|fart on conrad-izzy||question everything|
|fight lies||truth is beauty|
Top Of The List!
Canadians for Canada Coalition (CCC) - United Left, if you will - but bottom of the line - Get Rid of Corporate Government in Canada - 2004 Federal Election may be your last chance - act NOW PLEASE!!
The Debt Conspiracy Theory Fact - do you believe people who email you from Africa wanting to give you 10 million bucks? No? Well WHY DO YOU BELIEVE THE NATIONAL DEBT IS LEGITIMATE?!?!? (Sorry - I get excited about this...)
911 - as important as the debt scam - ask yourself why you are so afraid to admit the truth here, even when it's been kicking you in the face almost since it happened? When the world you live in is operating under a lie this big and obvious and monstrous, you have no security whatsoever.
Democracy - well - it is or it isn't. We're in control or not. What do you think?
RM-Vol 1 No ?? May 19/2003|
Wow - just ran across this - INTERIM DECISION of the HUMAN RIGHTS TRIBUNAL (Canada, of course! dated May 25 1998):
BETWEEN: SABINA CITRON and TORONTO MAYOR'S COMMITTEE ON COMMUNITY AND RACE RELATIONS Complainants - and - ERNST ZUNDEL Respondent - and - CANADIAN HUMAN RIGHTS COMMISSION
The RM archive copy - read it all here if the original link has problems
- I guess I better watch what I'm up to here. As I keep saying, this whole site is devoted to looking for some truth, to uncover some of the more serious lies that are being perpetrated by those who have stolen our government but pretend to govern democratically - but this decision in one of the Zundel hearings says in black and white that truth is basically irrelevant when legal decisions are rendered in certain situations - the accusations against Zundel being one of those situations. That is, since the people accusing Zundel of hate crimes are a "race", I guess you'd say, and racial discrimination is prohibited in the Charter of Rights, then you can't say anything that would make them look bad - even if it is true. Really - I'm not lying!! Look it up yourself! One of those crazy assumptions I make that occasionally just jump up and bite my bum - I had assumed that no-one could argue with the truth, at least about the big issues in public life in our country. Wrong again.
I'm not going to really say much about that - either you can see how ridiculous and even outrageous that is, or nothing I am going to say is going to change your mind about it. I really don't like a lot of the places this could lead to. And it's a hell of a precedent - imagine, now, for instance, this sex registry that is being talked about - I do believe the charter also says that sexual preference is a protected thing, so some of those high-paid lawyers could make a pretty good case that it doesn't matter what sort of sexual crimes these people have committed - telling the truth would make them look bad, so forget it, pal! (yes yes, I'm overlooking the PC aspect of things - saying bad things about at least some racial groups is just a no-no, and that's all there is to it - but anything goes with sexual perverts. Who said we had to be consistent anyway - what are ya, some kinda commie? You know what we do to smart-asses around here pal? Mmm-hmmm.)
Oh well, we have known for a long time that the truth is not that important in Canadian courts, although the mainstream media who are there as much as the courts to maintain the status quo aren't going to talk about it much - but I do recall a case a few years ago where some silly boy in Alberta, I believe it was, took Mulroney to court (Mulroney didn't show, of course) accusing him of lying during the election campaign about some promise. The judge dissed the guy pretty quick - saying something like "...anyone who believes a politician during an election campaign is simple-minded - case dismissed!" - so lying in elections is law of the land, you might say, sanctioned by the courts. Which, when you think about it, makes elections pretty useless (but we knew that anyway, didn't we - just testing!!)
Should also add that when I said the last time that we shouldn't live our lives in the past, I certainly wasn't saying we should forget it either - if bad things have been done, and the perpetrators not brought to justice, the books should indeed remain open. But as far as the so-called holacaust goes, well, Hitler's dead, and the Nuremburg trials were supposed to look after most of the perps - and I do believe that a lot of others have been hunted down since as well. So whatever happened, it was stopped, and the bad guys were punished. There are other things that remain unpunished however - the American supported wars and slaughters of the last half-century, for instance, although we don't read much about this in the media. We hear a lot about the 58,000 American soldiers who died during the Vietnam war, but a lot less about the 3,000,000 or so Vietnamese, Laotians and Cambodians. Or the half-million or so of East Timor, or the Philippines, or the hundreds of thousands in south and central America. Or more recently the illegal American destruction of Kosovo or Iraq, or the 1,000,000 or so Iraqis who have died during the last 12 years of American sanctions (don't start with the UN or NATO stuff - the US was and is responsible). Things like that - if there really was any god that these people keep calling on, he would have destroyed their violent land in a holacaust unlike any the world has seen since the flood, for their barbaric actions all around the world during the last 50 years. But no such luck - if these brutal slaughterers of innocents are ever going to face justice, it will be through a human court, not a divine one. I figure, however, unfortunately, the odds are a bit slim of that ever happening. As, obviously, do they.
If you want your own personal excursion into neverneverland, you might check out
The Iron Cage is our Matrix, by Elizabeth Nickson, National Post, Friday, May 16, 2003
No shit - would I lie about that? Backed up by several ad-hoc statistics (that is to say, no reference - which is understandable, as it would be difficult, I think, to find any even semi-serious stats for statements like our Canadian tax structure costs every family $12,000. yearly (that's right - twelve grand!!) - or that said taxes eat up 45% of GDP (right again - forty-five percent!!) - I don't think even the Frazer crazies dare go that far - but no prob for our Ms Nick.) And she lives in some fantasyland where she can say with whatever passes for a straight face with her that government regulation has been INCREASING over the last 15 years!! - apparently completely oblivious to the deregulation and privatisation that has been the hallmark of the last two Canadian BCNI/CCCE regimes, that have done such damage to everything from health care (I wonder if she heard of Walkerton out there in BC?) to Air Canada. But even that isn't the best part - at the end, she says that we poor misguided souls (alright, she didn't use those words, but that's the implication) in this sad socialist state north of the 49th are waiting for Neo - not to FREE us from the right-wing whackos like Ms Nick and her masters who have taken over our society and are in the process of creating a new feudalism with Ms Nick's masters as the feudal overlords and the rest of us as the drones supplying them with everything they desire, which is what the Matrix allegory is really all about (insofar as it has any application to Canada at all) - but, in her view, we are waiting for Neo to LEAD US INTO THE UTOPIA OF DEREGULATION, LOWLOWLOW TAXES, AND FREEDOM FROM THAT HORRIBLE GOVERNMENT BUREACRACY WE TOIL UNDER IN THIS COUNTRY!!!!
Sorry about all those caps - got carried away. But LORD TUNDERIN JAZUS B'Y ya gotta give it to these people, the way they can twist everything that happens into some form of supposed support for their crazy dystopian dream, or nightmare. Ms Nick is one of those elitists who doesn't really occupy the same world as most of us (National Post staff writer - about what you'd expect). She makes it clear that, regardless of her "interpretation", allegories such as the Matrix or Lord of the Rings are really amusing entertainments for children (one suspects she may just have had a glimmering of understanding that her interpretation of the film bore about as much relation to reality as her hilarious "statistics"), but people such as herself in the real world of Privilege are well above all such nonsense. Rose-colored glasses is, I guess, one way of putting this kind of world-view - head up the ass is another.
The RM archive copy - read it all here if the original link has problems
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS: With thanks to the Editors of the Toronto Star, Globe and Mail, Ottawa Citizen, Ch'town Guardian, Vancouver Sun, and others I cannot think of at the moment, for their refusal to print my letters over the last few years on various issues of national import - had I even a hope of being printed occasionally in these fora and my voice acknowledged in the national debate, I would undoubtedly have not bothered putting all this together. Cheers!