  1. Belief-Allah, His angels, His books, His prophets, the Day of Judgment and the decrees of God.
  2. Moralities-giving good counsel, humility, patience and so forth.
  3. Devotions-the Five Pillars, alms, pilgrimage to Mecca, and jihad.
  4. Transactions-business law, marriage, divorce and disputes.
  5. Punishments-stoning, amputation, lashings, and retaliation
Dhimmis
The Sharia is very detailed how the dhimmi will live under Islamic domination.
O11.1 a formal agreement with Jews, Christians, Zoroastrians, Samarians, Sabians, and those who adhere to the religion of Abraham of one of the other prophets.
O11.3 such an agreement is only valid when the subject peoples:
(a) follow the rules of Islam(b) and pay the kafir poll tax (jizya) Note: this is a tax that applies to kafir and is designed to show that he is greatfull for the protection of Islam - i.e. they don't kill him for being a non-believer
O11.5 Kafir subjects are obliged to comply with Islamic rules that pertain to the safety and indemnity of life, reputation, and property. In addition, they:
(4) Must keep to the side of the street ; Note to show that they are below the Muslim population

(6) Are forbidden to openly display wine or pork. ( or to ring church bells or display crosses) recite the Torah or Gospels aloud, or make public display of funerals and feast days.  Note: prayers by Jews are forbidden on the Temple Mount (Dome of the Rock) by the Islamic authorities, and this is stated by the Israeli police to all Jews before they are allowed to go up to the Temple Mount. Mouthing silent prayers is strictly forbidden. Muslims are passionate about this rule because Muhamed said that the prayers of Muslims are nullified if a Christian or Jew prays in the vicinity. A curious concept that God is limited by such a law.
(7) And are forbidden to build new churches.

Wednesday, October 21, 2009

When Pravda Says It - You Know It's Bad

The polices of this US Administration are vitally important to Canadians.
When Pravda Says You Are Too Liberal - you know that things are bad.

The economics of the Obama administration are vitally important to Canada and the whole world, so when Pravda criticizes the economic "tax & spend" liberal policies of the US, it should be time to wake up.

The deficit in the US has tripled in the first year of this administration. It is now three times what it was when Obama took office.

Why worry say some liberals? Well the answer should be obvious: foreigners hold nearly half the $7.5 trillion U.S. public debt. That means that the American taxpayers not only paid a massive $383.4 billion dollars in interest charges during the Obama's first year, but fully half of that money went overseas, without any benefit to the US economy whatsoever. Money down the drain - out the window - just to maintain the debt where it is.

$383.4 billion dollars in interest charges over the first year of Obama's administration; that averages to almost $32 billion per month in interest charges. Not one cent of that goes to schools, health care, roads, or to paying the ever increasing government payroll.

The data is taken from the US Treasury here

That $383.4 billion dollars is money that comes from the tax-payer; money that doesn't go to buying homes, paying off mortgages, or buying goods and services that help build the US economy. But here is the worst part - fully half of it goes overseas.

You have to be an ostrich if that doesn't frighten you.

BUT, it is going to get worse, because the Obama administration want to increase spending even more. There is the energy bill, the Cap and Trade bill that will add billions in costs to the economy, which must be born by industry and private citizens - it will be a disaster. (Millions of green jobs? Does anyone believe that?) Plus there will be a massive increase in costs to the US taxpayer as a result of the proposed health care reform in is current form, which will result in a further restriction on growth and recovery.
Cutting taxes helps the economy; increasing taxes slows down and stifles the economy.
It has been shown in the past that the best way to stimulate the economy and create jobs is to cut taxes. A cut in employment tax for example, provides an immediate boost to industry, by reducing their costs. This produces a direct stimulus which acts fairly quickly. However, the current economic policy is exactly the opposite. That is why we should all be concerned; if the US economy falters the whole world will feel the effects. (Think of the huge amount of US aid that currently is distributed all round the globe; if the US economy is not strong how can they sustain this giving?)

The US with its massive spending is lagging the recovery of the rest of the world - not leading it. That should be proof enough. But tax and spend is at the heart of liberal dogma. It doesn't work but they are not about to let the facts get in the way of their liberal  ideology.

Where are the conservatives in Canada? We seem to be complacent up here.
If the US economy falls - we will be drowned in the tsunami.
"The American Self Immolation, Truly a Sight to See" from Pravda:
It can be safely said, that the last time a great nation destroyed itself through its own hubris and economic folly was the early Soviet Union (though in the end the late Soviet Union still died by the economic hand).
Now we get the opportunity to watch the Americans do the exact same thing to themselves. The most amazing thing of course, is that they are just repeating the failed mistakes of the past. One would expect their fellow travelers in suicide, the British, to have spoken up by now, but unfortunately for the British, their education system is now even more of a joke than that of the Americans.
While taking a small breather from mouthing the never ending propaganda of recovery, never mind that every real indicator is pointing to death and destruction, the American Marxists have noticed that the French and Germans are out of recession and that Russia and Italy are heading out at a good clip themselves.
Of course these facts have been wrapped up into their mind boggling non stop chant of “recovery” and hope-change-zombification. What is ignored, of course, is that we and the other three great nations all cut our taxes, cut our spending, made life easy for small business…in other words: the exact opposite of the Anglo-Sphere.
That brings us to Cap and Trade. Never in the history of humanity has a more idiotic plan been put forward and sold with bigger lies. Energy is the key stone to any and every economy, be it man power, animal power, wood or coal or nuclear. How else does one power industry that makes human life better (unless of course its making the bombs that end that human life, but that's a different topic).
Never in history, with the exception of the Japanese self imposed isolation in the 1600s, did a government actively force its people away from economic activity and industry.
Even the Soviets never created such idiocy. The great famine of the late 1920s was caused by quite the opposite, as the Soviets collectivized farms to force peasants off of their land and into the big new factories. Of course this had disastrous results. So one must ask, are the powers that be in Washington and London degenerates or satanically evil?
Where is the opposition?
Where are the Republicans in America and Tories in England?
 Where are the conservatives in Canada? If the US economy falls - we will be drowned in the tsunami.

Read the "The American Self Immolation, Truly a Sight to See" here


Gurth Whitaker
Calgary AB

More Thuggish behaviour from McGill Student


The McGill Daily hosted a very well-written rebuttal to the thugs that succeeded in shutting down the "Choose Life" clubs legitimate event (it was approved by the McGill authorities).

The original story on Lux et Veritas "McGill Protesters Shut-Down Free Speech" is here, the follow-up story about how one of the young thugs tried to shutdown the McGill  Daily website: "McGill Daily Website Attacked" can be seen: here, and then "the Fascist Anti-Free Speech Mind" can be seen: here, and finally "Free-Speech Deniers at McGill" here.

Now returning to the McGill Daily today, I see this post from one of the young fascists; as usual it's anonymous, but why put your name to work such as this?

I suppose someone who aggressively champions the "right" to kill unborn babies thinks nothing of engaging in anti-social behaviour.

The idiot doesn't even appreciate that this is a Comment page, not an editorial and he refers to the title of a piece as the "headline."

The Choose Life rebuttal to the protesters: "Choose Life Digs Its Heels In" by Nathalie Fohlis (President) and Richard Bernier can be seen here.




New Resource Added


I have added a great resource for the Christian readers of Lux et Veritas; it is the well-loved daily devotional written by Oswald Chambers: "My Utmost for His Highest." Read Chambers bio here.

It is published by RBC (Radio Bible Class), that long-lived and outstanding organisation which publishes and mails millions of Our Daily Bread (ODB) to readers all over the world.

 "My Utmost for His Highest." is available as a topical link from the Our Daily Bread page. RBC have done an amazing job to produce cross-links on the topic of the day.

For example today's ODB is about faith in God and resting in Him, by building a deeper relationship with God. At the right side of the page RBC have provided several links for further study on this theme (that's what I mean by "topical" references). There are 2 ODB links, 2 for My Utmost, and 2 for what RBC call the "discovery series". 

This is a great resource because if the devotional for the day resonates with the reader, and it is something that they want to go deeper into, then RBC has provided links

I find that Our Daily Bead is generally lighter than Spurgeon and Chambers, who both usually require a little more time and reflection.

Here's a list of the resources available:

Bible Gateway
Blue Letter Bible
Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms
Charles Haddon Spurgeon:
This Evening's Meditation
This Morning's Meditation
My Utmost for His Highest
Our Daily bread
the Barnabus Fund
Desiring God

Faith Freedom International

Monday, October 19, 2009

UN Undermines Real Human Rights Efforts


Gay McDougall is the United Nations' Independent Expert on minority issues; a job she has held for 4 years. You might imagine that Ms. McDougall has been a busy lady visiting some of the world's human rights hell-holes such as: China, Cuba, Iran, Libya, Saudi Arabia, and Syria, just to name a few of Freedom Houses list of the worst of the worst.

But actually no! According to this very disturbing editorial in today's National Post:  The wrong target. Ms. McDougall has no plans to visit any of those countries or any of the other human rights hell-holes:
But what is truly missing from Ms. McDougall's travel schedule is a trip to any of the world's vilest regimes such as Syria, Saudi Arabia, Cuba, China, North Korea, Burma or Chad.
Together, millions of people have been murdered by the 21 governments that Freedom House judges are the most repressive in the world, many simply for their minority status alone.
Millions more have been imprisoned and tortured. Yet not one of these countries has been the subject of one of her inspections, nor are any scheduled to be.
Just in case you missed that last line:
Yet not one of these countries has been the subject of one of her inspections, nor are any scheduled to be.
 So the UN's Independent Expert on minority issues focuses all her time on countries such as Canada, France and EU countries. As Steven Edwards,wrote in the National Post last Friday (Oct 16): Rights watchdog gives 'worst of the worst' a pass
Her previous "targets" were three European Union members: France, Greece and Hungary; as well as the Dominican Republic, Guyana, Ethiopia and Kazakhstan.

Sunday, October 18, 2009

Calgary Herald wont publish my rebuttal to CAIR

On Thursday, I published a post on Lux et Veritas, concerning the Calgary Herald publishing a pro-veil essay by Canadian CAIR (Council of American-Islamic Relations); read it here: CAIR Article in the Calgary Herald.

Canadian CAIR is an affiliate of CAIR, (who were) named as one of the "un-indicted co-conspirator in the HLF terror funding trial";
the Holy Land Foundation For Relief And Development (HLF) was a pro Hamas organisation.
I submitted a letter of rebuttal to the Calgary Herald Friday morning, but since it isn't published in today's Herald, I have to think that it's rejected by the editor.

I am including my full letter, but first I want to comment as to why the Calgary Herald would publish a piece from Canadian CAIR (do they know about CAIR?), and why they wouldn't publish my letter.

First why not publish my letter? Well the answer may be as simple as they don't think it is worthy, or it is too late, they have published a couple of letters already (I was a bit late submitting - the original article was published Wednesday & I didn't submit till Friday morning).

OR, perhaps the content is too dangerous for the Herald.

I wondered why the Herald would publish an essay by CAIR in the first place?  Here's a couple of possibilities:
  1. They do know about CAIR, this is likely because their sister newspaper (big sister) the National Post was subjected to legal action by the Canadian CAIR.
  2. They do not know about CAIR; they published the CAIR essay thinking it represents a moderate Muslims voice. 
If the reason is (1), then they published it to attract comment to bring this issue out into the open; however if that is true why not publish my letter?

If the reason is (2), they show a lack of good research; remember that CAIR is the named "un-indicted co-conspirator in the HLF terror funding trial".

Could there be a third possibility? This one I find very hard to imagine: could the Calgary Herald have some pro-CAIR sympathies within its staff? I  know, I find it hard to believe this is true either, but it is a logical possibility.

Here is my letter to the Calgary Herald submitted by email Friday October 16, 1:15 (not strictly speaking Friday morning)
09-10-16 Letter to Calgary Herald
Rebuttal to Mr. Riad Saloojee’s Article: “For Muslim women, veil is power and beauty”
Mr Riad Saloojee, dismissed concerns about the face veil (niqab) in his article published by the Calgary Herald on Wednesday, October 14, 2009, as “fear-mongering”. However concerns are well warranted; the niqab is associated with the most extreme forms of Islam and has no place in Canadian democratic society.
Mr Saloojee is a member of Canadian CAIR, whose parent organisation CAIR was named by the US government prosecutors as the “unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF terror funding trial.” The Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development was a pro-Hamas organisation.
The niqab is widely worn in Saudi Arabia, where religious police beat women in the streets who are not appropriately dressed. Herald readers are probably familiar with such beating in Afghanistan by Taliban police. On occasions the woman beaten were actually wearing a burka, however a little ankle was visible so the police would set on them with whips. Sometimes these were older women.
In 2002, Saudi Arabia's s powerful religious police beat girls trying to flee a burning school in Mecca, because they were not properly attired. The police forced them back into the school where they perished.
According to the al-Eqtisadiah daily, firemen confronted police after they tried to keep the girls inside because they were not wearing the headscarves and abayas (black robes) required by the kingdom's strict interpretation of Islam
The niqab is associated with authoritarian societies such as Saudi Arabia, the Taliban, and Al-Qaeda; Canada should not allow the niqab here.
There may be women who choose to wear the niqab, but it irrelevant because it is imposed by Islamic ideology, and enforced by men, and is accompanied by other Islamic abuse of women such as wife-beating, and marriage to pre-pubescent girls.
Canadians should not mistake this matter as a freedom or rights issue; veils, niqabs, or face masks, should be banned in public in Canada to protect moderate woman.
NOTE: I also submitted a reference to the Herald on the burning school story in Mecca, which can be seen here Saudi police 'stopped' fire rescue.

Gurth Whitaker
Calgary, AB

Lord's Day Meditation


Spurgeon's writings are imbued with scripture, he writes as one who is taught by the Holy Spirit.

Last evening's (Saturday) devotion speaks to the very heart of the Gospel, and to the true desires of a Christian.

These words speak of my conversion from unbeliever some 12 years ago:
How gently did he gather me to himself, to his truth, to his blood, to his love, to his church! With what effectual grace did he compel me to come to himself!
Since my first conversion, how frequently has he restored me from my wanderings, and once again folded me within the circle of his everlasting arm!
... and I believe they speak to every true follower, and I hope they shed some light to those who are genuinely trying to know more about Jesus and His true Church.

A true believer's prayer:
Great Shepherd, add to thy mercies this one other, a heart to love thee more truly as I ought.
~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~ ~
Evening Devotional for October 17, from Charles Haddon Spurgeon.
"He shall gather the lambs with his arm." - Isaiah 40:11
Our good Shepherd has in his flock a variety of experiences, some are strong in the Lord, and others are weak in faith, but he is impartial in his care for all his sheep, and the weakest lamb is as dear to him as the most advanced of the flock. Lambs are wont to lag behind, prone to wander, and apt to grow weary, but from all the danger of these infirmities the Shepherd protects them with his arm of power. He finds new-born souls, like young lambs, ready to perish-he nourishes them till life becomes vigorous; he finds weak minds ready to faint and die-he consoles them and renews their strength. All the little ones he gathers, for it is not the will of our heavenly Father that one of them should perish. What a quick eye he must have to see them all! What a tender heart to care for them all! What a far- reaching and potent arm, to gather them all! In his lifetime on earth he was a great gatherer of the weaker sort, and now that he dwells in heaven, his loving heart yearns towards the meek and contrite, the timid and feeble, the fearful and fainting here below. How gently did he gather me to himself, to his truth, to his blood, to his love, to his church! With what effectual grace did he compel me to come to himself! Since my first conversion, how frequently has he restored me from my wanderings, and once again folded me within the circle of his everlasting arm! The best of all is, that he does it all himself personally, not delegating the task of love, but condescending himself to rescue and preserve his most unworthy servant. How shall I love him enough or serve him worthily? I would fain make his name great unto the ends of the earth, but what can my feebleness do for him? Great Shepherd, add to thy mercies this one other, a heart to love thee more truly as I ought.

Friday, October 16, 2009

A Black Day for Human Rights (2)

How they voted.

According to the Guardian UK the voting at the UN Human Rights Council  in Geneva today was as follows:

In favour (25): 
Argentina, Bahrain, Bangladesh, Bolivia, Brazil, Chile, China, Cuba, Djbouti, Egypt, Ghana, India, Indonesia, Jordan, Mauritius, Nicaragua, Nigeria, Pakistan, Philippines, Qatar, Russia, Saudi Arabia, Senegal, South Africa, Zambia.
Against (6):
Holland, Hungary, Italy, Slovakia, Ukraine, US.
Abstentions (11):
Belgium, Bosnia, Burkina Faso, Cameroon, Gabon, Japan, Mexico, Norway, South Korea, Slovenia, Uruguay.
Did not vote (4)
Angola, Britain, France, Madagascar, Kyrgyzstan.
I am not sure what the difference is between "abstaining" and "did not vote" (let me know if you understand it); this further information from the Guardian UK sheds some light on it, but it seems an overly subtle difference to me.
Gordon Brown reportedly had a heated telephone call on Wednesday with Netanyahu, who pressed him to vote against the resolution.
Brown spoke again with Netanyahu this morning, hours before the vote, and Britain then decided not to take part at all. A Downing Street spokesman said:
"We did not participate in the vote. We were involved in discussions with Israel and the Palestinians about potentially substantive improvements in the situation on the ground and therefore asked for a delay to the vote."
The Jerusalem Post has more on the reasons for UK and France not to participate in the vote:
An unnamed British diplomat told Israel Radio that in the hours prior to the vote, British Prime Minister Gordon Brown and French President Nicolas Sarkozy had tried to get clarifications from Israel that would enable the countries to vote against the resolution.
France and Britain reportedly decided to refrain from voting after the contacts with Israel failed to produce the results they were seeking. 
Well perhaps I was too hasty with my comments of quisling for Gordon Brown; I suppose I can't blame him for the state of the UN Human Rights Council. 


Gurth Whitaker
Calgary AB

ADDENDUM, apparently they are confused over at the BBC about the difference between "abstaining" and "did not vote." I found this gem on their website:
"No, we didn't abstain - we didn't vote."
Confused? We were. Apparently, there is a key difference between the UK government abstaining and not voting when the UN Human Rights Council backed a report into the Israeli offensive in Gaza.

A Black Day for Human Rights


A Black Day for justice and truth!

A Black Day for the peace of the Middle East!

A Black Day for the whole world!


The UN Human Rights Council  in Geneva today, passed a resolution endorsing the Goldstone Commission Report by 25 votes to 6, with eleven countries abstaining.

Five states, including France and the UK, declined to vote. I hand my head in shame at the coutnry of my birthday. The spirit of Winston Churchill is not alive in this administration, but the spirit of Nevill Chamberlain is in control.
"All that is necessary for the triumph of evil is that good men do nothing." Edmund Burke
Brown the despised Prime Minister of the UK must wear the shame, must bear the epithet 

Quisling! Traitor! Betrayer! Collaborator! Judas! Turncoat! Fifth columnist! - you Benedict Arnold!

England you did not vote;
you didn't register your vote on this sham, this farce.

You failed to vote against this collection of human-rights abusers and didn't stand firm with the only democracy in the Middle East; Israel this tiny country in the Middle East surrounded by hate-spewing, blood thirsty war-mongers who have cynically sponsored terrorism, and suicide bombers. 

"It's all about the oil stupid!"

According to the Jerusalem Post, the Israel Foreign Ministry said in a statement today:
"The council's decision undermines efforts to safeguard human rights in accordance with international law, as well as the efforts to advance the peace process in the Middle East,"
"The decision encourages terror groups in the whole world and undermines world peace. The decision also ignores the fact that the IDF took unprecedented measures to avoid harming civilians, and [ignores] the terrorists' use of civilians as human shields."
the Post went on to say:
Although the Goldstone report also accuses Hamas of war crimes, the five-page resolution adopted in Geneva explicitly mentions only Israeli violations of international law.
Ealier today, I posted the video, of the address by British hero, Colonel Richard Kemp, addressing the UN Human Rights Council, on behalf of UN Watch.

Watch the video of Colonel Kemp's address here: Self-Defense is not a Crime of War.

Concerning the actions of the IDF (Israel Defence Force) in Gaza during Operation Cast Lead, Colonel Kemp told the U.N. Council that:
'the IDF is the Most Moral Army in History of Warfare'
Read the article in Jerusalem Post here: Israel slams UNHRC over its 'one-sided, unjust decision'


Gurth Whitaker
Calgary, AB

Self-Defense is not a Crime of War


British Hero Tells U.N. Council: 'IDF Most Moral Army in History of Warfare'
Today's emergency UN Human Rights Council debate on the Goldstone Report predictably saw a line-up of the world's worst abusers condemn democratic Israel for human rights violations.
In a heated lynch mob atmosphere, Kuwait slammed Israel for “intentional killing, intentional destruction of civilian objects, intentional scorched-earth policy,” saying Israel “embodied the Agatha Christie novel, 'Escaped with Murder'.” Pakistan said the “horrors of Israeli occupation continue to haunt the international community’s conscience.”
The Arab League said, “We must condemn Israel and force Israel to accept international legitimacy." Ahmadinejad’s Iran said “the atrocities committed against Palestinians during the aggressions on Gaza should be taken seriously” and followed up by the international community “to put an end to absolute impunity and defiance of the law.”
What the world's assembled representatives did not expect, however, was the speech that followed (see video and text below), organized by UN Watch.
We invited as our speaker a man who repeatedly put his life on the line to defend the democratic world from the murderous Saddam Hussein, Al Qaeda, and the Taleban.
The moment he began his first sentence, the room simply fell silent. Judge Goldstone, author of the biased report that prompted today's one-sided condemnation, had refused to hear Col. Kemp's testimony during his "fact-finding" hearings. But UN Watch made sure today that this hero's voice would be heard -- at the U.N., and around the world.
UN Watch Oral Statement
Delivered by Colonel Richard Kemp, 16 October 2009
UN Human Rights Council: 12th Special Session

Col. Richard Kemp on the Goldstone Report


Gurth Whitaker
Calgary, AB

Thursday, October 15, 2009

CAIR Article in the Calgary Herald

(A short post; after having flu for a few days it is starting to take over. I will develop this theme in future posts)
 
I was somewhat shocked yesterday (Wednesday Oct 14), to see an article published in the Calgary Herald  by a member of  Canadian CAIR (Council of American-Islamic Relations). The article was a rebuttal of the announcement by the MCC (Muslim Council of Canada) requesting that the Canadian government should ban the niquab, veils or face-mask. (I posted an article on Lux et Veritas a few days ago and can be seen here: Egypt’s top cleric to ban veils in schools)

I was surprised, but also concerned because I had heard enough about CAIR for "red-flags" to be raised. So I called my good friend Geraint for information concerning CAIR.

He supplied me with considerable evidence (all in the public domain), to confirm my suspicions; but after reading I found out that it is a lot worse than I imagined.

Canadian CAIR is an affiliate of CAIR, the unindicted co-conspirator in the HLF terror funding trial;the Holy Land Foundation For Relief And Development (HLF) was a pro Hamas organisation.

This is a very serious business.
"Prosecutors applied the label of "unindicted co-conspirator" to the Council on American-Islamic Relations, the Islamic Society of North America, and the North American Islamic Trust in connection with a trial planned in Texas next month for five officials of a defunct charity, the Holy Land Foundation for Relief and Development."
Note that CAIR is named as an "unindicted co-conspirator" by the prosecutors in the case.
A court filing by the government last week listed the three prominent groups among about 300 individuals or entities named as co-conspirators. The document gave scant details, but prosecutors described CAIR as a present or past member of "the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood's Palestine Committee and/or its organizations." The government listed the Islamic Society of North America and the North American Islamic Trust as "entities who are and/or were members of the U.S. Muslim Brotherhood."
This whole report can be read here: Islamic Groups Named in Hamas Funding Case

It should be understood that Canadian CAIR also engages in "lawfare" (as does its parent organisation CAIR), and brought legal action against the well-respected journalist David Frum and the National Post,

"Lawfare" is used by International actors to shut-up critics of Islam using our western courts. It is often funded by Saudi Arabia or other middle eastern states with deep pockets when it come to spreading militant Islam. 
 
David Frum wrote this rebuttal to CAIR and their legal action in 2004:
The author defends against libel charges from the Council on American Islamic Relations. CAIR has maintained indisputable ties to Islamist terrorism--a fact that must be exposed.
David Frum list evidence against CAIR:
CAIR was founded in 1994 by alumni of an older group, the Islamic Association for Palestine. The IAP, founded by senior Hamas figure Mousa Mohammed Abu Marzook, calls for the destruction of Israel and the creation of an Islamic state under Islamic law in Israel's place. (In 1996, CAIR would condemn the U.S. government's decision to deport Marzook as an "anti-Islamic" act.)
CAIR's first director, publicly declared himself a supporter of Hamas.
CAIR's first executive director, Nihad Awad, publicly declared himself a supporter of Hamas at a 1994 forum at Barry University in Florida.
CAIR board member supports the convicted World Trade bomber Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman:
One of CAIR's original advisory board members, Siraj Wahhaj, served as a character witness for Sheik Omar Abdel Rahman. Rahman is the blind Egyptian cleric convicted in 1995 of conspiracy to bomb New York landmarks. CAIR described Rahman's conviction as a hate crime.
 "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran . . . should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth."
CAIR's founding chairman, Omar Ahmed, also an IAP alumnus, is said to have declared at a public event in California in July, 1998: "Islam isn't in America to be equal to any other faith, but to become dominant. The Koran . . . should be the highest authority in America, and Islam the only accepted religion on earth." Ahmed has since disputed the accuracy of the quote--five years after it was reported by a California newspaper.
Soliciting Donations to the Holy Land Foundation, banned organisation linked to Hamas:
After the 9/11 attacks on the United States, CAIR's Web site featured a link titled, "Donate to the NY/DC Disaster Relief Fund." The link connected to the Web site of the Holy Land Foundation, a charity closed down by the United States three months later as a Hamas front.
 David Frum's article can be read here: The Question of CAIR

I have not addressed the burqa or niqab issue, I have been focusing on CAIR, and I will return to that debate tomorrow (God willing). I will address the deceptive nature of the article.

The full article can be read here: For Muslim women, veil is power and beauty, by Riad Saloojee, For The Calgary Herald, Published: Wednesday, October 14, 2009

Bio: The author of the piece is Riad Saloojee Is A Canadian Lawyer And Member Of The Canadian Council Of American-Islamic Relations's Advisory Board. He Is A Full-Time Student In Arabic And Islamic Jurisprudence.

Gurth Whitaker
Calgary, AB

Wednesday, October 14, 2009

McGill Daily Website Attacked (2)

As discussed in the previous post McGill Daily Website Attacked 
"Choose Life" the pro-life group who's event was targeted, published a sound and well written rebuttal in the "McGill Daily". I now discovered that an attempt to vandalize page of the McGill Daily web-site where the Choose Life piece was published.

I am posting the evidence again because the method I was using to post the file was not reliable, and many people were not able to access it. Blogger does not permit a file to be hosted so I am attaching a snippit.

This is the sophisticated technique that the protesters used; leave a comment on a free-speech forum that was gibberish.

First comment "Dezrasab wrote:" followed by
"comment4 http://www.lyricsyoulove.com/images/index.php?a=rob-scuderi fleury http://www.lyricsyoulove.com/images
/index.php?a=sytycd-season-5-top-20 sytycd idol http://www.lyricsyoulove.com/images"


And so on for a couple of pages and then "Cbvuvcfg wrote:" and more gibberish for a couple of pages,

There are 56 pages of this. The intention was to try to stop the "Choose Life" rebuttal from being seen.

Well it didn't work. The website did not crash and the Choose Life rebuttal was available for view. Which is good news for free-speech, and particularly so because it is an excellent piece, in contrast to the "pro-choice" piece published as an editorial by the McGill Tribune 

You can see from the final bogus comment on page 56 of the pdf file I made that the final post was entered at 6:29 pm; he started posting at 5:30 pm so after an hour of posting gibberish, he found that the website was still up and running so he cut his losses and gave up.

He only wasted an hour in his bid to shut-down a well-written article.
 



Gurth Whitaker
Calgary, AB