All of the above?
Update: Quel insult--Kim Jong Un gets an invite to Moscow but Trump has to make do with a hook up in Helsinki?!
In the sanitizing Orwellian newspeak employed by the Canadian government, the terrorists are not jihadis who left Canada to commit the most heinous crimes, such as torture, rape and murder, while fighting for ISIS in Syria and Iraq, but "High Risk Travelers" and "High Risk Returnees".To add insult to injury, the Trudeau minions insist that ISIS fighters with Canadian citizenship are entitled to--wait for it--"a right of return."
The government is fully aware of the security risk to which it is subjecting Canadians: According to the documents, "HRRs [High Risk Returnees] can pose a significant threat to the national security of Canada". This fact raises the question of why the government of Canada is keen to facilitate these people's "right of return" -- when presumably the primary obligation of the government is to safeguard the security of law-abiding Canadian citizens.
However, Karen Mock, the president of JSpace Canada, a progressive Zionist organization, is not as concerned with how Canada voted on the resolution."Strategic voting" my adorably dimpled arse. The only strategy to be seen here is the Trudeau government's desire to suck up--big time--to the heinous UN. And if that means shafting Israel in the process, well, that's something that the Liberals (and let's remember that the "progressive" Ms. Mock numbers herself among their ranks and, indeed, was once a Liberal candidate in a Canadian election) are only too willing to do.
“Canada’s support for Israel is clear and long-standing, so it should not be judged by any one vote. Canada is walking a diplomatic tightrope to regain a spot on the security council, which will allow Canada to do far more good than on the sidelines,” she said.
Mock also pointed out that once it was clear which way the vote was going, there was no point in Canada voting in favour of the resolution. She said that strategic voting will put Canada in a position to play a stronger role in the peace process going forward.
The divergence between the Trump administration’s desire to increase arms sales to the Middle East and the capacity limits of Arab clients for what the US currently markets makes the release of new types of advanced US weapon systems to the region more likely. This could undermine Israel’s qualitative military edge. While the Trump administration’s global arms export drive may increase US-Israel competition for certain markets, it could also offer opportunities for joint arms export cooperation. But Israel should be wary of following the American lead in relaxing export standards for approving arms sales.
Juche, which roughly translates as “self-reliance,” is an odd blend of several different ideas. It borrows much of its language from Marxism but also draws on Confucianism, 20th-century Japanese imperialism, and traditional Korean nationalism. Its core idea is that North Korea is a country that must remain separate and distinct from the world, dependent solely on its own strength and the guidance of a near-godlike leader.
The camp’s own descriptions of each year’s activities from 2013-2017 report that the teens are shown films such as “Occupation 101” and “Jerusalem: The East Side Story,” which depict Israel as a racist, savage oppressor. A panel on “Youth Activism and Engagement in Palestine” featured representatives of “the Love Under Apartheid Campaign [and] the BDS movement.” Officials of a group called “Right to Education” explained to the campers that all Israeli universities should be boycotted, since they are part of “the structure of systemic oppression.”Hello Muddah, hello Faddah, here I am at Camp Intifada...
On politics, everyone got a fair chance to tell their story: he discussed the Troubles in Irish pubs and bars; American viewers walked with him through the streets of Cuba; he ate in Gaza, for which he was both praised and vilified (his response, later, was this: “The world has visited many terrible things on the Palestinian people, none more shameful than robbing them of their basic humanity. People are not statistics. That is all we attempted to show”).Sadly, however, he omitted the many terrible things the Palestinian people have visited upon Israel specifically and mankind as a whole, including jihad, Jew-hate and wee tots decked out in Semtex vests.
In a recent interview in the online magazine which I edit, Quillette, I asked Campbell and Manning what they thought about cultural appropriation. They explained that they found such complaints baffling, like everybody else, but that they also “illustrate victimhood culture quite well.” One of the key components of victimhood culture is its projection of collective guilt, social offenses between individuals are no longer about the actual people involved, they are about “one social group harming another.”
One might make the case that while complaints about cultural appropriation are annoying, they are ultimately harmless. What is the harm in showing deference to peoples who have historically been the victims of exploitation, discrimination, and unfair treatment? What is the harm in showing respect and compliance with these new rules—isn’t it a way of making up for past sins?
The short answer to these questions is, no. The notion that a person can be held as responsible for actions that he or she did not commit strikes at the very heart of our conception of human rights and justice.
We used to take calls for collective punishment much more seriously. In the 1949 Geneva Convention it was determined that: “No protected person may be punished for an offense he or she has not personally committed.” Collective punishment was seen as a tactic designed to intimidate and subdue an entire population. The drafters of the Geneva Convention clearly had in mind the atrocities committed in WWI and WWII where entire villages and communities suffered mass retribution for the resistance activities of a few. In their commentary on the outlawing of collective punishment the International Red Cross stated: “A great step forward has been taken. Responsibility is personal and it will no longer be possible to inflict penalties on persons who have themselves not committed the acts complained of.”
Time's have changed
Our kids are getting worse
They won't obey their parents
They just want to fart and curse
Should we blame the government?
Or blame society?
Or should we blame the images on TV?
No, blame Canada, blame Canada
With all their beady little eyes
And flappin' heads so full of lies
Blame Canada, blame Canada
We need to form a full assault
It's Canada's fault,,
Well, blame Canada, blame Canada
It seems that everything's gone wrong
Since Canada came along
Blame Canada, blame Canada
There not even a real country anyway...
In view of the Iranian leader's vow to, in his own words, "eradicate Israel," here's a question to pose to Mayor John Tory: Why is Toronto permitting yet another "Al Quds Day," an annual event initiated by the late Ayatollah Khomeini in order to "protest" Israel's effrontery in daring to exist, to take place in our city?In an instance of perfect timing, Gatestone's Bassam Tawil explains why the Khomeinists' "Justice, Peace & Love" palaver is a bunch of malarkey:
Yelling lies about Israel and Jews does not make one "pro-Palestinian." It only makes one an Israel-hater. Hating Israel does not improve human rights conditions for Palestinians living under Hamas and Fatah. Instead, it serves as a distraction and even facilitates Fatah and Hamas in suppressing public freedoms and human rights.'xactly!
Dear Mayor Tory,
I am dismayed and disgusted to see the City of Toronto—motto: Diversity is Our Strength—doing nothing to put the brakes on yet another Iran-sponsored Al Quds Day.
This is not about “free speech.” This is not about “free assembly.” This is about Iran’s desire to wipe out the sovereign Jewish State of Israel (see this: https://www.timesofisrael.com/khamenei-israel-a-cancerous-tumor-that-must-be-eradicated/).
There is no place for this sort of genocidal hatred in the city we both love.