Friday, February 27, 2015

Putin opponent assassinated in Moscow

New York Times:
Boris Nemtsov, a prominent Russian opposition leader and former first deputy prime minister, was shot dead Friday evening in central Moscow in the highest-profile assassination in Russia during the tenure of President Vladimir V. Putin.

... Mr. Putin condemned the killing, the Kremlin said, and Mr. Putin’s spokesman, Dmitri S. Peskov, said the president would personally lead the investigation. [Riiight!]
... “They have started to kill ‘enemies of the people,’ ” the former opposition member of Parliament Gennady Gudkov posted on Twitter. “Mr. Nemtsov is dead. Who is next?”...

Thursday, February 26, 2015

Climate McCarthyism

... the hunt for the hides of a few climate skeptics began last weekend when The New York Times climate beat reporter, Justin Gillis, co-wrote an attack on Wei-Hock (Willie) Soon, a sceptical scientist at the Harvard-Smithsonian Center for Astrophysics.  ...
... In the end it is the warmists who will come out of this looking like the pathetic political witch hunters they are ...
When “witch hunts” are deemed legitimate in the context of popular causes, we will have fully turned science into just another arena for the exercise of power politics. The result is a big loss for both science and politics.

Peter Foster: Crushing climate thoughtcrime
The U.S. Democratic witch hunt against scientists skeptical about official climate science threatens to blow up in the faces of the Inquisitors. It lays bare the totalitarian mentality behind the radical climate agenda.
 Willis Eschenbach: Mental Midgets Try To Bite Dr. Willie Soon’s Ankles

 Faux outrage over Willie Soon’s disclosure


Wednesday, February 25, 2015

Pachauri's fifty shades of green

Peter Foster on the IPCC boss's resignation:
When you look at the long list of Mr. Pachauri’s disingenuities and evasions, you might be inclined to ask why one more (alleged) example of sleaziness would make any difference. 

... Mr. Pachauri’s resignation letter on Tuesday, aptly described by blogger Donna Laframboise as a “two-page love letter to himself,” moved from effrontery to gag-worthiness with its claim that “For me the protection of Planet Earth, the survival of all species and sustainability of our ecosystems is more than a mission. It is my religion and my dharma.”

Given that Mr. Pachauri’s hobbies include writing novels featuring the soft-porn adventures of an Indian climate expert ... the question now is whether ... Mr. Pachauri’s karma will run over the IPCC’s dogma.

 The contents of those sexts are bound to be titillating. ... one observer wryly noted,  we’re likely talking about “fifty shades of green.”
 Update: Pachauri admitted to hospital.

Tuesday, February 24, 2015

F.C.C. Expected to Enforce Net Neutrality

New York Times
... On Thursday, the Federal Communications Commission is expected to vote to regulate the Internet as a public good. ...

UN IPCC climate head Rajendra Pachauri resigns

From the “the hornier they are the harder they fall” department: The head of the United Nations climate change panel (IPCC), Rajendra Pachauri, has stepped down amid sexual harassment allegations.
It would have been much better had he been given the boot long ago for failure of  leadership, blatant hypocrisy and conflict of interest.

But we'll take what we can get.

Monday, February 23, 2015

UN IPCC Chaiman accused of sexual harassment

From No Frakking Consensus:
Texts and e-mails allegedly sent by IPCC chairman Rajendra Pachauri tell a disturbing tale. Months after a female subordinate objected repeatedly and strenuously to his sexual advances, the UN official continued to physically and electronically stalk her.
Mail Today, New Delhi, February 21, 2015

Should we expect Dr. Pachauri to blame global warming for his overheated state?

Sunday, February 22, 2015

Lying about the link between Islamist terror and Islam

In Saturday's National Post Andrew Coyne (attacking Stephen Harper) argued that we should be "Watching our words on Islamism".

Coyne makes the odd reasonable observation, like for example:
"... they [Islamists] are commanded by their faith to take up arms in its defence. Of this there can be no doubt: they have said so, on a hundred different occasions, and we would be wise to take them at their word."
... then, sadly, he decides to advocate for Obama's highly dubious "strategy" of lying about Islam's blatantly obvious connection with terrorism - concluding that to be truthful, like Stephen Harper, is "playing with fire".

In other words, Coyne, like Obama, presumably on the word of so-called "moderate" Muslims (Obama has close associations with members of the Muslim Brotherhood), prefers to ignore the obvious realities of political Islam and its extremist, violent opposition to the West (and to infidels everywhere).  He prefers to go along with the many "moderate" Muslims in the West who peddle the obviously self-serving fiction that ISIS and other similarly motivated terrorists "are not Islamic".

Rather than trying to mollify these "moderate" Muslims by ignoring or downplaying (lying about) the obvious links between Islam and Islamist terrorism we (that includes you, Mr. Coyne and Pres. Obama) should be insisting that they stop trying to obfuscate or deny the issue and instead to clearly and firmly denounce the radical elements in their midst - march in the streets (as they are so quick to do when Western satirists mock Mohammed).  If, as they claim, ISIS, al Qaeda and other killers are indeed perverting Islam (rather than faithfully observing it) and are giving the one "true" Islam a very bad name, it is up to these "moderates" to be shouting out, en-mass, against it loudly, publicly and often.  Can we expect this to happen any time soon?  Not bloody likely -  especially with the Obamas and Coynes among us giving them cover.

 BTW.  In the NP epaper, there were lots of great critical comments, while in the open version linked above there are a great many of the usual dhimmi leftists supporting Coyne.

And here is Blazing Cat Fur's blunt assessment:
 Idiot At National Post Says If We Pretend Islam & Terrorism Aren’t Linked Muslims Will Like Us More!

Friday, February 20, 2015

Obama - worse than a Manchurian Candidate?

Roger Simon, PJ Media:
... Barack Obama is not the Manchurian candidate. That’s just an excuse. The only problem is…He’s worse.  He’s far worse.  Barack Obama doesn’t have to be a Manchurian candidate.  He can and is doing more damage without being one. 

... I wish I knew what to do, because convincing Obama to act is a double-edged sword.  He is a horrible person to be a commander-in-chief and to put our troops in his hands is an awful thing to do to them. He will undoubtedly pull the rug out from under them just at the wrong moment.  And they certainly know it.  How could they not?

Thursday, February 19, 2015

The right to hide your face while swearing to be a loyal Canadian

The National Post has been making a big deal out of a Federal Court judge`s ruling that strikes down the government`s policy banning the niqab during the citizenship swearing in ceremony.  The complainant is activist Muslim, Zunera Ishaq (Hmmm. Not even a citizen yet and already a pushy leftist activist.)  In today`s letters to the Post there were 5 letters disagreeing with Ms Ishaq and the judge.  The first:
... The veil issue is about having the courtesy to accept the traditions of Canada. The reason this particular story has hit such a strong emotional nerve with so many Canadians is that Zunera Ishaq’s stance demonstrates an insulting lack of respect — indeed contempt — for this country. Imagine how she would feel if a non-Muslim barged into her mosque and refused to take off his construction boots — in fact demanded that it was his God-given right to keep wearing them. Would she not feel anger at the brazen show of disrespect? That is precisely how so many Canadian feel over this issue.

Anger is also multiplied by both Ms. Ishaq’s puzzling desire to be a citizen and the government’s immigration rules that cheapen what it means to be a Canadian by allowing people with attitudes like hers to become citizens. No one asked her to come here and certainly no one is asking her to stay. Like Montreal imam Hamza Chaoui, who puzzlingly chooses to stay in Canada despite preaching Islam and democracy are incompatible, or Chiheb Esseghaier who came here to consume our educational resources and as a thank you decided he wanted to blow up a train, all three show both a lack of respect and blatant hypocrisy. John Love, Toronto.
Here`s Ezra`s and Marissa`s take:

Globe and Mail - Stenographers for al Qaeda

The Globe and Mail decries that it is being denied the opportunity to interview jailed al Qaeda killer Omar Khadr:
as a result of the vagaries of Correctional Service Canada interior design, Omar Khadr cannot be interviewed by journalists.
The Globe refers to Khadr as a `... member of the notorious jihadi Khadr family` but almost certainly not because they actually hold that view.

Here`s Ezra:

Latest videos and updates on who`s involved in the new website.  Michael Coren and Marissa Simkiw now on board.

Just a couple of days in and looking good!

Wednesday, February 18, 2015

TheRebel - a web resurrection for Canadian conservative media

Ezra Levant and Brian Lilley are setting up a new website they're calling TheRebel.
Ezra explains:

Monday, February 16, 2015

The death of Sun News makes this Arab-Canadian happy

Omar Mouallem is an Edmonton-based writer, Metro News columnist and editor of The Yards:
... Thankfully ... as of this morning, the most trusted name in bigotry is gone. Sun News Network has shut down.

... It was a network that promoted racism—against Arabs, against Romani people, against First Nations ...
[Nonsense.  Ezra expressed his sincere regrets for his comments about the Romani, but Sun's coverage of First Nations focused on issues of systemic dysfunction and corruption among the Indian leadership, the systemically racist regime perpetuated by the Indian Act as well as highlighting competent, successful reserves like Osoyoos. And, Sun's coverage of "Arabs" wasn't about Arabs it was about radical Islam, its reign of misogyny, homophobia and terror; and it was about execrable Western lib/left apologists covering for it.]

... young reporters launched their careers by contributing to a hate-machine that perpetuated prejudice, especially against Muslims ... 
["hate-machine"? Not so much. Sun was a TRUTH machine. But then the truth doesn't cut much ice, even with our often ridiculously PoMo Supreme Court: “the use of truthful statements should not provide a shield in the human rights context” .]

... If the now unemployed Sun News Network staff, or the congenial media professionals offering their condolences to those who lost their jobs, were brown or Muslim they'd understand just how harmful it is to casually sensationalize stories about Islam ... 
[The phony race card, again. And Sun News wasn't "casual" about its coverage of radical Islam, it was deliberate, forceful and truthful.]

... because this is the overwhelmingly white Canadian media ... 
 [Now, speaking of bigotry, that's just ...phobic.]
 It would seem that the real bigot here is Mr. Mouallem.  But never mind, that whiter-than-white, Jewish, lib/leftist, Jonathan Kay, liked the cut of his jib:
Which brought this obvious suggestion in reply:
Because the latter is a long-perpetuated lie and the former is a suppressed truth?
A gripping tale of a hyper-sensitive "brown" guy and his "white" liberal apologist - both of whom have a disdain for the truth.

Friday, February 13, 2015

Sun News is dead!

This must be Friday the 13th.  Sun News went dark (see also) at about 2:00 AM PT this morning.  That's very bad news.  Now all we're left with is Fox News and leftist, politically correct,  group-think TV in the remainder of the cable news wasteland.

And, we're left to wonder where Ezra Levant, Brian Lilley, Michael Coren, et al might resurface to give us some relief.

Update: Here's Ezra Levant's opinion on Sun's demise.  Sign up here to stay posted on Ezra's next moves.

Sunday, February 8, 2015

Greenpeace's thuggery

James Delingpole:
All right – so accusing Greenpeace of being dishonest, bullying, hypocritical, scientifically illiterate, menacing and environmentally damaging is about as novel and contentious as suggesting that Michelangelo may have painted the Sistine Chapel.

... a compliant media ... still tends to view Greenpeace as a loveable, homespun collective of gallant eco-crusaders in chunky-knit sweaters and rubber dinghies, rather than the thuggish, overmighty zealots they actually are.

... a few examples:

More debate on the doctor-assisted suicide

Phil Horgan, Catholic Civil Rights League:

Sun News panel, Jerry Agar ++:

Sun News panel, Faith Goldy, JJ McCullough ++:

Saturday, February 7, 2015

Why does Steven Fletcher champion assisted suicide?

I've always been a little puzzled by Steven Fletcher's championing of doctor-assisted suicide.  He would actually make an excellent poster-boy for the other side of the argument.  Despite what must have been huge challenges after becoming quadriplegic early in life, he forged an exceptionally successful political career and a productive life.  However, had assisted suicide been available at the time of his accident it is highly likely that, in the depths of suffering and depression, he'd have requested it.  And he'd have missed the experience of overcoming his challenges and achieving the success that followed.

So, why does he favour doctor-assisted suicide?  Does he regret having lived his life?  It's hard to imagine, but maybe we'll see a year from now whether or not he exercises his new right.  Another, more likely possibility is that he's contemplating that eventually, perhaps many years from now, he'll want to exercise his right.  But, has he considered whether it's worth it given that from now on it is far less likely that there will be any more Steven Fletchers?  Not to mention all the other down-side risks:
Barbara Kay: Euthanasia so accepted, doctors must now justify prolonging a life
Barbara Kay: Suffering people just want an end to their pain
Father Raymond de Souza: Our euthanasia point of no return
Andrew Coyne: Crossing the Rubicon, Supreme Court seems eerily complacent
Ezra Levant:

Friday, February 6, 2015

Obama: Let's not "get on our high horse" about Islamic terrorists ...

...They're no worse than Christians.  At the National Prayer Breakfast yesterday Barry played the moral equivalence card:
Unless we get on our high horse and think this is unique to some other place, remember that during the Crusades and the Inquisition, people committed terrible deeds in the name of Christ. In our home country, slavery and Jim Crow all too often was justified in the name of Christ.” [Good grief! Leaving aside the questionable equivalence of the deeds, didn't the Crusades and the Inquisition happen a millennium and half a millennium ago?]
So that's what Obama was doing the day before meeting with (unnamed) Muslims at the White House - getting his hug-a-Muslim talking points for the Prayer Breakfast.

Roger Simon put it well (first link above):
... frankly I was appalled by what Obama said. Many faiths could be cited, including communism, obviously, also a kind of religion that was responsible for exponentially more deaths — via Stalin’s Gulag, Mao’s Cultural Revolution and Great Leap Forward, the killing fields of Cambodia, etc. — than all other belief systems combined, although none of them are doing it now.
... And yet Obama saw fit to lecture his audience on the Crusades and slavery, done “in the name of Christ,” subjects of which his audience was undoubtedly well aware and, needless to say, did not approve in the slightest. Yet still the president felt he had to hector them.
... Obama is not a Manchurian candidate and never was. He never had to be. He is just absolutely the wrong human being to be leading the West at this point in history. Heaven help us.

Doctor-assited death - the SSC greases the slope

Today the Supreme Court of Canada rendered its judgement to allow physician-assisted suicide in limited circumstances.  Some selected paragraphs:
Section 241 (b) and s. 14  of the Criminal Code  unjustifiably infringe s. 7  of the Charter  and are of no force or effect to the extent that they prohibit physician-assisted death for a competent adult person who (1) clearly consents to the termination of life and (2) has a grievous and irremediable medical condition (including an illness, disease or disability) that causes enduring suffering that is intolerable to the individual in the circumstances of his or her condition. ... The declaration of invalidity is suspended for 12 months.

... The prohibition on physician-assisted dying infringes the right to life, liberty and security of the person in a manner that is not in accordance with the principles of fundamental justice. The object of the prohibition is not, broadly, to preserve life whatever the circumstances, but more specifically to protect vulnerable persons from being induced to commit suicide at a time of weakness. Since a total ban on assisted suicide clearly helps achieve this object, individuals’ rights are not deprived arbitrarily. However, the prohibition catches people outside the class of protected persons. It follows that the limitation on their rights is in at least some cases not connected to the objective and that the prohibition is thus overbroad.
... The appropriate remedy is not to grant a free-standing constitutional exemption, but rather to issue a declaration of invalidity and to suspend it for 12 months. Nothing in this declaration would compel physicians to provide assistance in dying. 

The Feasibility of Safeguards and the Possibility of a “Slippery Slope”
 ... At trial Canada went into some detail about the risks associated with the legalization of physician-assisted dying.  In its view, there are many possible sources of error and many factors that can render a patient “decisionally vulnerable” and thereby give rise to the risk that persons without a rational and considered desire for death will in fact end up dead.  It points to cognitive impairment, depression or other mental illness, coercion, undue influence, psychological or emotional manipulation, systemic prejudice (against the elderly or people with disabilities), and the possibility of ambivalence or misdiagnosis as factors that may escape detection or give rise to errors in capacity assessment.  Essentially, Canada argues that, given the breadth of this list, there is no reliable way to identify those who are vulnerable and those who are not.  As a result, it says, a blanket prohibition is necessary.
The trial judge, on the basis of her consideration of various regimes and how they operate, found that it is possible to establish a regime that addresses the risks associated with physician-assisted death.  We agree with the trial judge that the risks associated with physician-assisted death can be limited through a carefully designed and monitored system of safeguards.
Now it's for the government to re-write the law, clearly defining the fuzzy terminology, setting limits and the necessary safeguards.

The slippery slope has just been greased.  We'll have to live (or die) with it.  However, the pro-death activists won't rest until they've got what they're really after - euthanasia.

1. Today's decision was unanimous 9-0 with these judges in attendance: McLachlin C.J. and LeBel, Abella, Rothstein, Cromwell, Moldaver, Karakatsanis, Wagner and Gascon JJ.

2. The previous assisted suicide judgement of 1993 dismissing the Sue Rodriguez appeal was decided 5-4 with McLachlin and three others dissenting.  McLachlin was the only judge to hear both cases.

Monday, February 2, 2015

The Globe and Mail's ridiculous head-in-the-sand stupidity

Globe editorial - Parliament must reject Harper’s secret policeman bill:
 "Prime Minister Stephen Harper never tires of telling Canadians that we are at war with the Islamic State."
News flash, we ARE at war with the Islamic State.  The Islamic State has declared war on Canada.  Our CF-18's are bombing them.  Our special forces are on the ground designating targets and shooting back at ISIS fighters in self defence.

"... recklessly conflates the two recent lone-wolf incidents in Canada with the Islamic State’s call for attacks on “non-believing countries.”  ... no evidence that either attacker was connected to ISIS. ..."
Wrong.  Police and CSIS investigators have shown that both Jihadi terrorists were inspired by ISIS videos and propaganda.

"If the Prime Minister has evidence that either attack was directly linked to ISIS, he should provide it ..."
No! With our own eyes and ears we've seen and heard what atrocities ISIS has committed and is threatening to commit.  If the Globe has any evidence that ISIS is NOT a threat, then IT should provide it.
Whoever wrote this piece of nonsense is doing so either from Neville Chamberlain's naive head-in-the-sand playbook or as anti-Harper political propaganda. Or both.

Update: Ezra Levant is much more blunt:

Resurgent Jew-hatred

Charles Krauthammer:
Anti-Semitism has returned to Europe. With a vengeance.

... It has become routine. If the kosher-grocery massacre in Paris hadn’t happened in conjunction with Charlie Hebdo, how much worldwide notice would it have received? As little as did the murder of a rabbi and three children at a Jewish school in Toulouse. As little as did the terror attack that killed four at the Jewish Museum in Brussels.

...  In Berlin, Gaza brought out a mob chanting, “Jew, Jew, cowardly pig, come out and fight alone!” Berlin, mind you.

... European anti-Semitism is not a Jewish problem, however. It’s a European problem, a stain, a disease of which Europe is congenitally unable to rid itself.
In the comments it's clear that it's not just a European problem.  Canadian Jew-haters came out in force, as usual.  (In America its no doubt the same, plus, the hug-a-Muslim, kick-a-Jew mentality extends to the very top.)

By contrast, the comments behind the e-paper pay-wall harbour no such sentiments. Here are two:
Stephen Boyling:
I say this without reservation - Israel's dilemma is the West's dilemma.  No ifs ands or buts.  There's only one "cure" for anti-Semitism and that would be death.  By any means necessary.  I'm not talking about those confused and crazy nobodies, the "rebels without a cause" that pick the non-thinking obvious - Israel specifically, and Jews generally.  I include union leaders and university professors in that group.  And skinheads.

The enemy is Islam.  The example to be set is Islam.  It's state enablers and financial backers.  Gone.  By any means necessary.  And then maybe I can get on a plane without taking my shoes off.  Or my belt.  Or leaving my trusty pocket knife in a desk drawer.  By any means necessary.  Until that job is done.  Unfortunately, not any time soon.
Alastair Gordon:
It is appropriate to see the term "Jew-hatred" replacing the anodyne "anti-Semitism". How many "progressives" have told me that they cannot be anti-Semitic because, after all, Arabs are Semites too?

Time to call out the Muslim world and their useful idiots - the United Church, Sid Ryan, CUPE, Noam Chomsky, student unions, academics, liberal media, and many on the left for what they really are - Jew-Haters.