Another letter that The Star would not print.
RE: Compelling case to join the air war, Oct. 6
Those who fail to learn from history are doomed to repeat it.
I’m hardly the first to point out that the videos of ISIS members beheading Western journalists are obviously fake. Naomi Wolf is currently being lambasted in the media as a crazy tinfoil-hat for the mere suggestion that there may be more hype and spin than reality to the ISIS threat. It would not be the first time America has acted on a false pretext, as we know from the Gulf of Tonken incident among others.
A Letter they did not print…
I sent the Star a letter about this editorial:
But they weren’t biting.
"Salutin has a lot of nerve comparing the bond rating agencies to the oracle at Delphi. Not that he’s wrong, but its a little impious, considering The Star is just another oracle itself.
The Star gets its name not from the distant balls of gas, but from the goddess Ishtar. Her symbol was the pentagram, because of her association with the planet Venus, the parihelion of which traces a 5-pointed “star”. Her priestesses were “sacred prostitutes”, not unlike many Star editors and columnists.
The bond rating agencies are only one leg of the tripod stool occupied by our modern Delphic oracle, the financial markets. The other two are the various national securities agencies like the CSC, SEC, and FSA; and the various privately owned central banks of the Western liberal “democracies”. Perched precariously on this tripod, over the chasm wherein lays the rotting corpse of the she-dragon of financial collapse, the oracle inhales the noxious fumes of investor confidence and contorts in ecstatic fits.
Salutin paraphrases another ancient oracle, William Shakespeare. That fraud could barely sign his own name, so like all oracles, his words came from some mysterious source that we do not understand. The original quote from big Willie was “kill all the lawyers”, which is just a bit of slagging the competition, kind of like when Salutin rags on bond raters.”
RE: Stephen Harper’s incoherent approach to crime
Wrote a letter to the Star about this article (http://www.thestar.com/opinion/commentary/2014/06/28/stephen_harpers_incoherent_approach_to_crime.html), but it doesn’t look like they’re going to print it.
This article is a good example of how our system creates an illusion of debate. Harper makes some comments and some laws that the left-wing doesn’t like, so Canada’s richest, most famous defense lawyer and one of its elite criminologists step up to offer some “critical thinking”.
From the perspective of politicians, lawyers, and criminologists, the solution to crime is more of their services. “More laws, courts, and criminology studies are what’s needed here, people. We’ll civilize you silly commoner-slaves.”
These people have no clue about crime or how to stop it. They know how to run the system which pays them and plasters their names across newspapers. Part of making that system run, is the illusion of debate. If it looks like they’re up there fighting for your rights, then it all makes sense somehow that all three of these people are entirely employed by the state apparatus. I mean, its at least easier to swallow than the truth.
The truth is these people are overpaid, over-“educated” blowhards who talk better than they work. Their jobs would not exist without the fat, bloated colony of England which we know as “Canada”. They don’t understand one thing about the lives of people outside of their fishbowl of legislatures, court rooms, and ivory towers. Harper’s solution to crime is more police and jails, the Greenspans of the world want their clients to get more rights,and Doob wants you to buy his book.
In all the thousands of years since Hammurabi introduced codified law, has there ever been an era without crime? Are laws a solution to crime? Or courts? Or criminologists? We’ve had all these things for thousands of years (criminologists are just philosophers with a fancy name and none of them have written anything that Plato didn’t do better), yet somehow the crime keeps getting worse and the politicians, lawyers, and “intellectuals” get richer.
If you think evil is part of human nature, then you think it requires human ingenuity to solve this “problem”. Are Stephen Harper and Eddie Greenspan the solution to evil? Is another book about criminology going to solve evil? Maybe if you vote. Will that work?
Evil is not a problem, its a spirit. If you want to solve evil, start with your own heart.