Veterans Affairs needs mucking out | Editorial | Comment | Toronto Sun
Friday, September 24, 2010
Monday, September 20, 2010
Social Media and Social Responsibility
16-year-old girl 'gang raped' at rave, photos posted to Facebook: RCMP
Normally, I write about military related topics but today I am going to digress from that a little to give my point of view on something different.
At what point does a Social Media Companies right to run its business end and the right of a gang rape victim begin? When does a company become responsible to the people to ensure that the right thing is done and that their safety is preserved?
These are some of the questions that I have been asking myself since I heard this terrible story. The short version is, a girl was raped by multiple men after being drugged and the act was photographed and videotaped and posted on the net. I cannot imagine what the victim and her family must be going through. The RCMP has reported that that possession of the photos is criminal offence and anyone possessing or posting them to the net could be prosecuted.
Then why aren’t they being prosecuted? Why is the Social Network not being compelled to give up information to the police about people posting and possessing these photos? Does this not make the operators of the Social network complicit in a criminal act? It would if it were me or any other private citizen. In my view, this girl, and her family have the right to justice no matter the cost or how big the undertaking. There are many ways that that the media site can do the right thing, my question is, do they want to? When every page on their site has advertisements and directed and targeted ads ranging from everything from tooth picks to sex, it begs the question do they really want to catch these people. If they wanted to, the social media site could shut down every account that has the photos and pass the names of the people posting to the police simple and done. Would it be good for their bottom line to have the public know that they gave up some of their members to police? what I say to that is, if you have done nothing illegal you should have nothing to worry about.
Social media sites hide behind their “terms of use policies” as though they were the Holy Gail, and that it will protect them from all evil. Well when a company becomes so big it that it has the ability to create society and to change it, it should also share in the responsibility to protect it and not just wash its hands when an evil and vial deed is done.
Saturday, August 07, 2010
No Welcome for Deserters
No welcome for deserters | Canada | News | Toronto Sun
I really don't understand why this is even being discussed in this country. Canada is a country at war and our soldiers are currently engaged in combat operations in foreign lands. In Canada, desertion is a criminal act under the National Defence Act and is punishable by a lengthy prison term. I commend the Prime Minister for his directive to his immigration officials. Currently admission in to the US Military is voluntary and anyone who joins the military now would have to be living under a rock not to know that there is a war on. Why should Canada become a haven for those that wish to hide from a duty that they willingly signed up for. No one forced them to sign the line, they did it all by themselves and when duty called they ran, choosing to not hold up their end of the deal they made with the American people.
If they don't want to fight, that's fine, stay in your own country and take the punishment. I mean they had no problem when they thought the US government was going to pay for college or university through the US G.I. bill. In exchange for accepting the job they get pay, benefits and assume the risk of deployment as the Government sees fit. All soldiers are made aware of the penalty of desertion and the consequences that this action has. I would have more respect for deserters if they stayed in their own country and did the time for the crime they committed.
Normally if Canadian immigration officials come across someone that has a criminal record in the US they deny entry in to the country,or if they are already in the country they send them back. In Canada desertion can hold a 14 year sentence and is a criminal charge. So why would some Canadian politicians want to give refuge to criminals, when our own soldiers are fighting and in some cases dying?
I really don't understand why this is even being discussed in this country. Canada is a country at war and our soldiers are currently engaged in combat operations in foreign lands. In Canada, desertion is a criminal act under the National Defence Act and is punishable by a lengthy prison term. I commend the Prime Minister for his directive to his immigration officials. Currently admission in to the US Military is voluntary and anyone who joins the military now would have to be living under a rock not to know that there is a war on. Why should Canada become a haven for those that wish to hide from a duty that they willingly signed up for. No one forced them to sign the line, they did it all by themselves and when duty called they ran, choosing to not hold up their end of the deal they made with the American people.
If they don't want to fight, that's fine, stay in your own country and take the punishment. I mean they had no problem when they thought the US government was going to pay for college or university through the US G.I. bill. In exchange for accepting the job they get pay, benefits and assume the risk of deployment as the Government sees fit. All soldiers are made aware of the penalty of desertion and the consequences that this action has. I would have more respect for deserters if they stayed in their own country and did the time for the crime they committed.
Normally if Canadian immigration officials come across someone that has a criminal record in the US they deny entry in to the country,or if they are already in the country they send them back. In Canada desertion can hold a 14 year sentence and is a criminal charge. So why would some Canadian politicians want to give refuge to criminals, when our own soldiers are fighting and in some cases dying?
Friday, August 06, 2010
Shaking hands with the Devil
Image by Getty Images via @daylifeOver the past couple of months there has been a lot of discussion in the media and political circles about a reconciliation with the Taliban. This war has raged on for 9 years with no conclusive end in sight. For me the concept of reconciliation with a terrorist group is a troubling thought. On the surface, the idea of reconciliation is a nice dream and the intent behind the idea has some merits. The thought of a stable and peaceful Afghanistan is truly a tempting notion. No more deployments, our soldiers would come home and no more flagged draped caskets traveling down the Highway of Heroes. The Afghan nation could once again join the global family in industry and comers.
I have to ask myself what would I be willing to accept to make this vision a reality. What sort of concessions would the terrorist organizations ask for, and what liberties would be sacrificed by the Afghan people to maintain stability. Would you be willing to turn a blind eye to mutilation of women, would you be willing to turn a blind eye to the production of ridiculous amounts of narcotics and marijuana, destined for North American markets? Would you be willing to allow militant Islamic extremism to have a legitimized foot hold in a land that runs red with the blood of the innocent?
Before the war weary nations of the world press ahead with this idea, they really need to ask themselves a difficult question. Is the short term goal of creating stability worth years of potential religious extremism. Do they really want to go down to the crossroads and shake hands with the Devil, and make a deal were they could really lose their soul?
Saturday, July 31, 2010
Intruders in the North
Image via WikipediaThe recent interception of two long range Russian Bombers over the Canadian North, should be a very big cause for concern. The frequency and length of time that these over flight patrols are taking is increasing, and keep in mind these flights are often conducted with live Nuclear Warheads.
When the U.S. Conducted armed and un armed Cruise Missile tests in Canadian Air Space in the 80's and 90's, people lost their minds. I recall seeing Cruise Missile Nets sent into the air with hot air balloons, in a ridiculous attempt to intercept these Missiles. But when the Russian's come knocking on our northern coastline, the worst people can say is that the government is playing up this incident to bolster its position on the purchase of new fighter aircraft.
Canadians need to pay attention to the world around them, and to this simple rule of thumb, "if you can't defend it, you can't keep it". The opposite to this is, that if our northern coast line is indefensible, or better to say if it can not be defended, Canadians need to be prepared to give it to some one who can.
Make no mistake that the Americans are well aware of Canada's defense capabilities and would have no problem "Assisting" in defense of the north. We must also keep in mind that if Canadians fail in their responsibility to defend Canada's sovereignty, the US Government will be more than happy to do it for us and in so doing strengthen their claim to our north as well.
It wasn't that long ago that the US Navy poked a nuclear Sub's Conning Tower through the Polar Ice cap, also without the permission of the Canadian Government. They did nearly the same thing as the Russians did and for the same purpose, to show, the flag and to say "we can do this anytime we want".
Canadians need to wake up to the fact that the natural resources within our borders make this country an industrial power house. In the not to distant future, as natural resources around the world dwindle, the ability for Canada and Canadians to defend our own borders proportionately to emerging threats brought on by dependence on country sustaining necessities such as oil and natural gas, must increase to maintain our own sovereignty.
Sent from my BlackBerry device on the Rogers Wireless Network
Saturday, June 26, 2010
The lose of the Message
A true activist wants their message heard and presented to the masses so that it can be understood and supported. They wish to be visible and have their stories told. Activists do not cover their faces to hide their identity because they are not afraid; typically they hold the courage of their convictions. The Black Block, or “Protestors" wear masks, and they cover their faces they hide and run. But then again the people like this don't really have an agenda or any real cause. They just bring destruction and kayos to what may have been a very public platform for legitimate causes and Issues.
Over the past couple of major events here in Canada, efforts have been made by the powers that be and the media to give protest groups a voice to allow their issues to be heard. If interest groups and social activists don't want their message to get lost in pointless and mindless violence, they themselves need to police their own organizations and show greater cooperation with security forces. Organisations that wish to put on a protest should also share some of the responsibility and the cost of ensuring that violence does not happen.
Organizations that wish to protest have the responsibility to ensure that there event is not hijacked by infiltrators that have nothing more than destruction on their mind. They have a responsibility to safeguard public safety just as the police or security forces do. If they wish to bring their message to the masses they also share the responsibility of protecting the masses from the message.
Tuesday, May 11, 2010
A Poem Worth Reading
A Poem Worth Reading
He was getting old and paunchy
And his hair was falling fast,
And he sat around the Legion,
Telling stories of the past.
Of a war that he once fought in
And the deeds that he had done,
In his exploits with his buddies;
They were heroes, every one.
And 'tho sometimes to his neighbors
His tales became a joke,
All his buddies listened quietly
For they knew where of he spoke.
But we'll hear his tales no longer,
For ol' Bob has passed away,
And the world's a little poorer
For a Soldier died today.
He won't be mourned by many,
Just his children and his wife.
For he lived an ordinary,
Very quiet sort of life.
He held a job and raised a family,
Going quietly on his way;
And the world won't note his passing,
'Tho a Soldier died today.
When politicians leave this earth,
Their bodies lie in state,
While thousands note their passing,
And proclaim that they were great.
Papers tell of their life stories
From the time that they were young
But the passing of a Soldier
Goes unnoticed, and unsung.
Is the greatest contribution
To the welfare of our land,
Some jerk who breaks his promise
And cons his fellow man?
Or the ordinary fellow
Who in times of war and strife,
Goes off to serve his country
And offers up his life?
The politician's stipend
And the style in which he lives,
Are often disproportionate,
To the service that he gives.
While the ordinary Soldier,
Who offered up his all,
Is paid off with a medal
And perhaps a pension, small.
It is not the politicians
With their compromise and ploys,
Who won for us the freedom
That our country now enjoys.
Should you find yourself in danger,
With your enemies at hand,
Would you really want some cop-out,
With his ever waffling stand?
Or would you want a Soldier--
His home, his country, his kin,
Just a common Soldier,
Who would fight until the end.
He was just a common Soldier,
And his ranks are growing thin,
But his presence should remind us
We may need his like again.
For when countries are in conflict,
We find the Soldier's part
Is to clean up all the troubles
That the politicians start.
If we cannot do him honor
While he's here to hear the praise,
Then at least let's give him homage
At the ending of his days.
Perhaps just a simply headline
In the paper that might say:
"OUR COUNTRY IS IN MOURNING,
A SOLDIER DIED TODAY."
Pass On The Patriotism!
YOU can make a difference
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)