Babies Thrown Out with the Bathwater

...and into a river.

(bad joke- sorry)

Rural traditions of abandoning dead infants because they're considered bad luck may have played a role in the case of 21 babies' bodies found along a river in eastern China, apparently dumped by hospital mortuary workers.

The little bodies — at least one stuffed in a yellow bag marked "medical waste" — were found floating and strewn along the bank of a river on the outskirts of Jining city in Shandong province last weekend.

Police detained two mortuary workers at a hospital who were paid by the babies' families to dispose of the bodies.

Though China is infamous for its draconian one-child policy, this seems to have taken the proverbial cake. If one must dispose of the unwanted girl-baby, make sure no one sees.

From the same article:

One question that arose Wednesday was why would the parents of so many dead children simply abandon their remains?

Hospital procedures normally call for families to take away dead infants, the Shandong province-based Qilu Evening News reported. However, the death of a young child is considered bad luck among some rural families, and the body is often abandoned or buried in unmarked graves.

"According to customs in some places, dead infants are not considered to be a family member and will not be buried in family tombs," said Cao Yongfu, professor with Medical Ethic Institute of Shandong University.

Some local customs go even further. When a baby dies, the family burns its clothes, toys and photos — anything that would remind them the child ever existed. The traditions stem from China's agrarian past, where child deaths were common, and not considered something to dwell on.

The grandness of multiculturalism.

Though the case has shocked the public, Cao said a more pressing issue was developing clear regulations on how the bodies of infants and fetuses should be disposed.

Because no one must know the terrible truth.

For a very telling narrative on the subject, see this:

I know a British couple with a Chinese daughter, pretty and fluent in English. Of course the little girl was adopted. It is necessary to steel one’s self against three agonising thoughts: how did such children come to be here, why does one never meet an adopted Chinese boy, and what does one reply when the adopted Chinese child asks, ‘Why did my real mother let me go?’

There is already substantial information on this subject, including television documentaries, none of it mentioned by Xinran. No one has exposed the scandal of Chinese orphanages, the starting point for the traffic in babies to foreigners — there are now well over 120,000 such children living abroad — better than the Scottish academic and journalist Robin Munro and it would make this troubling book even better had his exposés been noted by Xinran.

But never mind. No bleaker picture exists of the fate of Chinese female infants, whether murdered at birth or abandoned, than Messages from an Unknown Chinese Mother. One woman’s story reveals this black mark in Chinese culture, both traditional and contemporary. She had lived and worked almost her entire life in orphanages, and told Xinran that little girls sometimes arrived there with scars between their legs. Oil lamps or candles had burned them.

The first thing the village midwives did when the baby was born was not to clear its airway but to check [by the light of the lamp or candle] whether it was a boy or girl, because that was what the family wanted to hear. Some of the burns were on the baby’s private parts …

After Robin Munro and others made public what they had seen and filmed in orphanages (some of them rightly termed ‘dying houses’), Beijing cracked down on those who had allowed such shameful practices to be discovered by foreigners. A furious official burst out to Xinran:

All these foreigners think about is making a ‘historical record’. They never consider Chinese people’s feelings. If I were a girl adopted abroad, I wouldn’t want people to know I had been picked up from some shambolic, godforsaken mountain village. It would be so humiliating.

The young woman, a university graduate, wasn’t finished:

Mother love is supposed to be such a great thing, but so many babies are abandoned, and it’s their mothers who do it. They’re ignorant. They feel differently about emotions from the way you do. Where I come from, people talk about smothering a baby girl or just throwing it[!]into a stream … to be eaten by dogs, as if it were a joke. How much do you think these women loved their babies?

Racism

We're all people, man!

Kichigai

... and the world is full of them.

Seriously:

Sumo suits, the plastic novelties that can transform a skinny sports fan into a comically unstable sphere for the delight of a stadium audience, are racist and dehumanizing instruments of oppression, according to the student government of Queen's University.

They "appropriate an aspect of Japanese culture," turn a racial identity into a "costume," and "devalue an ancient and respected Japanese sport, which is rich in history and cultural tradition." They also "fail to capture the deeply embedded histories of violent and subversive oppression that a group has faced."

The Alma Mater Society yesterday published a two-page apology and cancelled a food-bank fundraiser scheduled for today, which was to feature two Sumo suits. The letter scolds the student government's own executive for "marginalizing members of the Queen's community" and failing to "critically consider the racist meaning behind [the fundraiser]."

What?

It gets better:

Letter Of Apology

The following is the letter of apology issued by the Queen's student government:

Dear AMS members and members of the Queen's community, We are writing in regards to an event that was scheduled to take place on Tuesday March 30th, organized and run by a group in the AMS. This event was planned to have students don padded suits, coloured and designed to resemble Japanese sumo wrestlers. The Facebook event created to advertise this event, entitled "SUMO Showdown," included a picture of two cartoon Japanese wrestlers grappling. We recognize racism as the systemic oppression, both intentional and unintentional, of individuals and groups based on racial or ethnic identities. Regrettably, those of us who were aware of the event did not critically consider the racist meaning behind it. Asking students to wear these suits and partake in the activity appropriates an aspect of Japanese culture. This is wrong because it turns a racial identity into a costume; the process of putting-on and taking-off a racial identity is problematic because it dehumanizes those who share that identity and fails to capture the deeply imbedded histories of violent and subversive oppression that a group has faced. The event also devalues an ancient and respected Japanese sport, which is rich in history and cultural tradition. The decision to hold this event, and the failure of many students who hold senior positions in the AMS to recognize the inherent issues of racism tied-in to the event, marginalized members of the Queen's community. As an organization and as individuals who allowed this to go on unchallenged, we are deeply sorry for having caused feelings of hurt and not being safe on-campus by planning this event. We are implicated in systems of oppression by not challenging things such as this, and perpetuating racist stereotypes. Events such as this take place at other institutions and within Queen's as well; it is imperative that we learn from this experience to ensure that we constantly work towards challenging various forms of oppression. We will also be following-up with other groups at Queen's who utilize these suits so that we can encourage them to also engage critically with issues of racism and oppression.

To which I say, fukyu 普及

Let us diffuse and spread some points of relevancy.

Political correctness has run amok (point to an incident yourselves as there are SEVERAL).

The "showdown" in question was designed as a fund-raiser.

Universities have been scenes of deplorable bigotry and censorship (RE: Israel Apartheid Week; "dead white male literature"; Ann Coulter).

If racial identity is being seen as a costume, then why did the Vancouver Olympics parade out dancers in Mountie costumes?

Who complained and how Japanese are they?

On a scale of one to ten, how juvenile and materialistic is contemporary Japanese culture? Will it ever return to its period of refinement or cruel oppression as was seen during the annexation of Korea when Koreans couldn't even speak their own language or have Korean names?

How many sumo wrestlers were offended?

How self-serving and pathetic is this apology?

Earf Hour: Coda

The preceding video, in its way, calls attention to the sheer stupidity of Earth Hour and its adherents.

It's not about energy conservation or about the importance of preserving the planet's resources. It's about someone saying "Jump!" and idiots saying "How high?".

However harsh my conclusion is, it's true.

Why revert to a nineteenth century peasant lifestyle for one hour when one clearly lives in a highly advanced culture? We live in a world where technology allows one to communicate in a matter of seconds, to store and prepare food and just stay alive? And what happens after the designated dark hour? After that dreary hour, the lights go back on and everyone blogs about how "conscientious" they were. Way to stick it to imperialist technology! No, way to stick it to yourselves. Someone told you to turn off your house lights and you bought into the fiction. In the end, you think you've done something constructive but in fact you've wasted more time, energy and dignity than if you just said: "Forget this nonsense! I'm going to read a book with my lights on!"

Someone pointed out that North Korea experiences Earth Hour every night. Will someone applaud that?

A Mellow Moment

Such is life.

The Molehill V: It Never Ends

From Ezra Levant (who couldn't be more awesome if he wore a Viking helmet and a cape):

The University of Ottawa disgraced itself on Tuesday night with its treatment of Ann Coulter, the U.S. conservative pundit. In a spectacle that earned international attention, hundreds of shouting protesters stopped Coulter's speech from proceeding through pure physical intimidation.

The protesters had bigger plans than mere heckling. Just look at their venomous Facebook page dedicated to disrupting the event: Vanessa Alexandra Peterson wrote "I wonder what the security would be like. I want to throw rotten veggies and eggs at her evil Barbie mask." Saif Latif wrote "somebody needs to throw a pie at her during her speech like they did at the University of Arizona," to which Guillaume Pelegrin replied "I hope someone will get arrested." More than 500 people on that group whipped each other up into a hateful frenzy, publicly spelling out their fantasies.

In case we forgot how "reasonable" "progressives" are.

Further:

This is the sham of political correctness. It's not about civility. It's not about protecting groups from hate, or even violence. It's about politics and power.

Houle essentially accused Coulter of planning to commit illegal acts. But when actual illegal plans were hatched -- in public for the world to see -- and then carried out, Houle was silent. So much for his "restraint, respect and consideration."

What Mr. Houle cannot do with a milquetoast warning, he uses a mob to do.

I would like to know why people like Mr. Houle think the public at large are children in need of protection. It is clear from his letter and his up-to-now lack of action it was his exercise in power to see that Miss Coulter didn't speak. He is now left to explain (for he should explain) why a taxpayer-funded post-secondary academic institution was the scene of ugliness not unlike the Cultural Revolution (and yes, I use that term deliberately and without hyperbole). It doesn't even matter at this point what Ann Coulter might or might not have said. She wasn't speaking to children but people who paid to hear her, to people who presumed theirs was a country where people will not be persecuted for what leaves their mouths.

And the arrogance to even think one speaks for all Canadians is insufferable.

Perhaps one must speak on Mr. Houle's level. When these students leave university, does Mr. Houle trust them not to smash his windows or set fire to his car when (not if) they throw a tantrum? I wonder what the Canadian Criminal Code says about that?

After all, blind rage is a virtue and- in the case of the University of Ottawa- a course requirement.

The Molehill IV: It's a Great way to Learn Roman Numerals

From Mr. Steyn:

The quality of your argument is only important if you want to win by persuasion. But it’s irrelevant if you want to win by intimidation. I’m personally very happy to defend my columns in robust debate, but, if Canada believed in robust debate, we wouldn't have these "human rights" commissions or university administrators like the wretched M Houle in the first place. The morons who shut down Ann Coulter last night don't care that they made her point for her, anymore than those Muslim agitators in the streets of London fretted about the internal contradictions of threatening to kill anyone who says they're violent.

Freedom of speech is in grave peril in Canada. In the Coulter fracas, almost all the major societal institutions behaved poorly:

1) François Houle symbolizes a decadent academy that is the very antithesis of honest enquiry and intellectual debate that the university is supposed to represent.

2) The Ottawa Police have declared that there is no equality before the law. If you belong to certain groups, they'll stand by as the mob shuts you down.

3) The dinosaur media are vast lumbering eunuchs too cowed by political correctness to do even elementary research. Fatima Al Dhaher, the poor wee thing traumatized by Ann Coulter's camel joke, turns out to be a Jew-hater who wants to eliminate the State of Israel, and belongs to a group who regard Jews as "subhuman" "zionazis/kikeroaches". But that's too complicated for the media to fit into their Sesame Street narratives.

Some insight into the Muslim girl insulted/outraged/called out/ect. By Miss Coulter:

Fatima Al Dhaher that poor thing who was offended by Ann Coulter's camel comment, just happens to be a fan of a Facebook group that offends everyone - It's Called Palestine Not Israel!

A nice little snapshot of Miss Al Dhaher's Facebook page.

As I've said before, Miss Coulter will leave Canada with vindication and scads of cash but where does that leave us? How will the people who have paid to see Miss Coulter speak be reimbursed? Are the noise-makers ready to pony up the cash necessary to compensate them? Will a country allegedly reeling from Europe's poor estimation of our "barbaric" seal hunting season and oil sands be able to say with conviction that we allow the fundamental right to express ourselves? What qualifies as hate speech (I've asked that and have not, as of yet, gotten an answer)? Spell it out. I would like to hear what words, phrases and topics are considered by the government and/or special interest groups as "improper" for public discourse. Let's put this all out there. After all, we can offend Christians but we can't offend Muslims who seem to be offended by everything (RE: Danish cartoons). Is this reasonable or did this fall through the cracks?

What victims of censorship look like.

Liar, Liar, Pants on Fire

Hail to the Cheat!

President Obama declared that the new health care law "is going to be affecting every American family." Except his own, of course.

The new health care law exempts the president from having to participate in it. Leadership and committee staffers in the House and Senate who wrote the bill are exempted as well. A weasel-worded definition of "staff" includes only the members' personal staff in the new system; the committee staff that drafted the legislation opted themselves out. Because they were more familiar with the contents of the law than anyone in the country, it says a lot that they carved out their own special loophole. Anyway, the law is intended to affect "ordinary Americans," according to Vice President Joe Biden (who - being a heartbeat away from the presidency - also is not covered), not Washington insiders.

The Molehill III

Here is a link to Michael Coren's interview with Ann Coulter.

The Molehill II

(Look at the love in the angry little fascist's face to the left. One can really tell she supports the freedom for one to say what one likes.)

Ann Coulter's speech in Ottawa was cancelled by an untidy little group of fascists- I mean- university students with nothing better to do. I will not hide my disgust.

From the article:

After protesters at the University of Ottawa prevented Ann Coulter from giving a speech on Tuesday night, the American conservative writer said it proved the point she came to make — free speech in Canada leaves much to be desired.

Yes, I suppose it does.

Ezra Levant (RE: awesome) has his say:

Mr. Levant laid the blame squarely on Mr. Houle. “A fish rots from the head down,” he said. “Francois Houle got his wish. He telegraphed to the community that the University of Ottawa is not a place for free debate.” Houle could not be reached for comment on Tuesday night. Levant said the spectacle showed “just how eroded our Canadian values of free speech have become” — especially on university campuses. “I think this has turned into a teaching moment for the entire country, a reminder that freedom of speech is a Canadian value,” he said.

I think Mr. Levant, as awesome as he is, gives far too much credit to public school educated noise-makers. If Miss Coulter was allowed to speak plainly about airport security, international unity or even ginger snaps, the audience might well have been swayed (you have no idea how powerful ginger snaps can be). A rent-a-crowd cannot allow their unsubstantiated ravings be undercut by reason.

Examples from the article (emphasis mine):

Rita Valeriano was one of several protesters inside the hall who, with chants of “Coulter go home!” shouted down the International Free Press Society of Canada organizer who was addressing the crowd.

Ms. Valeriano, a 19-year-old sociology and women’s studies student, said later that she was happy Ms. Coulter was unable to speak the “hatred” she had planned to.

“On campus, we promise our students a safe and positive space,” she said. “And that’s not what (Coulter) brings.”

Outside the hall, Sameena Topan, 26, a conflict studies and human rights major at the U of O, spoke to the Citizen on behalf of a group of protesters.
“We have a large group of students that can very clearly outline the difference between discourse and discrimination,” Ms. Topan said of the protest. “We wanted to mobilize and make sure that’s clear on campus, that there’s a line between controversy and discrimination, and Ann Coulter has crossed it. Numerous times.”

I would like this proven. What was the matter on which Miss Coulter was supposed to speak? What words were particularly offensive? How would an adult be offended or in danger? Is like Israel Apartheid Week or when Netanyahu was supposed to visit Concordia University?

And the crowning achievement:

"I think that’s great. I think we accomplished what we were here to do, to ensure that we don’t have her discriminatory rhetoric on our campus,” she said.

No, you've disadvantaged people who paid to see her, not Miss Coulter herself. You see- she is a clever and capable woman who has made scads of cash selling her books. She might walk away but she is still paid, vindicated and will continue being so. The unfortunate people who made their way to see Miss Coulter only to be disappointed should form a class action suit against the university- naming the brownshirts responsible for shutting down her talk- and get their money back.

Chairman Trudeau Is in Hell

Just read this.

Marlon Brando once visited the Prime Minister of Canada, Pierre Trudeau, to request money for a film about the First Nations that he and Abby Mann were working on.

Following the very unfruitful meeting with Trudeau, Brando declared,”That’s the most frightened I’ve ever been in my life. He’s the most intimidating person I’ve ever met.”

What a swell guy. And by swell, I mean horrible.

The Train Wreck II

The clot thickens. (Thank you, ABC)

(Emphasis mine)

For as long as the political fight took over the past year, the abbreviated review process on the health care legislation currently pending on President Obama’s desk is unquestionably going to result in some surprises — as happens with any piece of mashed-up legislation — both for the congressmen who voted for it and for the American people.

One such surprise is found on page 158 of the legislation, which appears to create a carveout for senior staff members in the leadership offices and on congressional committees, essentially exempting those senior Democrat staffers who wrote the bill from being forced to purchase health care plans in the same way as other Americans.

You don't say?

No wonder there is glee on Capitol Hill. What is alright for thee is not alright for me.

And in the first ring of hell, a rough creature waits....

The Molehill

Mark Steyn says it so much better than myself (emphasis mine):

Ah, that famous Canadian hospitality. One François Houle, Provost of the University of Ottawa, writes to warn a forthcoming visitor to the campus, Miss Ann Coulter, that Canadians enjoy only the right to government-regulated "free speech" and that therefore she may be liable to criminal prosecution:

Dear Ms. Coulter,

I understand that you have been invited by University of Ottawa Campus Conservatives to speak at the University of Ottawa this coming Tuesday. We are, of course, always delighted to welcome speakers on our campus and hope that they will contribute positively to the meaningful exchange of ideas that is the hallmark of a great university campus. We have a great respect for freedom of expression in Canada, as well as on our campus, and view it as a fundamental freedom, as recognized by our Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms. I would, however, like to inform you, or perhaps remind you, that our domestic laws, both provincial and federal, delineate freedom of expression (or “free speech”) in a manner that is somewhat different than the approach taken in the United States. I therefore encourage you to educate yourself, if need be, as to what is acceptable in Canada and to do so before your planned visit here. You will realize that Canadian law puts reasonable limits on the freedom of expression. For example, promoting hatred against any identifiable group would not only be considered inappropriate, but could in fact lead to criminal charges. Outside of the criminal realm, Canadian defamation laws also limit freedom of expression and may differ somewhat from those to which you are accustomed. I therefore ask you, while you are a guest on our campus, to weigh your words with respect and civility in mind. There is a strong tradition in Canada, including at this University, of restraint, respect and consideration in expressing even provocative and controversial opinions and urge you to respect that Canadian tradition while on our campus. Hopefully, you will understand and agree that what may, at first glance, seem like unnecessary restrictions to freedom of expression do, in fact, lead not only to a more civilized discussion, but to a more meaningful, reasoned and intelligent one as well.

I hope you will enjoy your stay in our beautiful country, city and campus.

Sincerely,

François Houle

I've no idea what Ann Coulter's reaction to this letter is, but I suspect it's "Go ahead, Princess Fairy Pants, make my day." M Houle would have a very hard time persuading the Ottawa police or the RCMP to lay criminal charges over an Ann Coulter speech because they realize, even if he doesn't, that Canada doesn't need to become even more of an international laughingstock in this area. More likely is a complaint to the Canadian and/or Ontario "Human Rights" Commissions. But you know something? I don't get the feeling they'd be eager to re-ignite the free speech wars on a nuclear scale. Think of Ezra's and my appearance in the House of Commons, and then imagine the scene when Miss Coulter testifies. So the threat is an empty one and M Houle seems to be being - oh, what's the "respectful and civil" way of putting it? - a posturing wanker.

This is the pitiful state one of the oldest free societies on the planet has been reduced to, and this is why our free speech campaign matters - because those who preside over what should be arenas of honest debate and open inquiry instead wish to imprison public discourse within ever narrower bounds - and in this case aren't above threatening legal action against those who dissent from the orthodoxies. Lots of Americans loathe Ann Coulter but it takes a Canadian like François Houle to criminalize her. The strictures he attempts to place around her, despite his appeal to "Canadian law", are at odds with the eight centuries of Canada's legal inheritance. Canadians should point that out to him politely, and explain that, although he lives high off the hog courtesy of the Canadian taxpayer, he does not speak for them.

Outstanding!

Further: Health law will require calorie counts in menus in 200,000 restaurants nationwide

A requirement tucked into the nation's massive health care bill will make calorie counts impossible for thousands of restaurants to hide and difficult for consumers to ignore. More than 200,000 fast food and other chain restaurants will have to include calorie counts on menus, menu boards and even drive-thrus.

The new law, which applies to any restaurant with 20 or more locations, directs the Food and Drug Administration to create a new national standard for menu labeling, superseding a growing number of states and cities who have started to pass such laws. President Barack Obama was expected to sign the health care legislation Tuesday.

The idea is to make sure that customers process the calorie information as they are ordering. Many restaurants currently may post nutritional information in a hallway, on a hamburger wrapper or on their Web site. The new law will make calories immediately available for most items.

If people are stuffing their faces with junk food, I'm sure they don't care.

Nice save, nanny-state.

The Monsters of Literature

(sigh)

I guess it's true.

The Train Wreck

Fifty-nine percent of poll respondents opposed health care bill.

Let us be clear: Obama does not care about the sick and the needy. If he did, he would have gathered around the experts and determined how best to reform health insurance. This disastrous plan was about him getting control.

From Mark Steyn.

Captain's Blog II: The Mirth of Khan

Happy birthday, Mr. Shatner.

In case you didn't get it, he IS Captain Kirk.

An Analogy

Imagine the world is an apartment and its inhabitants are the countries of the world.

United States would be the occupant everyone needs. Sure, he might be a little showy but he pays eight-five percent of the rent, deals with the landlord and is always good for getting the beer and pizza. The rest of the occupants might not like him but they need him. Badly.

Now imagine some moron stuck our favourite occupant with an enormous bill no reasonable occupant really wanted anyway. Let's say this bill would cost- oh- about two trillion dollars (insert Dr. Evil image here). Utterly impossible to pay unless our go-to guy the United States involves his younger siblings and cousins to help him pay it off. He can't cover the rent or get the food and beer but this bill must be paid for or the moron will throw a tantrum.

Now the rest of the occupants are really stuck. The good-looking but part-time employed occupant, Canada, can't do it alone but the sniveling EU occupants and the in-need Third World occupants won't or can't. Forget about asking the Iranian or North Korean occupants hiding in their isolated rooms adorned with pictures of horror movie scenes and listening to Marilyn Manson at full-crank. And it's only a matter of time before they go off.

Now no one has rent, food or beer.

I never thought it was possible to hamstring the freest country on the planet but there you go!

More here.

Saturday Night Special

The big to-do about Ann Coulter's planned appearance at the University of Ottawa would be laughable if the matter was not so serious. The fact that an upstart with extremely questionable pet hatreds would assume to speak for everyone at a taxpayer-subsidized post-secondary institution and attempt to stifle free speech (no matter how repellent it may seem to aforementioned upstart) should strike everyone as nauseating. I would never ask this guy to speak for me or use anyone else's resources to shut someone down. As Bugs Bunny would say: what a maroon!

It isn't the first time brats at universities tried to ruin everything for the adults.

Rex Murphy is spot-on about a Christmas-hating frowner.

And now, to finish Saint Patrick's Week, stormtroopers on parade.

Living In a Post-Green World

The "green" refers to Saint Patrick's Day which has (alas) come to a close (sigh).

Speaking of "green", here is a rather interesting article detailing the logistics of turning off energy sources for Earth (read: Earf) Hour. Pretty interesting.

Apparently, adherents to the green philosophy are full of biodegradable excrescence. Who knew?

A Palestinian rocket killed a Thai worker. How have the Thais offended the Palestinians? Oh yes- they are pork-eating infidels.

With Putin's help, Iran's nuclear power plant will be up and running by the summer. Tell me- how is the Great Communicator going to resolve this?

An example in the schizophrenic thinking with regards to nuclear armaments:

But the U.S. strongly opposes this. Washington fears South Korea may end up acquiring nuclear weapons by producing plutonium through reprocessing, and these fears are amplified by North Korea's two nuclear tests. The U.S. feels it cannot allow only South Korea to acquire the technology to reprocess nuclear fuel as it seeks to get North Korea to scrap its nuclear program. It is not easy to fault Washington's logic. This is going to be the great test facing the Korea-U.S. alliance as the nuclear agreement expires in March 2014.

Only Iran and North Korea can have nuclear weapons because- as we all know- those two countries are not led by madmen. If I didn't know better, I might suggest someone wants to world to explode in a fury of distrust and ultimately war.

More things to make one ill. In Cuba, too.

This is why we should adopt the use of stocks. Also, allow people to pelt rancid tomatoes at them.

A Very Special Saint Patrick's Day Post

Today is the Day of the Potato-Eater! Men of the Pale, unite! We few, we happy few. For he who shares his beer with me today shall be my brother, be he never so sober this day shall intoxicate his condition. And men now in England shall think themselves accursed and hold their manhoods cheap whiles any speaks upon Saint Patrick’s Day!

And how good is this day?

Saint Patrick- just one of the apostles of Ireland and Nigeria- truly opened up Ireland. His path was not easy but had he not prevailed (thanks to God), the world would be changed utterly.

The Irish (-esque) who contributed to the good of the world:

Saint Brendan (discovered North America)

Saint Columba

Saint Brigid

William Butler Yeats

Jonathan Swift

James Joyce

Colm Meaney (the guy who played Chief on Deep Space Nine- the only non-stereotypical Irishman- Boo! Shame, Star Trek franchise!)

CS Lewis

Liam Neeson

James Nesbitt

Father Chris and his dogs of Ireland

It is also the feast day of Saint Gertrude of Nivelles and Gary Sinise's birthday (many happy returns).

Rue, Britainnia

A British documentary targets Alberta oil sands.

The British ought to know "no blood for oil".

The True North

Nunavut vows to ban EU booze in dispute over sealing

Good.

As much as I loathe a cart blanche to hunt simply because one's ancestors came over the Bering Strait, I loathe white liberal ignorance and arrogance even more. In this case, Euro-arrogance. For the Inuit, the seal hunt is a matter of sustenance. Urban dwellers have the convenience of purchasing their meat processed and wrapped; the Inuit do not. They have been hunting seals for centuries. For squeamish Europeans to cast judgment on a people a few (if any) have met smacks of the kind of prejudice one thought we did away with years ago. Did anyone in the EU ask an Inuit hunter what his perspective on the seal hunt was? Did it not occur to anyone that for many people, hunting a way of life or that the hunting of seal pups is banned or that seals consume vital fish stocks?

Perhaps it is best never to let facts get in the way of what appears to be a cuddly animal.

Oh Dear....

Look- if you're going to cheapen human life like this, at least be upfront about human organ trafficking or some other morally repulsive crime against human reasoning and nature.

Just saying.

(sigh)

Gone are the days when you could say: "Well, at least Tom Hanks isn't a loony!"

Actually- those days disappeared during the "The Da Vinci Code" fiasco.

Mr. Hanks' latest gaffe is just troubling, so troubling that one hopes he misspoke.

“Back in World War II, we viewed the Japanese as ‘yellow, slant-eyed dogs’ that believed in different gods. They were out to kill us because our way of living was different. We, in turn, wanted to annihilate them because they were different. Does that sound familiar, by any chance, to what’s going on today?”

If one never, ever reads a book and ignores the militarist government which emerged in Japan in the Thirties and held its population in an iron grip, its expansionist policies which led to the brutal domination of Korea, China, Indonesia and much of the Pacific, the abandonment of true bushido, the fanatical devotion to their emperor, the attack on Pearl Harbour, the treatment of citizens and POWs and the ends to which the Allied powers had to go in order to secure world peace, then perhaps. In order for the comparison to be complete, one would also have to forget the September 11th attacks and other Islamofascist atrocities but that would be just nutty.

Perhaps Mr. Hanks should cease from commenting on that of which he apparently knows nothing.

All Manner of Things

The Oscars were handed out and, apparently, it's International Womens' Day but seeing as the Oscars are overly long sordid back-slapping sessions for liberal A-listers and other selfish, stupid people and International Womens' Day is, along with Kwanzaa and Earth Day, the L. Ron Hubbard of holidays, I won't be commenting on them.

I will, however, make note of Sarah Palin's appearance in Calgary. Whether people like her or not, she is electrifying. She galvanises those who share her values and horrifies those on the left. She appeals to western Canada because it is not mainstream. Places like Saskatchewan and Alberta have long been mowed over by Ottawa. As Canada's bread basket and oil producer, these two provinces have had to forge for themselves a place at the bigger table. They've earned that place. That is their connection to Mrs. Palin, a self-made politician whose love of hard work and an understanding of essential natural resources is a mirror to her Canadian counterparts.

Just my thoughts.

Bob Geldof, embarrassed by the knowledge that his Live-Aid proceeds went to war lords, attacked the BBC for bringing that to the world's attention:

He added: "There is not a single shred of evidence that Band Aid or Live Aid money was diverted."

The BBC World Service reported claims that 95% of US$100-million of the aid which went to Ethiopia's Tigray province in 1985 was used by rebel forces to buy weapons.

Geldof should apologise for this. He should also apologise for "Do They Know It's Christmas?". I hate that song with the fire of a thousand suns. That song is as annoying as John Lennon's "Happy Xmas (War is Over) " is self-serving. Shame on you liberal white yahoos and your terrible music and your complete misunderstanding of Africa, its politics and cultural mores!

Niqabs once again make news in Quebec:

Recently, a Montreal woman made headlines for lodging a complaint with Quebec's Human Rights Commission after she was expelled from a government-sponsored French course in November for refusing to remove her niqab.

Wearing the niqab or hijab is not so much an expression of religious devotion as it is a deliberate snub of Western values, the same values, I might add, that allow women to be educated (try that under the Taliban). It is my opinion that the same people who demand tolerance for the intolerable are the very people who should integrate and be assimilated. Why should anyone tolerate hiding a woman's features because (it is believed) a seventh century war monger demanded it? Are we going to tolerate anti-semitism because we don't want to offend Arabs who think Jews run the world and women should be ushered out of the room? Is it perfectly acceptable to nod politely when a Canadian of Pakistani descent calls for the deaths of our troops? These are no more acts of tolerance than they are willing submission to wickedness and disorder.

"World recoils as 500 Christians slaughtered in Nigeria". Yeah, I'll say! I won't pretend to understand Africa the way Bob Geldof might but perhaps it should be remembered that tribalism is Africa's greatest impediment to internal peace. Just saying.

From the article:

One local paper said the gangs shouted Allah Akhbar before breaking into homes and setting them alight in the early hours of Sunday. Churches were among the buildings that were burned down.

Let's remember that when certain groups claim discrimination.

I'll believe it when I see it: Feds will eliminate 245 patronage positions: Day

From a North Korean defector:

Q: Is there any legal evidence for ‘speech revolt’ as a crime?

A: Because people can’t be prosecuted for saying the wrong things, they are sent to the prison camps. If there is a legal problem, they are sent to a re-educational facility. There are no court procedures. If a security agent arbitrarily decides that an individual is guilty of treason, the verdict stands. There can be no clause that can be used as legal evidence.

Shades of Ezra Levant, I tell you (whom, as we may remember, is awesome).

The fate of North Korean prisoners (WARNING: it is very shocking).

From everyone's favourite Kool-Aid drinker/North Korea apologist.

And now, a recipe.

Mother Earf

Despite evidence coming to light indicating that the climate is changing but not in the way politically motivated scientists, wags, ect are thinking, the effort to drive the climate cult to the forefront still is running.

Case in point: Al Gore's editorial in the New York Times (hat tip: ABC). Does Mr. Gore at any time mention his palatial home or his jet-setting to hugely financially rewarding talks filled with unsubstantiated blather? No, but he does do some fear-mongering:

But what a burden would be lifted! We would no longer have to worry that our grandchildren would one day look back on us as a criminal generation that had selfishly and blithely ignored clear warnings that their fate was in our hands. We could instead celebrate the naysayers who had doggedly persisted in proving that every major National Academy of Sciences report on climate change had simply made a huge mistake.

The effort is as shameless as it is disingenuous. I doubt Mr. Gore believes his would-be followers read newspapers, magazines or blogs. Would he care to explain the Himalayan glaciers?

The UN's climate science body has admitted that a claim made in its 2007 report - that Himalayan glaciers could melt away by 2035 - was unfounded.

The admission today followed a New Scientist article last week that revealed the source of the claim made in the 2007 report by the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) was not peer-reviewed scientific literature – but a media interview with a scientist conducted in 1999. Several senior scientists have now said the claim was unrealistic and that the large Himalayan glaciers could not melt in a few decades.

I guess not.

I submit that Mr. Gore has made a very good living off of his "green" claims. His reckless disregard for facts and their effect on the public cannot be ignored. How does one deal with an individual bent on saving trees rather than people? It breeds and/or feeds a misanthropy that pervades society at large. How do we explain away a couple who would murder their own children believing the failure at Copenhagen to effect "real change" was akin to apocalypse (hat tip: SDA)? Earth Day itself was founded by a communist-leaning radical who murdered his own girlfriend. Are these examples of people-minded conservationists who want to preserve the world for others? I do not put these tragedies directly at the feet of any one individual but I do blame an ideology based on suppositions and complete disregard for humanity.

Just my thoughts.

Did You See That?

Yep.

Talk about tense. I literally sat at the edge of my seat and jumped up and down like a school-girl when the shot went in.

Someone owes someone else a beer (good beer, not American "beer").

Someone owes someone else an apology.