Liberal hysterics on Al Aqsa, Vladimir Putin's Canadian fanbase, Emanuel Macron: Loathed at Home, Loved in Beijing, and Xi's Man in the Senate Beclowns Himself Again.
Once again Terry, an outstanding update on the current state of affairs which the vast majority of voters in Canada are blissfully unaware of. How else can one explain the blind adherence of the Trudeau cult supporters?
Thanks, Terry. I’m glad you’re finally on the mend. The only reasons I can think of for Trudeau and his cabal’s ignorant, hateful treatment of Israelis are: 1) they really are anti-Semitic; or 2) there are more votes to be gained by their repeated hateful rhetoric and behaviour; or 3) both.
Yes, likely. Everything with Trudeau and the gang is couched in something. As to imbecility, that is a given as imbecilic rhetoric and behaviour seem to be prerequisites for being a Trudeau Cabinet and maybe even caucus member.
Perhaps that’s one reason Trudeau appointed Amira Elghawaby to combat Islamophobia. I see she wants to remove negative stereotypes about Muslim from our books. I’m waiting for a blasphemy law next. That’s what the Organization of Islamic Cooperation really wants.
See my post above with the 2021 census numbers. About five times more Muslims than Jews in Canada, and the Muslims tend to be concentrated in several ridings in Toronto and Montreal giving them more electoral power (more seats in parliament). The Jews seem to be more spread out, so less electoral power. Looks like the Liberals have figured this out, so expect more condemnations of Israel from Trudeau and the Liberals.
Right on. I was literally ( now I sound like a 14 year old myself, like, you know) but , like , literally this evening, in a discussion with my friend Rick, saying that Justin saw the world like a 16 year old.
Then I thought of Churchill's comment about Austen Chamberlain, briefly foreign minister, that he saw the world " through the wrong end of a municipal drainpipe." No relevance at all, but my favourite Churchill putdown.
Imagine the howling if the devil incarnate himself (Stephen Harper) did half nay 1/8 of what Trudeau has done. People rightly make fun of the 80's haircut bands but sadly not our haircut politicians.
Jean Paul Sartre was pro-Stalin and KGB controlled via a “swallow” - a Kremlin prostitute-spy.
Sartre and life partner in crime Simone de Beauvoir turned Maoist when Khrushchev was accused of revisionism.
Beauvoir penned The Long March An Account of Modern China - a 501-page Maoist puff piece.
Khmer Rouge elite were indoctrinated by French Communist Party.
Michel Foucault was militant Iran revolution supporter. Iran, along with China and Russia, leads Eurasian project.
Today, Simone de Beauvoir Institute, for example, continues to indoctrinate troubled minds into bad ideology. No real change will come until these bitter truths are understood.
“ So nice work, Team Trudeau. Really nice incitement you championed last week. How too inclusive and diverse and liberal of you.” Saving the best for last in three great sentences…errr….jabs.
I can’t decide if Trudeau really believes we’re racist or if he’s just trying to divide Canadians. He responded incorrectly to the Al-Aqua Mosque situation but is constantly admonishing us for spreading disinformation. I have no words!
So, against my better judgment, I was listening to the CBC radio early this morning. They were talking about the pyramids in Egypt. OK, interesting topic I says to myself and keep listening. Big mistake. Apparently, there are conspiracy theories about the pyramids, who knew? And of course these conspiracy theories are all due to white European racism. Every single topic the CBC covers these days is forced through the lens of racism. I am so sick and tired of being called a racist by Blackface Trudeau and his CBC propagandists. Enough is enough.
It is obviously crazy to tarnish someone for the sins of their grandfather, but is this really what the Freeland's-grandad-was-a-Nazi story is about? Here's another version: The Liberal Party and their allies in the media are notorious for demanding instant and repetitive "denunciations" whenever any of their political enemies happens to be associated in any way - often equally hoax-ish - with "right wing extremists." Look back no further that the Canadian visit of MEP Christine Anderson for an example. Or consider Trudeau insinuating that Melissa Lantsman "stands with those bearing swastikas" during the freedom rally in Ottawa. (The evidence suggests that the flag-bearer was probably a Liberal false flag, specifically planted to discredit the convoy.) Or the fact that Pierre Poilievre's twitter list included a (not even disreputable) MGTOW link. They never let conservatives forget those "associations," and play them for all they are worth. But the Liberals are at least equally guilty of association with Chinese operatives, with antisemites (recently Laif Marouf - but this goes back decades), etc. Trudeau has worn blackface more times than he can remember. Etc. Yet despite the dismal Liberal record, they rarely if ever denounce anyone, or see the need to. The media do not stick microphones in Liberal faces daily, asking them to comment on their dubious associations. As long as we are playing the "denunciation game," some conservatives reasonably reckon, why not play it fairly? Why doesn't Freeland denounce her grandfather, or at least denounce what he wrote and stood for? Shouldn't she be constantly repeating her disgust at her grandad's behaviour, in all fairness? People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones; the Liberals live in glass mansions; yet they are the first to throw cluster-bombs at everyone else. It is rather grating, and one can't help feeling a bit of satisfaction in returning the favour.
"Why doesn't Freeland denounce her grandfather, or at least denounce what he wrote and stood for? Shouldn't she be constantly repeating her disgust at her grandad's behaviour, in all fairness?" You should read the Macleans piece I wrote. I link to it in the newsletter. I think your questions will be answered there.
I did read it, and you are correct that Freeland helped her uncle to explore her granddad's involvement with the Nazis; she never denied or hid the connection, as the Russian propaganda says. But she also hasn't been lighting her hair on fire over it, either - as progressive dogma suggests she should be doing. Shouldn't she be paying reparations to Jews, even? This is what Liberals like Freeland expect of their political opponents when they are "caught" associating with "controversial" people or groups. They expect abject apologies and denunciations, repeatedly, purely to provide distracting talking points and sound bites during election campaigns. I would be happiest if politicians of all stripes stopped using these cheap tactics to smear their opponents; but if the Liberals are going to insist on deploying that tactic every campaign, and in between campaigns, then it is only fair to demand abject apologies and strong denunciations when Liberals are guilty by association as well. It's the double standard that favours Liberals and progressives generally that is the real problem. If everyone were held to the same standard, maybe everyone would stop trying to seek political advantage by playing the denunciation game.
You realize that, from 2016 to 2020, Trump was asked at least 56 times, including at the Presidential debates in 2016 and 2020 (remarkably, by the same debate moderator, Chris Wallace, in both cycles!) to denounce white supremacists and neo-nazis, right? There is a YouTube mash-up of Trump denouncing them dozens of times during this period - yet no matter how many times he did it, he was always asked to do it again. This was pure propaganda, aimed at fooling the poorly informed voter that Trump was resisting it, had something to hide, was courting the neo-nazi vote, etc. Nobody asked Biden to explain his 50-year history of racist and sexist comments in his public life. This guilt by insinuation game is sick, and it has far more impact on the political mood than the Russian propaganda you expose has. "The Real Story" is how double standards in the media, using the Liberal's and progressive's sick denunciation game, distorts perceptions and turns people off politics. "Gotcha" journalism (played almost every day by the CBC, for example) is largely to blame. If the media didn't play along, the political games would be abandoned.
Agreed! I was a devoted CBC listener for twenty two years but gave it up in 2020 because of the perceived bias. After that, I checked in a few times and every time I heard about racism or colonialism or victimhood. I’m sure it’s worse now. As they say “I’m done”.
Thanks Terry!! It’s good to see someone credible pointing out the antisemitism, bigotry and pure performative gaslighting that the Liberal Party of Canada and their loyal propaganda media inflict on Canada
One item: I've read the "Enemy of my Enemy" study. Like several similar studies it fails to name names of the so called Russia aligned Twitter accounts. I don't expect them to print the names on paper, but putting the database online would be useful.
Here's the problem: the mis-information mavens at places like the Atlantic Council are quite happy to put people who are not "rah, rah Ukraine" into a bucket labelled "Russian controlled/alligned/unwitting dupes" with scant regard to any fact of the matter. I know several people who this has happened to - including the estimable Andy Lee. It really is nothing more than an academically burnished drive by smear. Truck loads of salt are needed when reading these sorts of exercises in meta propaganda.
I know the study that named Andy. U of Calgary if memory serves (don't hold me to that I'm away from my desk). And I thought it was weird. The Enemy of my Enemy Study doesn't name names, and from a reporter's point of view, that's a big problem. Leaves a bog hole in the story. So I thought I'd name a handful of obvious names. Absolutely horrible people. Assad's liars.
These "academic" studies tend to provide doubtful proof for foregone conclusions. Tim Caulfield (if I have the name right) at UofA being a prime example with his silly study of the inputs of vax hesitancy. Debunked within an hour of its release. Bought and paid for of course.
Great work by my favorite person to keep me up to date on the nonsense that Canadians have come to expect from our current government. Insights into the rest of the world's political kooks makes it more entertaining.
With respect to Ukraine, I believe that diplomacy is the answer to resolving the conflict. Professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Kotkin are IMHO the most informed voices on this subject. Russia and Ukraine are side by each, and when this conflict is over, they will still be next door to each other. So we need to find a solution both countries can live with. I don't believe NATO will fight. What I believe is that most countries in NATO, including Canada, will tell the Americans that they will "hold their beer" while the Americans supply the troops and equipment. Trying to expand NATO to Russia's borders was very foolish, and the West was repeatedly told it was a "red line" not to be crossed. The Americans have no problem enforcing the Monroe Doctrine, so why would we be surprised when another country does the same thing? I am no fan of Putin, and I will be glad when he is gone. However, thus is not a Putin issue, it is a Russian issue. Yeltsin complained bitterly about the status of Crimea (which is mostly ethnic Russian BTW, and was made part of Ukraine by Krushchev in 1954), but at the time Russia was powerless to do anything about it. The West (specifically the Americans) interfered in Ukrainian internal affairs in 2014, which precipitated the crisis in Crimea and the Donbas (another area, like Crimea, which is mostly ethnic Russian). It is high time to get this matter settled.
Your man, John Mearsheimer has been a critic of American foreign policy for years, fair enough.
There was an interview with him in The New Yorker last year.
Why John Mearsheimer Blames the U.S. for the Crisis in Ukraine
The New Yorker, March 1 2022
Isaac Chotiner: I thought you said that he was not interested in taking Kyiv.
John Mearsheimer: No, he’s interested in taking Kyiv for the purpose of regime change. O.K.?
Isaac Chotiner: As opposed to what?
John Mearsheimer: As opposed to permanently conquering Kyiv.
Isaac Chotiner: It would be a Russian-friendly government that he would presumably have some say over, right?
John Mearsheimer: Yes, exactly. But it’s important to understand that it is fundamentally different from conquering and holding onto Kyiv. Do you understand what I’m saying?
Not really sure I understand John, sounds like sophistry to me.
By 1939, Nazi Germany had already taken over the Sudeten region of Czechoslovakia, arguing that millions of ethnic Germans were being persecuted in this area. European powers chose not to act, hoping to avoid war. Six months later, German troops invaded Czechoslovakia, again claiming ethnic Russians were being mistreated.
Now, just substitute Russia for Nazi Germany, and fix the dates…
By 2014, Russia had already taken over the Crimea regions of Ukraine, arguing that millions of ethnic Russians were being persecuted in this area. European powers chose not to act, hoping to avoid war. A few years later, Russian troops invaded Ukraine, again claiming that ethnic Russians were being mistreated.
Thanks Terry. Always interesting and informative. Unfortunately due to my lack of faith in our Institutions of Higher Education, the academics that stay between their walls, and the indoctrinated and activist student bodies, I would be extremely cautious to take any of their information on who may be spreading Propaganda for the Russians. They can no longer even define a woman, add basic numbers and arrive at a correct answer, and are the useful idiots who train the latest propagandist’s to aide the woke Trudeau Government. So for me to accept their rendition of who is spreading Russian propaganda is just a step too far. There has to be someone out there that has a fraction of reliability to use for reference. Sorry but even pinching my nose, holding my breath, and trying to swallow their information, is just a bridge to far.
As I mentioned on here recently, History is a big thing with me, so I see the world differently from a lot of people. I see civilizations ending after a few hundred years, and people moving and creating new ones. I see that everything changes and that nothing stays the same forever.
My family moved here for different reasons. The Irish side with their Viking name,Nixon, arrived following the potato famine. The other half of that Irish side came fifty rears earlier, something to do with the British I believe, as my grandfather spit on every picture of the Queen he saw in the Toronto Star. The other side were Germans who came from the USA, and before that from the UK, and before that from the homeland. Records show they were invited to England when it needed labourers. Then after a proposal by a civil servant in the Colonies to collect turpentine from pine trees, my ancestor Heinrich signed a one year contract to work on that. “The government isn’t good at picking winners”, they say. What's true today was true in the 1700’s. The pines in the north were the wrong ones. it was the ones in the south that produced turpentine. Because land was available, Heinrich received a piece in the Mohawk Valley and with his hard working fräulein-wife, established a large family along with working the land. When they had to choose to stay or go, because they had such warm feelings towards the British, they moved here right after the War of 1812.
After the government froze Canadian citizens’ bank accounts, some in my family began talking about moving on. We could go back to Germany because we can establish that Heinrich was born there. But we don’t feel German. We still feel British, the reason one of us will soon be relocating there.
Once again Terry, an outstanding update on the current state of affairs which the vast majority of voters in Canada are blissfully unaware of. How else can one explain the blind adherence of the Trudeau cult supporters?
Thanks, Terry. I’m glad you’re finally on the mend. The only reasons I can think of for Trudeau and his cabal’s ignorant, hateful treatment of Israelis are: 1) they really are anti-Semitic; or 2) there are more votes to be gained by their repeated hateful rhetoric and behaviour; or 3) both.
Votes. Imbecility. Bistro antisemitism rather than Bierkeller antisemitism.
Yes, likely. Everything with Trudeau and the gang is couched in something. As to imbecility, that is a given as imbecilic rhetoric and behaviour seem to be prerequisites for being a Trudeau Cabinet and maybe even caucus member.
Lots of Muslim votes in the GTA, rather fewer Jewish votes.
Pretty simple political calculation, even for a Liberal.
Muslims: 1,775,715 or 4.9% of the total Canadian population (2021 census)
Clustered in voting blocks in Toronto and Montreal
Ontario 942,990
Quebec 421,710
Jews: 335,295 (2021 census) or 1.4% of the Canadian population
Some voting power in Toronto, but not much.
Ontario 272,400
More vote buying and deciding that some Canadians have more value than others because of how they vote. Trudeau is a disgrace.
Perhaps that’s one reason Trudeau appointed Amira Elghawaby to combat Islamophobia. I see she wants to remove negative stereotypes about Muslim from our books. I’m waiting for a blasphemy law next. That’s what the Organization of Islamic Cooperation really wants.
They say there are only 350,000 Jews in Canada. And around 1,000,000 Muslims.
See my post above with the 2021 census numbers. About five times more Muslims than Jews in Canada, and the Muslims tend to be concentrated in several ridings in Toronto and Montreal giving them more electoral power (more seats in parliament). The Jews seem to be more spread out, so less electoral power. Looks like the Liberals have figured this out, so expect more condemnations of Israel from Trudeau and the Liberals.
Or Trudeau mistakes in his usual clueless, woke way the pro Palestinian position for the virtuous one. I was like that when I was 19.
I have JT pegged at the maturity level of a 14 year old, 16 max.
Right on. I was literally ( now I sound like a 14 year old myself, like, you know) but , like , literally this evening, in a discussion with my friend Rick, saying that Justin saw the world like a 16 year old.
Then I thought of Churchill's comment about Austen Chamberlain, briefly foreign minister, that he saw the world " through the wrong end of a municipal drainpipe." No relevance at all, but my favourite Churchill putdown.
Imagine the howling if the devil incarnate himself (Stephen Harper) did half nay 1/8 of what Trudeau has done. People rightly make fun of the 80's haircut bands but sadly not our haircut politicians.
Jean Paul Sartre was pro-Stalin and KGB controlled via a “swallow” - a Kremlin prostitute-spy.
Sartre and life partner in crime Simone de Beauvoir turned Maoist when Khrushchev was accused of revisionism.
Beauvoir penned The Long March An Account of Modern China - a 501-page Maoist puff piece.
Khmer Rouge elite were indoctrinated by French Communist Party.
Michel Foucault was militant Iran revolution supporter. Iran, along with China and Russia, leads Eurasian project.
Today, Simone de Beauvoir Institute, for example, continues to indoctrinate troubled minds into bad ideology. No real change will come until these bitter truths are understood.
“ So nice work, Team Trudeau. Really nice incitement you championed last week. How too inclusive and diverse and liberal of you.” Saving the best for last in three great sentences…errr….jabs.
I can’t decide if Trudeau really believes we’re racist or if he’s just trying to divide Canadians. He responded incorrectly to the Al-Aqua Mosque situation but is constantly admonishing us for spreading disinformation. I have no words!
So, against my better judgment, I was listening to the CBC radio early this morning. They were talking about the pyramids in Egypt. OK, interesting topic I says to myself and keep listening. Big mistake. Apparently, there are conspiracy theories about the pyramids, who knew? And of course these conspiracy theories are all due to white European racism. Every single topic the CBC covers these days is forced through the lens of racism. I am so sick and tired of being called a racist by Blackface Trudeau and his CBC propagandists. Enough is enough.
It is obviously crazy to tarnish someone for the sins of their grandfather, but is this really what the Freeland's-grandad-was-a-Nazi story is about? Here's another version: The Liberal Party and their allies in the media are notorious for demanding instant and repetitive "denunciations" whenever any of their political enemies happens to be associated in any way - often equally hoax-ish - with "right wing extremists." Look back no further that the Canadian visit of MEP Christine Anderson for an example. Or consider Trudeau insinuating that Melissa Lantsman "stands with those bearing swastikas" during the freedom rally in Ottawa. (The evidence suggests that the flag-bearer was probably a Liberal false flag, specifically planted to discredit the convoy.) Or the fact that Pierre Poilievre's twitter list included a (not even disreputable) MGTOW link. They never let conservatives forget those "associations," and play them for all they are worth. But the Liberals are at least equally guilty of association with Chinese operatives, with antisemites (recently Laif Marouf - but this goes back decades), etc. Trudeau has worn blackface more times than he can remember. Etc. Yet despite the dismal Liberal record, they rarely if ever denounce anyone, or see the need to. The media do not stick microphones in Liberal faces daily, asking them to comment on their dubious associations. As long as we are playing the "denunciation game," some conservatives reasonably reckon, why not play it fairly? Why doesn't Freeland denounce her grandfather, or at least denounce what he wrote and stood for? Shouldn't she be constantly repeating her disgust at her grandad's behaviour, in all fairness? People in glass houses shouldn't throw stones; the Liberals live in glass mansions; yet they are the first to throw cluster-bombs at everyone else. It is rather grating, and one can't help feeling a bit of satisfaction in returning the favour.
"Why doesn't Freeland denounce her grandfather, or at least denounce what he wrote and stood for? Shouldn't she be constantly repeating her disgust at her grandad's behaviour, in all fairness?" You should read the Macleans piece I wrote. I link to it in the newsletter. I think your questions will be answered there.
I did read it, and you are correct that Freeland helped her uncle to explore her granddad's involvement with the Nazis; she never denied or hid the connection, as the Russian propaganda says. But she also hasn't been lighting her hair on fire over it, either - as progressive dogma suggests she should be doing. Shouldn't she be paying reparations to Jews, even? This is what Liberals like Freeland expect of their political opponents when they are "caught" associating with "controversial" people or groups. They expect abject apologies and denunciations, repeatedly, purely to provide distracting talking points and sound bites during election campaigns. I would be happiest if politicians of all stripes stopped using these cheap tactics to smear their opponents; but if the Liberals are going to insist on deploying that tactic every campaign, and in between campaigns, then it is only fair to demand abject apologies and strong denunciations when Liberals are guilty by association as well. It's the double standard that favours Liberals and progressives generally that is the real problem. If everyone were held to the same standard, maybe everyone would stop trying to seek political advantage by playing the denunciation game.
You realize that, from 2016 to 2020, Trump was asked at least 56 times, including at the Presidential debates in 2016 and 2020 (remarkably, by the same debate moderator, Chris Wallace, in both cycles!) to denounce white supremacists and neo-nazis, right? There is a YouTube mash-up of Trump denouncing them dozens of times during this period - yet no matter how many times he did it, he was always asked to do it again. This was pure propaganda, aimed at fooling the poorly informed voter that Trump was resisting it, had something to hide, was courting the neo-nazi vote, etc. Nobody asked Biden to explain his 50-year history of racist and sexist comments in his public life. This guilt by insinuation game is sick, and it has far more impact on the political mood than the Russian propaganda you expose has. "The Real Story" is how double standards in the media, using the Liberal's and progressive's sick denunciation game, distorts perceptions and turns people off politics. "Gotcha" journalism (played almost every day by the CBC, for example) is largely to blame. If the media didn't play along, the political games would be abandoned.
The latest is the CBC going after Alberta premier Danielle Smith again. After there first unethical attempts failed miserably.
Breathless just reading this edition of the Real Story. Can't imagine how it felt to right it.
Agreed! I was a devoted CBC listener for twenty two years but gave it up in 2020 because of the perceived bias. After that, I checked in a few times and every time I heard about racism or colonialism or victimhood. I’m sure it’s worse now. As they say “I’m done”.
Thanks Terry!! It’s good to see someone credible pointing out the antisemitism, bigotry and pure performative gaslighting that the Liberal Party of Canada and their loyal propaganda media inflict on Canada
Deeply interesting as always, Terry.
One item: I've read the "Enemy of my Enemy" study. Like several similar studies it fails to name names of the so called Russia aligned Twitter accounts. I don't expect them to print the names on paper, but putting the database online would be useful.
Here's the problem: the mis-information mavens at places like the Atlantic Council are quite happy to put people who are not "rah, rah Ukraine" into a bucket labelled "Russian controlled/alligned/unwitting dupes" with scant regard to any fact of the matter. I know several people who this has happened to - including the estimable Andy Lee. It really is nothing more than an academically burnished drive by smear. Truck loads of salt are needed when reading these sorts of exercises in meta propaganda.
I know the study that named Andy. U of Calgary if memory serves (don't hold me to that I'm away from my desk). And I thought it was weird. The Enemy of my Enemy Study doesn't name names, and from a reporter's point of view, that's a big problem. Leaves a bog hole in the story. So I thought I'd name a handful of obvious names. Absolutely horrible people. Assad's liars.
I suspect it is BS all the way down.
These "academic" studies tend to provide doubtful proof for foregone conclusions. Tim Caulfield (if I have the name right) at UofA being a prime example with his silly study of the inputs of vax hesitancy. Debunked within an hour of its release. Bought and paid for of course.
Excellent wrap plus scoop.
Great work by my favorite person to keep me up to date on the nonsense that Canadians have come to expect from our current government. Insights into the rest of the world's political kooks makes it more entertaining.
With respect to Ukraine, I believe that diplomacy is the answer to resolving the conflict. Professors John Mearsheimer and Stephen Kotkin are IMHO the most informed voices on this subject. Russia and Ukraine are side by each, and when this conflict is over, they will still be next door to each other. So we need to find a solution both countries can live with. I don't believe NATO will fight. What I believe is that most countries in NATO, including Canada, will tell the Americans that they will "hold their beer" while the Americans supply the troops and equipment. Trying to expand NATO to Russia's borders was very foolish, and the West was repeatedly told it was a "red line" not to be crossed. The Americans have no problem enforcing the Monroe Doctrine, so why would we be surprised when another country does the same thing? I am no fan of Putin, and I will be glad when he is gone. However, thus is not a Putin issue, it is a Russian issue. Yeltsin complained bitterly about the status of Crimea (which is mostly ethnic Russian BTW, and was made part of Ukraine by Krushchev in 1954), but at the time Russia was powerless to do anything about it. The West (specifically the Americans) interfered in Ukrainian internal affairs in 2014, which precipitated the crisis in Crimea and the Donbas (another area, like Crimea, which is mostly ethnic Russian). It is high time to get this matter settled.
Your man, John Mearsheimer has been a critic of American foreign policy for years, fair enough.
There was an interview with him in The New Yorker last year.
Why John Mearsheimer Blames the U.S. for the Crisis in Ukraine
The New Yorker, March 1 2022
Isaac Chotiner: I thought you said that he was not interested in taking Kyiv.
John Mearsheimer: No, he’s interested in taking Kyiv for the purpose of regime change. O.K.?
Isaac Chotiner: As opposed to what?
John Mearsheimer: As opposed to permanently conquering Kyiv.
Isaac Chotiner: It would be a Russian-friendly government that he would presumably have some say over, right?
John Mearsheimer: Yes, exactly. But it’s important to understand that it is fundamentally different from conquering and holding onto Kyiv. Do you understand what I’m saying?
Not really sure I understand John, sounds like sophistry to me.
I've listened to Mearshimer try to explain how Putin is nothing, nothing, nothing like Hitler. I was unconvinced.
By 1939, Nazi Germany had already taken over the Sudeten region of Czechoslovakia, arguing that millions of ethnic Germans were being persecuted in this area. European powers chose not to act, hoping to avoid war. Six months later, German troops invaded Czechoslovakia, again claiming ethnic Russians were being mistreated.
Now, just substitute Russia for Nazi Germany, and fix the dates…
By 2014, Russia had already taken over the Crimea regions of Ukraine, arguing that millions of ethnic Russians were being persecuted in this area. European powers chose not to act, hoping to avoid war. A few years later, Russian troops invaded Ukraine, again claiming that ethnic Russians were being mistreated.
Yup, the similarities seem obvious.
In the end, as always, there will be a diplomatic settlement. Why it’s necessary to continue the destruction of Ukraine by both sides escapes me.
Thanks Terry. Always interesting and informative. Unfortunately due to my lack of faith in our Institutions of Higher Education, the academics that stay between their walls, and the indoctrinated and activist student bodies, I would be extremely cautious to take any of their information on who may be spreading Propaganda for the Russians. They can no longer even define a woman, add basic numbers and arrive at a correct answer, and are the useful idiots who train the latest propagandist’s to aide the woke Trudeau Government. So for me to accept their rendition of who is spreading Russian propaganda is just a step too far. There has to be someone out there that has a fraction of reliability to use for reference. Sorry but even pinching my nose, holding my breath, and trying to swallow their information, is just a bridge to far.
Fine. I name names. You can look them up.
As I mentioned on here recently, History is a big thing with me, so I see the world differently from a lot of people. I see civilizations ending after a few hundred years, and people moving and creating new ones. I see that everything changes and that nothing stays the same forever.
My family moved here for different reasons. The Irish side with their Viking name,Nixon, arrived following the potato famine. The other half of that Irish side came fifty rears earlier, something to do with the British I believe, as my grandfather spit on every picture of the Queen he saw in the Toronto Star. The other side were Germans who came from the USA, and before that from the UK, and before that from the homeland. Records show they were invited to England when it needed labourers. Then after a proposal by a civil servant in the Colonies to collect turpentine from pine trees, my ancestor Heinrich signed a one year contract to work on that. “The government isn’t good at picking winners”, they say. What's true today was true in the 1700’s. The pines in the north were the wrong ones. it was the ones in the south that produced turpentine. Because land was available, Heinrich received a piece in the Mohawk Valley and with his hard working fräulein-wife, established a large family along with working the land. When they had to choose to stay or go, because they had such warm feelings towards the British, they moved here right after the War of 1812.
After the government froze Canadian citizens’ bank accounts, some in my family began talking about moving on. We could go back to Germany because we can establish that Heinrich was born there. But we don’t feel German. We still feel British, the reason one of us will soon be relocating there.