(photo by Make Believe Photgraphy)
Shelley Cuthbert has achieved a certain measure of fame in the Yukon bit of Canada, but not in the way she would have preferred!
Shelley runs a rescue for dogs which require behavioral management. The goal of the rescue is to develop management plans for difficult dogs and adopt them out to people who have the experience and ability to manage such dogs. The rescue also boards other dogs long term, and handles dog control for the First Nations. Which makes the rescue a kind of revolving door for problem and unwanted dogs. Problem is she's been involved in a dispute over the last many months involving a few neighbours who seem to find living next to half a hundred dogs objectionable.
Understandable though that might be, the consequences of their annoyance have been piling up to a ridiculous level, actually to the point of driving Shelley and company from her personally owned home in the unincorporated settlement of Tagish, Yukon.
How this odd situation came about is a long story but to hit the key points: First of all its important to state that Shelley is a fully qualified mental health nurse who through a series of career choices ended up running a dog rescue in the Yukon. Obviously Shelley cares about the well-being of her animals. The evidence for that is everywhere you care to look. Feeding 50 dogs requires a thousand dollars a month for one example.
But nowhere is it more evident than in the fact that Shelley has actually chosen to adopt a homeless lifestyle rather than to take the obvious step of destroying her dogs, as her neighbours and a certain Yukon Judge clearly would have preferred her to do.
The striking thing about the situation is that a hundred years ago anyone owning 50 dogs would have been esteemed rather than despised as a "crazy dog lady" due to the fact that a large number of dogs back then represented success and prosperity. At the time of writing Shelley's whereabouts is unknown. Apparently, nobody but her and her 45 remaining dogs know just where she is, but it does beg the question: just how does one go about hiding 45 dogs?? There would be even more to hide but the courts have ordered at least some of them "euthanized" or "killed", in the local vernacular.
Now picture a woman cradling a 13 yr old dog that saved her daughter's life from CO2 poisoning, in her arms, as it slowly dies due to the lethal cocktail injected into its circulatory system by a veterinarian. Picture her being forced through fines and liens against her personally owned property to watch 4 of the dogs in her care destroyed this way until both the vet and herself were in tears and simply couldn't continue.
Thankfully the owners of the other 6 dogs came forward and spared her the ordeal of watching them die too. Unbelievably, Shelley has been held in contempt of court for Not following the courts order to have all the dogs in her care destroyed! Contempt of court! Are we North Korea? Yes it is annoying to be woken at 5 AM by the neighbours barking dogs, but using the court to force a woman to destroy her own family, for that is what a pet is to a single person, surely is a bit of overkill? And how is it even legally possible for the territorial court to force anyone to do anything regarding personal property in an unincorporated village? This has got to be one of the most ridiculous cases of coerced Gov't overreach ever attained in the once free Yukon.
As for Shelley, she's keeping up an amazingly positive attitude where many would simply despair, while she looks for a new situation for herself and her rather large and motley "dogteam" A place more isolated from neighbours, with any kind of rude shelter would be more than attractive to her at this point. And she can pay some rent. Any takers?
This head-scratcher makes you wonder though: was no other solution possible? What if the territory had made an offer of swapping her property for something less developed and more remote for instance? And what's with neighbours who choose to involve authorities in annoyance issues rather than taking a six-pack over and sitting down face to face to discuss the situation? Might that have prevented this sad scenario?
Follows a brief statement from Shelley Cuthbert herself: (slightly edited) "The dogs remaining at the time if the court case were my personal, other people's, and dogs whom do not meet the criteria set out by the Yukon government to be adopted. I choose to be homeless to prevent healthy dogs from losing their lives. (I agree the neighbours were adamant my dogs be handed over when the courts and everyone else were informed they would be killed) The vet was very empathic to the situation and supportive. There were 6 other dogs that previous owners requested they have the opportunity to euthanize (even though they had been surrendered to the rescue). These dogs were like my personal and had been with me for many yrs. In total 10 dogs lost their lives due to a court order demanding I surrender dogs to the government even though they did not meet their criteria to be safely adopted out due to liability issues. This effectively condemned them to death. It also needs to be said the neighbours are only seasonal and one neighbours lit is empty as he lives elsewhere. The one seasonal couple comes over on tourist visa every year. The neighbour who testified lives in Whitehorse and appears in Tagish periodically. The other two neighbours are also seasonal."
Come on Yukoners, in the spirit of this great region, lets find a better solution for Shelley and her animals than this!
Alberta, unloved and twice rejected, was once the beloved crown jewel of Canada.
Alberta boasts rich agricultural land, seas of swaying prairie grass, a defunct dinosaur place, rugged majestic mountains with enormous peaks and vast underground pools of oil and bulging pockets of methane gas.
That last one though has recently highlighted what is perhaps Alberta's biggest problem: It's a landlocked province with no easy accessibility to ocean ports!
And two generations of the Trudeau family have used this defect to torture the province to no end, to the enormous pleasure of the Saudis. Alberta is clearly seaport challenged and of course, in a functional country, this would present more of an opportunity than a liability. Friendly business transactions could take place to move their valuable product to the port of Vancouver, to Texas, to the eastern regions of Canada, and from those destinations to the world at large. However, we Canadians are clearly living in a dysfunctional country, eh?
The senior Trudeau, Pierre Elliot was no raving fan of the west and the west was never seen worshippng swayingly, arms outstretched, at his besocked feet either, so if we're waiting eagerly for Trudeau the younger to make emotional outpourings of sympathy toward Alberta, I would suggest finding an amusing hobby of some kind.
All we can expect is some few words perhaps and a forced toothy grin from our well-haired leaderette.
Recently in fact, she was caught in, to be polite, what could be termed a bold-faced lie. Justin denied, in Parliament, ever saying that the current rising prices for gasoline are "exactly what we want" . And there was something else in that previously recorded speech about encouraging better behavior from Canadians. On that, Justin and I concur wholeheartedly! I definitely would prefer to see better behavior from all Canadians, especially from myself, along with all the rest of us, and the Prime Minister! Better behavior, better results and who would be stupid enough to argue with that? The question though, is just exactly what constitutes better behavior and there is going to be a lot of different opinions on that topic, my friend!
Can I be perfectly frank? No I cannot because that is not my name and i don't know any perfect franks anyway. Nevertheless, by this one statement, Justin has shown himself to be totally out of touch with the vast majority of Canadians. We live in a sprawling land; it is huge in fact! (Duckduckgo The Arrogant Worms: Canadas Really Big, if you don't believe me)
I spent two days just driving from my home in the southern yukon to near the community of Fort McPherson, near the Arctic coast! A magnificent drive! I loved it, but i digress. Zooming back as with a digital map, the two day trip didn't even put a scratch on Canada! Our friends and colleagues are separated by enormous distance, as are the products we consume daily. What makes the whole thing tick tock as well as it does is one simple thing: Energy, usually in the form of oil and gas. I smile when I see a tanker of fuel coming up the alaska highway because i know what it means! Our perhaps well-meaning, grinning PM obviously does not! And who will ultimately bear the burden of that willful ignorance?
I've often had the thought that business, all business in fact, should go on strike for just a week. I think some people inhabiting this fair land would have a different perspective on such trifles as "resources" and who brings them to their doorstep by the end of the seven days. (Hint: Its Not the Gov't of Canada)
Well, looks like Maybe I will Maybe I wont just became guess what I did and I'm proud of it. MAGA. WOOT WOOT!!!!!!!!!
He's right about one thing. MAGA. Maga Mistakiosoamundo. Does the man and the people who pushed for the strike on Syria really not get that the people who put him there are largely against going to war with anyone and they voted for him in good faith believing he meant what he said about limiting the military and focusing on building US infrastructure, creating jobs and all that rot? Heck, the betrayal is so bad its even got Alex jones crying, and swearing! On the air!
If you've been paying attention, even just a little in between watching reruns of the Walking Dead and heading for the fridge, you must have noticed that America is continually at war with someone and the purpose is clearly never to win. Rather, as Orwell once warned, "War is not meant to be won , it is meant to be continuous." We are informed at great length of how evil some leader of another country is and then, strangely, off we go to war with his victims, killing them off in rapid succession as if to limit their suffering at his evil hands. This has always struck me as a bit odd. Surely if the purpose were to rid the people of Syria or Libya or Iraq or Afghanistan of their vile ruler, could that not be done more quickly and more effectively on a more personal level than by scattering all of his victims to the winds of the cosmos?
So, putting it to rest then once and for all, yes the war is meant to be continuous. The military industrial complex has to have conflict in order to survive financially let alone to prosper and issue dividends to it's stockholders. Think of the stockholders, man! Conflict or the threat of it is in fact, it's very lifeblood. At the very least the fear of the enemy has to be stirred continually in order to justify the continual suckling at the governmental teat. Yes, it is your taxes which make war possible.
War contractors and others of unscrupulous nature have to justify their existences in some way. Apparently, stealing money from the working class outright wouldn't look too good so some of them devise arguments for it's release. I'm at the point where i think it would be better for the lot of us if our war taxes were simply stolen rather than used as they are. I mean wouldn't it be better for us all to have the taxes stolen than misused as so many of them are? The arguments for the various expenses are becoming more and more insane and frail by the day. You can see through them "like spam in a ziplock bag" Leslie Nielson in "Wrongfully Accused". Somewhere someone is laughing his head off at our gullibility. Are they really going to buy this bovine excrement? That we're doing this because of our moral outrage that Putin might have almost killed somebody in England?? What a gas!!!
Yet the problem is so much bigger than the loss of the sweat of the productive class. When our taxes are used counter-productively, as in the airstrike against Syria, or on a politically useless and perhaps destructive visit to India, for example, wouldn't it be better for us all if the money were not spent at all? The justification for the use of public resources is worse than the theft!!!
In this particular case, with nuclear-armed Russia watching none too lovingly from the north, the stakes are way too high for us to be haphazardly lobbing bombs into Syria's capital .
Like my neighbour is fond of saying, 'No matter who you vote for the government always gets in!"
And gov't is not meant to be a temporary solution, it is meant to be continuous, same as our wars.
We need to rein them in. In a true democracy each individual would have the right to decide at the very least, into which field of endeavour he wants his taxes directed. Wouldn't that make sense? 30% to medical, 20% to education, and the rest to feed to homeless one-legged, one-eyed, BLT refugees from Uzbekistan for example?
Or, at a minimum, we get a vote on where the resources go. See Switzerland for an example of how that works, for example. They get to vote on all sorts of things over there instead of giving the key to the kindergarten to the emotionally unstable. And another thing, they have seven political leaders, not just one! And guess what? It works! Lets try that here!
It is concerning and not just a bit unsettling to consider the effect the last election has had on great white north dwellers. We now have a socialist administration which is apparently bent on leading the world's great charge on gender, farmers, babies, people bent on discussing foreign religions and non-violent gun owners whilst showcasing our prime ministerial dance moves and costume-donning abilities in foreign countries. I don't get it.
The list of prime ministerial oddities is long and amusing and would be sad if not so terribly funny! I've always had a dank sense of dark humor but even with that in full operation, it is difficult to watch the best example-setter Kanuckistan can produce telling a vet who lost a leg that there is nothing more the country can do for him. And not so long after that, chiding a woman for using a gender-specific pronoun, (how dare she???) insisting instead that she use "peoplekind" to avoid the use of that awful millenials-old term "MAN". Proving this was not "meant as a joke" is the later appearance of the directive forcing civil servants to address moms and dads as parent 1 and parent 2. No word yet on which gender gets the number 1 designation. A matter for the courts. Oh right! I just remembered. We don't have genders in Canada. My bad.
If "Just in for one term" is to be congratulated for any one specific thing, it would be for his stunning ability to ignore the naysayers and press on with his own peculiar, (not to use the forbidden word queer) agenda in the face of a full frontal assault by those stubbornly holding to the most basic forms of common sense. How does he do that? How can he ignore so much opposition while remaining unphased? Most of us would have backed down months ago in discouragement and gone with the general flow of thinking of those who elected him, but apparently, his upbringing has led him to believe that the way to run a country is to show 'em who's boss, plunging ahead and never to be deturd! And for this there are plenty of world leaders to emulate these days, men who don't take nyet for an answer: Erdogan, Sisi, Kim, Duterte, Zuma, Merkel, May... Plenty of examples, in fact too many, way too many!!
Yet it's all just a bit confusing too. Our PM is doing all this to what end? Sort of like watching an intoxicated sailor stumbling this way and that, puking occasionally in between propositioning the onboard dames, completely unaware of his slurring speech and putrid smell. Because It's one thing to take charge and show em all who's de boss. But quite another to be able to plot an acceptable, honorable and worthy course for the nation you are leading to work towards.
And this message is for the liberal party of canada whom i do not support and will be forever unlikely to support but still you peoples here it is, my precious notion: If you entertain any hope whatsoever of retaining your tenuous grip on political power...do something and do it right now rather than now. Distance yourselves from this spectacle of a peoplekind, or she will drag you all, kicking and screaming into a permanent abyss of gender-confused, financially irresponsible, farmer-hating, free-speech gagging, dope-inhaling political hell. She may have gotten you into power, you've got your use of her, now its' time to cow-people-up and listen to the men and women who put you there.
The ever-level-headed and mostly imperturbable Conrad Black, in a recent piece in the National Post, opined that: "Costumed naval-gazing.. and robotic repetition of the pieties of gender equality were not what inspired the builders of this country." (partial quote)
And i'd like to chime in stating I think that would be a fairly safe assumption!
The Canadian Pacific Railway, for all its difficulties, was not plagued with a lot of hand-wringing concern over which of the 32 genders the builders selected for themselves. Gay parades were "infrequent at best" and Prime Ministerial costume balls, almost unheard of.
I really shouldn't comment on the amount of dope the workers consumed, although doubtless there was some. But judging by the quality of the construction of the completed cross-country railroad and the excellence of service it has rendered these many decades, it is pretty clear that most of the brain cells of the designers and builders had to be functioning at a fairly acceptable level of operation, a level which our current leadership can only hope to eventually attain.
Personally, I am not against the legalislation of marijuana, or for that matter, the legalisation of a great many other freedoms we have regularly been denied. We are being regulated into full servitude by governments all over this flying rock and any loosening of the necktie, even involving something like the legalization of dope, is surely a "breath of fresh air" if you'll forgive the pun.
However, its another thing entirely when your leadership thinks its a great idea to harness the nations sweat and use it to establish a brand new dope-selling industry!! What exactly is that in your pipe, Justin? Oh sure, I know, 500 million might not seem like all that much money to most of us , but you know, half a billion here and half a billion there and it starts to really add up!
And the great payoff of this investment will be what exactly?
Increased employment for addictions counsellors. Just. Great. How did we get along without that so long, eh?
And here it might be apprope to mention a whole bunch of probable negative effects of expanding the use of hallucinogenic drugs in Canada and we probably should: increased accident rates, low job performance, increased time off work, added addictions counselling, potential for law suits against the state... should i continue?
Children not receiving adequate levels of care, damage to private and public property, increased violent crime required for obtaining the money to buy the drugs, legal or not...and this: unemployed drug dealers! What to become of them??? What about that guy in the nondescript black Lambourg who was happily making his way through life hawking all those little green bags? Whatever will he do now?
And do we suppose the old-school dealers will all quietly fold their businesses and take up knitting sweaters? With what will they replace their incomes then, or do we expect them to simply all disappear in puffs of bluish smoke? Or perhaps they will ramp up the "quality" of the material they push, to a new illegal level?
And all of this this is the smokey vision our Prime Minister smilingly advocates for helping Canada recover from our "extremely poor" record of managing our public finances? Allow me to humbly suggest that if we think increasing the amount of marijuana consumed in this country is going to add a single doubloon to the collective till, or in any way shape or form increase the standard of living in Canada, we need to do a whole lot less of our own product testing!!
Come on Canada! Surely we can come up with a better "Vision" that!
The rigging hangs limp
The sea is flat oil
The sailors lie about
Weary of their toil
The anchor line drags
From the side of the ship
The frayed end of it torn
As the aged hull lists
Nations like ships can suffer becalms
Directionless, purposeless hopeless and dull
People need purpose, direction and plans
These are the things that fight the doldrums!!!
South Africa: Could It Happen Here?
Jacob Zuma the beleagured president of South Africa has openly called for the legal confiscation of white-owned land in South Africa, following on the heels of the events of Zimbabwe, where this was done and the white farmers were invited back after disastrous hyper-inflation and other maladies gripped the then impoverished country.
I am not a white supremacist. I don't personally believe in "races" at all so much as individual family groups on a larger scale. Not to put it too crudely, but if you took a few dachshunds and salted a remote island with them and returned in thirty years, what would you expect to find? Rottweilers?
The same thing has happened with human families, isolated as they were for millenia without internet, airmiles or other travel and informational aids. They intermarried locally, for the most part and the result was familial characteristics becoming more pronounced in certain regions. Now, however, it seems we're all going on about how one race abused another race and how such a race is a victim of another race and besides that we are all vicitims anyway...
Well, I'm not buying into that fertilizer factory. I think a man should be judged on what he produces in this life; what he produces which is of temporary or lasting value should determine his worthiness.
"Whites have built buildings and so have "blacks" and people of every "race" you can name. To suggest that "white land" whatever that is, should be confiscated because it was taken from "the blacks" is patently absurd. When a settler moved in, the locals for whatever reason obviously welcomed him. Maybe he represented employment opportunity, or maybe he entered the area as a servant and so was accepted. He and his family may have produced more from their farming than they consumed and traded the rest for goods and services and prospered, largely no doubt through the process of getting up in the morning and doing something productive. And now, generations later, someone wants that for which others have toiled, without compensation, because of some perceived disadvantage due to the color of their skin?
Jacob Zuma should be set aside for retirement purposes by his own "black" people! How condescending of him to suggest that his family group is not capable of productive activity without the aid of governmental regulation and violence against the whites!!
Lets put this in Olympic terms, just for fun, shall we? If the Germans won all the medals, someone from Canada might stand up and suggest the only way for his fellow canadians to win a medal would be to eliminate the Germans from the Olympics. Thereby indirectly suggesting that a) the Germans are much too good at sports to be defeated, and b), Canadians can't win without resorting to trickery and violence. I would hope that Canadians everywhere would cowboy up and yell in defiance, "what do you MEAN, we cannot win against the GERMANS"? HOLD MY BEER!!!"
And I hope the "black" South Africans do the same! I have every confidence they can succeed as farmers, doctors and all the other trades without the help of a 70 something racist.
THE STRANGE CASE OF LAURA PLUMMER
Ever hear of Laura Plummer? I bet not. And you likely never would have if it were not for a peculiar set of circumstances which placed Laura in a most unenviable situation.
Laura Plummer is a British citizen who, while travelling abroad, became involved with an Egyptian man. They fell in love and so on and according to several reports, he had some back problems which were troubling to them both.
On a trip to Egypt Laura, a shop worker, thought to remedy the situation a bit by bringing her friend 290 Tramadol pills. Unbeknowst to Laura, the trap was set when she packed them in a clear plastic bag and placed them on top of her things in her travel bag, a trap which would lead her to a mandatory 3 year sentence in an Egyptian prison.
Her innocent act of kindness turned into the worst nightmare imaginable as life in an Egyptian prison does not bring with it the benefits we have come to expect in western jails, Satellite tv, 3 meals a day, regular exercise, a bit of sunlight perhaps, a modicum of privacy? Forget all of these. Instead, Laura finds herself today in an overcrowded jail, without a bed or a blanket, using a pack of sanitary napkins for a pillow on the floor, and she depairs knowing she will be spending the next three years of her life in this deplorable state.
How could this happen? In short, not all legal systems function alike. And this is one of the risks everyone should be aware of when visiting some of the more human-rights challenged lands on the planet. If you find yourself, like Laura, in a prison such as this one, what options do you have? The decision to show you mercy does not rest with your parents, or your friends, or even the political leaders of your birth country. It lies entirely with the authorities in the country where you, whether inadvertently or not, breeched the law. And the possible punishments are not limited to the humane as they are in the west. Some offences for instance, carry the death penalty. No doubt in Egypt, it will be argued that Laura deserved far worse than the 3 year sentence she received!
The problem lies in the way medications are treated differently in terms of legality in various countries. According to wikipedia, for instance:
"Effective August 18, 2014, tramadol has been placed into Schedule IV of the federal Controlled Substances Act in the United States. In addition, many states, including Arkansas, Georgia, Kentucky, Illinois, Mississippi, New York, North Dakota, Ohio, Oklahoma, South Carolina, Tennessee, West Virginia, Wyoming and the U.S. military have already classified tramadol as a Schedule IV controlled substance under state law.
Tramadol is classified in Schedule 4 (prescription only) in Australia, rather than as a Schedule 8 Controlled Drug (Possession without authority illegal) like most other opioids.
Effective May 2008, Sweden classified tramadol as a controlled substance in the same category as codeine and dextropropoxyphene, but allows a normal prescription be used currently.
The UK classified tramadol as a Class C, Schedule 3 controlled drug on 10 June 2014, but exempted it from the safe custody requirements."
Egypt, apparently frowns on this particular drug and so, whether Laura was trying to bring it into Egypt openly or attempting to hide the fact is irrelevant. The law was broken and punishment must ensue. Tramadol is in fact an opiate.
This case illustrates the tragedy of laws with minimum sentences, with no regard to the intentions of the perpetrator, in this case noble, trying to allieviate her friend's pain. Even the fact that she made no attempt to hide the pills but deliberately exposed them to authorities makes no difference in this case. One would think that showing them to the border officers could have been seen as a request for permission to bring them into Egypt rather than an attempt at smuggling them, but no. If it had been seen as a request, perhaps a simply shaking of the head together with a destruction of the pills would be adequate.
As it now stands, the family, the boyfriend, her other friends and of course Laura herself have no choice but to endure the sentence, the pain of separation and possible injury or death in an uncontrollable environment. And perhaps the most pitiable part is that Laura is a young and beautiful girl with her life ahead of her. Should she really have to endure such suffering, all for the crime of attempting to alleviate the suffering of her friend in a world where caught-red-handed murderers are routinely set free on the defense of insanity? In a world where terrorists like Omar Kdhar are given 10.5 million dollars as a settlement for their pain and suffering by the Canadian government?
Donate to her fund. Pressure your politicians. Perhaps common sense will rear its ugly head and bring about the desirable result for a change... the release and full pardon of Laura Plummer. I'm sure she will never make such a mistake again, and neither will anyone familiar with her story. And dear Egyptian authorities: your point has been made.
And here's a recent clip of a conversation with Laura's sister Rachel:
" Laura had with her a mixture of painkillers packed in her suitcase all in original boxes in a pharmacy bag, 290 tramadol and 114 naproxen, just a bag of painkillers to Laura but to egypt she may as well of brought heroin in because that’s what the class Tramadol as! The naproxen is not a banned drug so these where no a problem, but does that not tell the world that she was really just bringing them for pain relief? She doesn’t know anything about tramadol or naproxen for that matter , all she knew is that they where a good painkiller for back pain."
Recent development! Laura has been moved to a less crowded cell , she has food and water and a bed for the first time since her arrest! She is in the same cell as another British woman and they are getting on great together,,Her message to us was not to worry about her!
February 15, 2018
It appeared for a time almost certain that Laura would be shown mercy and released, however, after an agonizing wait the family learned this would not be the case! The emotional torture continues for the family...
Imagine a world, if you will, where broadcasters create the news, rather than merely reporting it, a world where acceptable thought is dictated to the people, and any annoying disidents are silenced by the sheer numbers of the daily brainwashed.
Is it possible that a world filled to the lid with dishonesty, could find the voice of a politician who is brutally honest about what he feels, refreshing?
I believe this is the core reason for the election of Donald Trump. And love him or hate him or schizophreniclly both at once, you have to admit that there is a certain segment, a certain very large segment of the American population who wanted a man in charge who dares to say unpopular, incorrect and abrasive things from the halls of political power. A demographic who is ready to revolt against the flowery language or fake, plastic, politically correct speech without the reality of a dirty-handed caring example of a life to go along with the voice.
The American mainstream media, controlled as it is by a few ultra-wealthy individuals, is having a hard time grasping the fact that flowery, politically correct language does not appeal to the average trucker, welder or carpenter. That there are people walking amongst us who actually believe that people from different cultures who are, in fact different, that there are only two genders, and that not everyone gets excited enough for a stripey piece of cloth to die defending it.
I never even heard of Barack Obama until he suddenly appeared as a candidate, and I never heard of Donald Trump until he began his run for the presidency. But the idea that he had his own wealth and didn't have to bow to the masterminds behind the US political system sounded appealing. Surely someone like him, with his strong opinions and business experience would be just the man to start the country back in the direction it needed, if not necessarily wanted, to go. And the motto, "Make America Great Again", held appeal as well. The genius of the slogan, by the way, is that everyone who sees it interprets it differently, for greatness means different things to different people. One interprets it to mean a peaceful and harmonious society while the next sees greatness in terms of military dominance. Also, who doesn't want his homeland to be "great", after all?
So, we have this man ostensibly in charge of what is still perhaps the most significant military power on the earth. And we watch as the bought media reels from one side of the ship to the other attempting to discredit everything he does, from feeding fish wrong, to drinking his water wrong, to pointing out every act of subtle insurrection within his chosen ranks. Its pretty clear the owners of most of the major outlets, as well as many of the reporters enjoying their salaries simply hate the man! It's as if, in fact, the term "unbiased reporting" is a phrase to which they have never given the slightest consideration!
On another note, I admit I remember a time, when "the news" consisted of tightly packed stories of car crashes, plane highjackings, apartment fires, floods and the like. These days, shocking occurrences like the latest Vegas shooting rate barely a blip on the mainstream radar, and immediately we're back to the antics of Mr Trump, or the latest "allegations" from "sources".
Its almost as if the owners of the outlets are directing the writers and producers of "the news" what to say and how to say it and for how long to say it. For the next three months you're going to talk about sexual harassment, and then we're going to shift to the latest developments in Jerusalem. Imagine a world, if you will, where broadcasters create the news, rather than merely reporting it, a world where acceptable thought is dictated to the people, and any annoying disidents are silenced by the sheer numbers of the daily brainwashed.
Well, here we are nearing the end of 017 and Trump has just announced that Jerusalem is the capital of Israel.
If Kim Jong Un were to announce that Calgary was the capital of Canada, what would we think of that?
Donald Trump is a tornado in a junkyard. You never know what he is going to stir up next, but he sure does know how to capture attention!
"The difference between capitalism and socialism is that capitalism is mans exploitation by man and socialism is just the other way around."
So it would seem. There is however a glaring difference. The capitalist is doing what he does for the purpose of generating a profit for himself and perhaps his shareholders while the socialist has no such desire. The socialist sees life a little differently and instead of trying to invest in property and activity which will increase the wealth, is more focused on re-distributing the wealth which the capitalist has created. It seems somehow unfair to the socialist that the businessman has been able through hard work and opportunity to amass wealth for himself. This is judged as being selfish in consideration of the fact that most people aren't so successful in accumulating wealth. The socialist therefore, taking his cue from Robin Hood, is ready and willing to even the score.
If individual property rights were totally withdrawn, worldwide, and placed under the authority of a central world government what would we have? Some benefits for sure! International borders could be eliminated. Currency exchange fee could be eliminated overnight. All wages equalized. Freedom baby! With all that wealth available for redistribution no one would have to work again! Well, not quite so fast...
Roofs still leak, people eat. They need transportation. In fact, all needs and appetites go on as before under our newly-formed One World Gov't. And so, very quickly conscriptions would be ordered forcing the able- bodied to mow the lawns, fix the roofs, farm the farms and haul the travelers to their destinations. Not for profit, mind but just because. In effect, we now live under a new form of oppressor, only now the oppressor is the central govt and those he appoints beneath him. And, and, And, not one of them will have the slightest clue about how to handle wealth and turn it into more wealth. Instead the economy will be a spending economy. Slowly ridding ourselves of the wealth the free market managers of the past created. A little like taking the piano away from Mozart and dividing its component parts among the masses. Wherever did the music go?
NOVEMBER 11, 2017
Answer #3 should scare us all. And even though I am a canadian, it scares me! oooooooooowwwwww!!!! And it's a valid complaint not only in the US but in a lot of other countries as well. And though certainly thousands and probably millions of pieces have been written outlining the problem, mulitiple huge protests have been formed and endless visits to politicians have been endured all over this blue ball hanging in space over nothing, little has changed. A certain tiny wedge of the pie, representing such a miniscule segment of the population as to be physically insignificant, effectively controls the lives of billions of us tiny creatures, causing us to leave our homes early in the morning hours and work throughout the days of our lives, producing the fuel, which is consumed by the aircraft carriers and the jetfighters whose pilots carry out endless destruction in foreign lands for the purpose of enriching the bulging coffers of the rich.
And with all the digibich that's been done, can we point to any improvement? I think we can! Imagine for a second, if no one complained, if wikileaks had never been formed, Snowden hadn't spoken, if the money crowd had been given free unrestrained control with no accountability whatsoever? How much farther down the destructive road might we now be?
Journalists have sacrificed their very lives bringing the darkest secrets to the broad light of day. Should we forget them on Remembrance Day? Should we only celebrate the lives lost in the pursuit of perpetual warfare and forget those who have lost their lives trying to prevent it or bring it to an end?
Might it be a good day to remember Martin Luther King, John F Kennedy, Ghandi and so many others who gave their all in the pursuit of peace?
Is this another article condemning the rich and the powerful and offering jackcrap for solutions? I don't mean it to be. I think the solutions lie within ourselves. The butcher, baker and candlestick makers of this world, all those who feel powerless to change the situation, who are caught in the web of the powerful and have no time or energy left to fight the system. What was it exactly that propelled ordinary people to fight and kick at the darkness til it bled daylight? Wasn't it simply that they reached a point in life of simply not caring about protecting themselves and their comfortable ways of life, a point at which they decided that they simply had to fulfill the purpose for which they were born? They could have taken the easy road, like so many of us disgracefully do. Shh! Don't say that in public! Keep quiet and just do your job. That's none of your business. Just keep that to yourself! Why bring trouble on yourself and your *gasp* children?
No. They decided to abandon caution, to challenge what they knew to be false and evil, to correct ancient wrongs. They risked and risk charges of insanity, lack of patriotism, recklessness and even hostility. They endured opposition such as most of us will never realize exists, and the closer to the prize they got the worse the persecutions became, many times involving inprisonment and torture, even death. And there's no Remembrance Day for them, although they are not forgotten. Sadly though, most of the corruption they fought so bravely lives on. And the reason is they were mainly abandoned and even opposed by those who could have stood and fought with them and overcome! Those who have the courage and desire to fight the wicked are precious, few and far between.
It is ridiculous in the extreme, ludicrous and perhaps obscene to see the great mass of people allowing a microscopically tiny group of individuals control the money supply for their own profit, alter the laws of the land to legalize the vilest of crimes, to protect their own from any and all legal recourse, regardless of the gravity of their crimes. Why do we allow this to go on and on, costing us the very lives of our youngest and brightest and best?
Protests have been tried. But the reality is the normal bloke on the street doesnt have six months to protest. Practical matters of survival soon take effect and the crowd disperses and business goes on as usual. All they have to do is wait us out.
Letter writing campaigns to politicians have been tried. But, come on, logically if youre a pol and a letter hits your desk with no check enclosed and a billionaire makes an opposite appeal and includes a bit of cabbage with the request, who will tempt your attention the most?
A petition? Oh no! Not A petition!!! Again, a petition is just a piece of paper, and it may raise an eyebrow, but ultimately the general population in taxpayer hell is going to bow to the force of authority and the fear of punishment and death as they always do, and they know it.
What gives the powerful their control? Currency. Their legal ability and right to print currency is what gives the owners of the central banks their authority over us all. And to take the point a bit further, really their power lies in our own minds, in our own ascribing of value to those little numbers on the teller's screen and the rectangular bits of parchment and now even plastic which we hold so dear, spending most of our waking hours pursuing! Who controls the creation of currency rules over us all. But, currency itself was invented as a mere convenience, to eliminate the hauling of cows and duck to the city to exchange for wheels for the wagon. Can we live without the convenience of currency? Of course we can!
Barter, the simple act of trading goods for goods, worked for thousands of years and it works today as well. Nations engage in it and so do individuals, sometimes bypassing all the troubling numbers on the screen. We should be doing more and more of this, not less! What is it about bringing home the paper and exchanging that for avocados that makes the deal so much more enjoyable than simply making a trade, goods for goods?
Another huge barrier to changing the status quo, and maybe the only real one though is
the belief in, the almost worship of the state as a real physical Being who cares and provides for us all, caring for us as a loving mother would from cradle to coffin. The illusion of the state is a comforting apealling one to many of us, and it is an illusion, because the State produces absolutely nothing any of us can eat, sit upon or wear! All it can ever do is rob peter to pay Paul, and the vast majority are quite willing to settle for being Paul and have their needs met at the expense of those filthy souls who soil their hands at the plow and the oil derrick. This is the real problem and gives the state it's perpetual power. As long as the population is provided for at a minimal level of sustenance, who is going to be fool enough to rebel? A comfortable couch, a tv, some beer in the fridge and a game to look forward to on the weekend and what more do we require? So in the minds of many, why change, why complain, why fight a system like that? To many, this is a valid argument. And when one considers the dire straights people in other countries endure, it is tempting to simply drop the keyboard and coast sleepily through life with the crowd.
And if, if... this situation would continue in its present state, it might not be worth the effort of opposing the system now in place in canada, for instance. However, one glance at any chart of canada's economic situation will quickly reveal the waterfall ahead. And we can continue to believe that somehow, ignoring the situation of our trillion dollar debt load will make it go away, but using basic logic, it's pretty clear that those we owe this gargantuan sum to will eventually demand, not request, repayment. Another glance toward Greece or Venezuela, should be enough to convince that every socialist utopia has an expiry date.
Weellll, as for me, I don't owe much of anything, except the continuing debt to love one another, and i've pretty much given up on inspiring my fellow Canadians to rebel. It'g going to have to get a lot more uncomfortable in this country before more than a couple gophers in Saskatchewan are going to organize to fight tyranny. In the meantime, maybe you might consider learning to produce the goods you consume, find some like-minded individuals, if you can, and form local systems of barter and realize, deep down inside, that the fool's paradise we now occupy cannot possibly continue for very much longer.
Thanks for reading and happy bartering!