Terrorism – Sommer Season all year

This is Stupid

In the video Pilot Has A Message For Canadians, the pilot speaks of a “disaster averting, lifesaving phrase: ‘this is stupid’” used in the aviation world. He tells of a deadly aviation disaster involving two 747s. He says even though a first officer expressed concern, the disaster still happened because “of complacency, deferring to authority and not wanting to rock the boat by questioning.” The phrase “this is stupid” or “this is dangerous” would have awoke the pilot of danger. He goes on to say that our government presently “has their throttle jammed full forward in a race for totalitarian control,” and the “voice inside you is saying ‘this is stupid,‘ ‘this is dangerous,’ and ‘this is wrong.’” He says, “your voice is useless if you stay silent,” so “you have to summon the courage to say no.” Since 2020, I’ve been saying “something is wrong.” The truth is, Canada and the world are at a critical point. DO WE WANT TO LIVE IN A FREE WORLD OR NOT?

Trudeau has never bothered to speak to the protestors. Instead, he declared an emergency while still debating the Emergencies Act in Parliament. In fact, the House of Commons suspends debate on Emergencies Act ahead of police operation against Freedom Convoy. This act has not received approval of the Canadian Senate or Royal Assent. On February 13, a MSM’s New York Post headline said, Canada PM Justin Trudeau slammed for invoking emergency powers to stop protests.

Multiple Canadian premiers oppose Trudeau invoking Emergencies Act. Trudeau is condemned around the world for moving to crush protests. Some headlines were blunt as in Trudeau Invokes the Emergencies Act (aka Martial Law) in Canada … For a Bunch of Truckers. Independent media says Trudeau is marching Canada down a dark path. Billionaire, Elon Musk draws ire for comparing Trudeau to Hitler. An editorial piece in the NY Times called out Trudeau for backing a protest by farmers in India that clogged major roads in New Delhi while attacking his own citizens for a peaceful protest that has blocked roads in Ottawa. American podcaster, Dan Bongino says “Canada’s Dictator Declares War On Freedom” (see Dan Bongino Show). This is a war on our freedoms. Declaring an emergency when there is no emergency is extreme bullying (#bullying, #antibullying).

Trudeau said when announcing this emergency:

We’re entering the third week of illegal blockades that have been disrupting the lives of too many Canadians. Here in our capital city, families and small businesses have been enduring illegal obstruction of their neighbourhoods. Occupying streets, harassing people, breaking the law: this is not a peaceful protest. At the borders in different places in the country, the blockades are harming our economy and endangering public safety.

Former Prime Minister Steven Harper said in 2005, “When a government start trying to cancel dissent or avoid dissent is when it’s rapidly losing its moral authority to govern.” Trudeau has lost the moral authority to govern.

When the blockade ended in Coutts, Alberta, protestors hugged police. Don’t believe me (#blogger #blog #somseason #YA #authors). Watch Coutts protest ends. Still think Ottawa protestors are “endangering public safety,” and it is “not a peaceful protest?” Watch the videos Canadian Peaceful Protest, and Food, massages offered freely to anyone in need as convoy protest continues in Ottawa. Here’s a video of the Ottawa protestors “endangering public safety.”

The National Post’s Rex Murphy: Trudeau’s monumentally misguided emergency measures are an insult to Canadians says:

Here’s the mother of all questions for Trudeau and it is one that he cannot, and will never, answer: what was so difficult about having a talk with the leaders of a group of Canadians who found some of the government’s COVID regulations to be a grievous burden? When Black Lives Matter [a terrorist organization] flooded the streets, Trudeau not only met with them, he went into the streets and joined in on the their American-inspired protest. He gave them a knee and bowed his head. But he would not meet with the truckers. He would not talk to their representatives. There was certainly no kneeling.

Here is some history around this act. The Canadian Encyclopedia, says, when the First World War began (1914), the Canadian government passed the War Measures Act (WMA), giving the cabinet sweeping emergency powers. This Act gave the government full authority during wartime to censor and suppress communications; to arrest, detain and deport people without charges or trials; to control the economy; and to seize private property. Most controversial is the WMA enabled the government to intern “enemy aliens” on the suspicion they posed a threat to Canada’s safety. About 600 Italian Canadians and 800 German Canadians were interned during the war, along with Jewish refugees and Mennonites .

During the Second World War (1939), the WMA was again invoked resulting in approximately 22,000 Japanese Canadians on the West Coast being interned in remote areas of interior British Columbia. The WMA enabled the government to strip Japanese Canadians of their property and pressure them to accept mass deportation when the war ended. I led many classroom discussions about the Japanese Internment, and students typically felt it was a violation of Japanese Canadian’s civil liberties.

In 1970, the WMA was invoked because of the October Crisis. A state of “apprehended insurrection” was officially declared to exist in Quebec in October of 1970, as a response to two kidnappings by the terrorist group Front de Libération du Québec (FLQ). This emergency enabled police to conduct more than 3,000 searches without a warrant and detain 497 people. The suspension of civil liberties in Quebec was controversial. I remember as a kid being confused about the controversy as many Canadians were angered at their loss of civil liberties.

In 1988, the WMA was amended to the Emergencies Act. This act defines a national emergency as an urgent, temporary and critical situation that seriously endangers the health and safety of Canadians or that seriously threatens the ability of the Government of Canada to preserve the sovereignty, security and territorial integrity of Canada. When invoked, the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms (Charter) continues to protect individual rights. The Government MUST respect constitutionally protected rights and freedoms (see Emergencies Act).

Canada’s Charter specifically says, “Everyone has the following fundamental freedoms: (a) freedom of conscience and religion; (b) freedom of thought, belief, opinion, and expression, including freedom of the press and other media of communication; (c) freedom of peaceful assembly; and (d) freedom of association.”

Most Canadians feel the use of Emergencies Act is illegal because a peaceful protest is no emergency. MSM’s National Post headlines, ‘Legal standard not met’: Two court challenges filed over Trudeau’s use of Emergencies Act. Ironically, Canada issued a harsh condemnation of the Cuban government’s sentencing of protesters who participated in anti-government rallies last July.

On February 18, in the once free country of Canada, Ottawa police arrest dozens of protesters, and start towing rigs, and Ottawa Police threaten media with arrest for covering enforcement against peaceful protesters. Independent Media, Rebel News journalist Alexa Lavoie attacked by Ottawa police. Watch how RCMP Trample Elderly Lady With Horses. Watch how police use force. The MSM’s National Post says This must be what Ottawa police meant by methods not usually seen in Canada. Look at the article’s disturbing pictures. Watch police damaging personal property in this video.

Watch the Fox News video: Tucker Carlson’s view of Ottawa events. What occurred is “state sanctioned violence.” CBC reports Emergencies Act directs financial institutions to freeze accounts linked to convoy protests. Trudeau gives BLM money while seizing the bank accounts of peaceful protesters. An Ottawa Bakery is facing threats and harassment over leaked convoy donation. Independent media reports that Ottawa may euthanize truckers’ pets as punishment. Trudeau’s justice minister, David Lametti says Trump supporters should be worried. Why? Trump merely endorsed the Truck Convoy.

Sadly, there are still Canadians who think this is about a virus. As an emotional Calgary police officer said after seeing what happened in Ottawa, “Canada has fallen.” This is about our government wanting totalitarian control over us. This is about the World Economic Forum’s Great Reset. Here is what Alberta’s premier said about the Great Reset.

Are we free when peaceful protestors are ignored, and arrested for demanding freedom, when bank accounts are being frozen for supporting freedom fighters, when threats to harm family pets are made, and businesses supporting freedom are harassed? If you think this is okay, you are NOT thinking for yourself. If you go to your heart, you know this is wrong; that this is stupid. You’d know this is a sad day for Canada.

I am still a proud Canadian, but I am ashamed of my government. Shame on a government who resorts to police action instead of peaceful dialogue with the protesters, and for the parliamentarians who voted to suspend parliament. I am ashamed of those enforcement officers conducting arrests in their riot gear and carrying automatic weapons. Shame on them for breaking the oath to serve and protect. I am ashamed of tow truck operators participating in this police action. Shame on you for wearing neon-green ski masks, with your companies’ decals taped over to conceal your identities. I am ashamed of the MSM. Shame on you for reporting a peaceful protest as a ‘nationwide insurrection” (see Business Insider).

This is NOT the country I grew up in. I no longer live in a free and democratic country. We are now living under a fascist dictatorship. That may make some uncomfortable, but that is because of cognitive dissonance. No matter what you believe, if you listen to your heart, you’d know this is stupid!

It is Time to Get Serious, People

A commentary on the importance of following pandemic rules

Global News reports that Canada’s Prime Minister, Justin Trudeau, said in March that the federal government was/is considering invoking the Emergencies Act to help keep the Canadian economy afloat as the COVID-19 spreads throughout the country. This act was created to provide a legal framework for power to be temporarily consolidated with the prime minister and cabinet to issue executive orders during national emergencies. It was only used three times in Canadian history. The War Measures Act—the act before 1988—was invoked during the first and second World Wars, as well as during the October Crisis of 1970 when members of the Front de Libération du Québec (FLQ), a terrorist group in Quebec, carried out kidnappings. (see October Crisis).

The point is, the Emergencies Act allows a great deal of power to the prime minister and cabinet. They would have the right to take over property, public utilities, provide special services and special compensation, regulate, prohibit public assembly, and prevent travel anywhere within the country, among other things.

This Act infringes on our individual rights, such as restrict travel in our own country, and dictate who we can and cannot see. The Megan Meier Foundation, a foundation working to create a world without bullying and cyberbullying, defines bullying as “an aggressive behaviour that involves an imbalance of power or strength.” One could argue, that Emergencies Act is aggressive and involves an imbalance of power, since governments would have all the power, thus making an argument that leaders are bullying their citizens to comply with their demands.

The Boston Globe has an opinion piece titled, A civil liberties pandemic, which debates the toll being taken on Americans’ freedom and constitutional liberties by the unprecedented restrictions that have been imposed to enforce physical distancing. The Military Times even has an article titled, Will coronavirus lead to martial law? Martial law is the replacement of civil rule with temporary military rule in a time of crisis.

NPR is a media organization founded on a mission to create a more informed public. Their article, Life During Coronavirus, reports that Chinese citizens are financially rewarded for reporting those who fail to follow quarantine orders reflecting a decades-long history of social control, which has been mobilized on an unprecedented scale for the COVID-19 crisis.

The Boston Globe’s opinion piece, A civil liberties pandemic, which I mentioned earlier reports that in Israel, the government has ordered a round-the-clock curfew and deployed anti-terrorist technology to track down people suspected of violating the coronavirus restrictions. In Norway, anyone caught violating isolation rules can be fined $2,000 or jailed for 15 days.

Even in Canada, most provincial governments have issued stay at home orders, implemented fines for anyone returning to Canada and not self-isolating for 14 days, or not practicing social distancing (see Provinces inpose fines). The purpose of these measures is to avoid overwhelming health care systems and reducing the spread of the Coronavirus.

I have not heard, or read, anything, about any such debate occurring in Canada about civil liberties (freedoms to do certain things without restraint from government), other than the occasional meme on social media saying (paraphrased): “Stay at home or risk losing more civil liberties.” No one that I have spoken to—via technology, of course—has mentioned any concern about their civil liberties disappearing, unlike the U.S. That doesn’t mean things couldn’t change. Our Prime Minister has not invoked the Emergencies Act as of yet, but if enough people don’t respect the stay at home orders and practice social or physical distancing, then more civil liberties could be removed. Our governments have warned us of that.

Yet, there are still a number of people who are not respecting the pandemic rules. CBC News has an news article, Grocery store staff fed up with ‘social’ shoppers who flout pandemic rules, reporting that customers are chatting and getting too close to others in grocery stores. Some employees say they have been yelled at, cursed at, and accused of overreacting as they try to enforce physical distancing measures put in place by their employers.

I’ve heard of “Snow Birds,” (Canadians who winter in warm places like Arizona or Mexico) returning to Canada after the Canadian Government advised all vacationers to return to Canada. In the town where I grew up, I’ve heard of Snow Birds ignoring the 14-day self-isolation rule by going into the post office to collect their mail. Local papers told of Snow Birds in a nearby town going in the grocery stores upon their return. Urban Dictionary coined the term “convidiot” for those misbehaving during the coronavirus pandemic. Its definition:

1. A stupid person who stubbornly ignored ‘social distancing’ protocol thus help to further spread COVID-19

2. A stupid person who hoards groceries needlessly spreading COVID-19 fears and depriving others of vital supplies

I am very willing to give up my civil liberties if it means keeping my family and me safer. I felt that way during the October or FLQ Crisis in 1970 as well. But the thing is, we don’t have to give up our civil liberties if all people followed the advice of the health professionals, and took this pandemic seriously. Or, to use Urban Dictionary’s word, stop being a convidiots. To me, it is all common sense. Perhaps the French writer and philosopher, Voltaire, was right when he said, “Maybe Common sense is not so common.” The bottom line, we will all get through this much faster—in theory—if everyone followed what the experts tell us, that is, follow the pandemic rules.

There is a post circulating on social media. It reads:

History repeats itself. Came across this poem written in 1869, reprinted during 1919 Pandemic. This is Timeless….It was written in 1869 by Kathleen O’Mara:

And people stayed at home

And read books

And listened

And they rested

And did exercises

And made art and played

And learned new ways of being

And stopped and listened

More deeply

Someone meditated, someone prayed

Someone met their shadow

And people began to think differently

And people healed.

And in the absence of people who

Lived in ignorant ways

Dangerous, meaningless and heartless,

The earth also began to heal

And when the danger ended and

People found themselves

They grieved for the dead

And made new choices

And dreamed of new visions

And created new ways of living

And completely healed the earth

Just as they were healed.

What is the truth around this poem? There was a Cholera pandemic that spread throughout the Middle East and was carried to Russia, Europe, Africa and North America, but according to Oprah Magazine, the poem was actually written by a Kitty O’Meara. Magazine editors contacted the author in her home outside of Madison, WI. Remember, not all you read on social media is fact! Nonetheless, the message of the poem tells a truth. I’ve seen evidence that people are beginning to think differently. My hope is that there will be an absence of people who live in ignorant ways; who are dangerous, meaningless and heartless. When this is all over, I dream of people making new choices, having new visions, creating new ways of living, and ultimately healing the earth, just as the poem says. As I’ve said in other posts, maybe this virus is trying to teach the world, and more specifically each of us, to live differently. I also mentioned that we humans are slow learners!

A Mass Shooting? Not Again!

One Canadian’s view on its gun obsessed neighbour.

Yet again, the world watched in horror as another gun slaughter took place in the United.States. October 1, 2017, was the deadliest shooting in modern US history with 58 dead and just under 500 people injured. The 2016 Pulse nightclub shooting in Orlando, Florida, previously was the deadliest with 49 killed. This latest bloodbath happened in Las Vegas, Nevada, where sixty-four-year-old Stephen Paddock opened fire on 22,000 concertgoers from his room at the Mandalay Bay Hotel. Paddock had no serious criminal history and killed himself with a self-inflicted wound before officers could reach him. Investigators are unable to find a motive for the killing spree.

What I find interesting, as many on Twitter have pointed out, is that the current resident of the White House did not use the words “terror” or “terrorist” during his remarks about the shooting, whereas he used those terms when referring to previous mass shootings. According to Merriam-Webster, an act of terror is “the use of violent acts to frighten the people in an area as a way of trying to achieve a political goal.” Granted, we don’t know what the political aim of the shooter was but by definition it sure sounds like an act of terror to me. I have to wonder if the president refrained from using the word “terrorist” because the shooter was white.

According to the article, Gun Violence by the Numbers, data from the U.S. Center for Disease Control and Prevention show that on an average day, 93 Americans are killed with guns and for every one person killed with guns, two more are injured. It is shocking to me that America’s gun homicide rate is more than 25 times the average of other high-income countries.

The CBS article, How U.S. gun deaths compare to other countries, reports that in 2010 the U.S. had a firearm homicide rate of 3.6 deaths per 100 000 people, the highest of all countries listed. Interestingly, the United Kingdom has a rate of zero as does Norway, Japan and the Republic of Korea or better known as South Korea. My country, Canada, has a rate of 0.5 deaths per 100 000 which is still too high in my view. One statistic that stands out for me is “even though it [the United States] has half the population of the other 22 [high-income] nations combined, the United States accounted for 82 percent of all gun deaths.”

According to CNN’s article on Mass Shootings, which used statistics from the Gun Violence Archive, defining, a “mass shooting” as any incident in which a gunman shoots or kills four or more people in the same general time and location, reported that in the U.S. there have been 273 mass shootings so far in 2017 (January 1 to October 3, 2017). That averages to 7.5 mass shootings a week. It seems America, or maybe even the world, has become immune to these mass shootings since we only seem to hear about the big ones. Let’s compare that to Canada. According to Wikipedia’s chart of Massacres in Canada, Canada has had 23 mass killings since 1967, the most recent being the Quebec City mosque shooting on January 29, 2017, where a single gunman killed 6 people and wounded 18 others in Quebec City, Quebec. The difference between the two countries is astounding! I am so thankful to be living in Canada.

I’m dumbfounded! It seems so obvious to me what America needs to do. There ARE solutions, America! Let’s look at the Australian example.

CNN’s article, What the UK and Australia did differently after mass shootings, reports that Australian Prime Minister John Howard was six weeks into his new job when the Port Arthur massacre occurred. That incident occurred in 1996, where 28-year-old Martin Bryant went on a killing spree ending in the deaths of 35 people in the town of Port Arthur in Tasmania, Australia.

PM Howard led the effort against a loud gun lobby and resistant state governments to push through a federal gun amnesty, in which the government compensated gun owners for the weapons they turned in. He also directed changes to gun laws that included lengthy background and identification checks for would-be gun buyers, and a ban on automatic and semi-automatic weapons.

That same article discusses the United Kingdom’s experience. Also in 1996, 43-year-old Thomas Hamilton used legally owned handguns to kill 16 children aged 5 and 6 as well as a teacher before taking his own life. This massacre in Dunblane, Scotland, provoked public outrage and backing to ban handguns. After a public inquiry, the Conservative government banned all handguns in England, Scotland and Wales, with the exception of .22 caliber single-shot weapons, The Labour government elected afterwards added .22 caliber guns to the ban as well.

You might wonder why the United States does not follow the example of the UK and Australian. A PBS article titled, Obama to Gun Owners, provides President Obama’s explanation. If you listen to the news video, Obama compares the effort to implement gun safety measures to the effort to create more automobile laws, in which during the late 20th century, there were an excess of car deaths and accidents. Therefore, governments made it priority to make stricter driving laws to be able to drive. People need a license to drive, but people don’t need a license to buy a gun which is the problem, according to President Obama.

President Obama explains in the video that even suspected ISIL or ISIS, sympathizers who are banned from flying in the United States are able to buy guns, because the National Rifle Association (NRA) uses its power and wealth to lobby members of Congress. It is because of the NRA that stricter gun laws are so difficult to get passed in the United States.

So, the question is: Will stricter gun laws be implemented in the U. S. after the Las Vegas massacre? Since no change occurred with the countless other gun massacres of the past, I doubt anything will change.

According to the National Safety Council located in the U.S. your chance of dying by a firearm in the U.S. is 1 in 370. The chance of dying in a motor vehicle accident is far less, 1 in 114.

According to Politifact:

“Last year [2012], handguns killed 48 people in Japan, 8 in Great Britain, 34 in Switzerland, 52 in Canada, 58 in Israel, 21 in Sweden, 42 in West Germany and 10,728 in the United States.”

These statistics ‘blow my mind’. That is 10 670 more gun related deaths then in Canada. I am so grateful to live in a country that has tight gun control laws. They could be tighter still in my view. I just don’t understand how a country where the chances of being killed with bullets is 1 in 370 refuses to change. I’m mystified! If the current president really wants to make America great again, he could start by making America safe again and introduce stricter gun controls.

We Are Not All the Same

A commentary on stereotyping

I recently saw on Facebook a video called, All That We Share. It is a video that was created in Denmark and provides a powerful message about stereotyping. To be clear on what stereotyping is, Simply Psychology defines a stereotype as “a fixed, over generalized belief about a particular group or class of people.” If you haven’t seen the video, here it is.

The video discusses many stereotypes, but let’s focus on some of the common ones. First, let’s look at a big one, perpetrated by rhetoric by populist movements about immigration. A common stereotype that I’ve personally heard many times is that ‘immigrants are taking our jobs’. The reality is immigrants are usually filling job vacancies. A country that is short of skilled workers will fill them with skilled migrants. Immigrants also will take jobs that most others are not prepared to do such as housecleaning. The fact is, migrants are not taking jobs away, rather they are filling a void.

Other stereotypes I’ve heard are; Immigrants don’t contribute to society’, ‘They are costing the country money’ and ‘They send money out of the country’. Like all of us, foreign workers pay taxes, pay rent, and spend money in our local economies on supplies such as clothes and food. Even if they send some money to their home country, they are still helping out our local economies.

Another stereotype is; ‘Immigrants put pressure on the health care and education system’. It is true that helping newly arrived children with their English does add extra stress on the education system, but children from other countries have helped to save some schools from closure and expose children to cultural diversity which in turn builds tolerance. Let’s be honest; health care services could not function without the many doctors, nurses and supplementary staff from other countries. That is especially true for rural areas. I live in a rural area and all of our doctors are immigrants.

According to Migration Policy Debates (May 2014) using new and internationally comparative evidence on the fiscal impact of migration for all European OECD countries, as well as Australia, Canada and the United States:

Immigrants are thus neither a burden to the public purse nor are they a panacea [cure all] for addressing fiscal challenges. In most countries, except in those with a large share of older migrants, migrants contribute more in taxes and social contributions than they receive in individual benefits. This means that they contribute to the financing of public infrastructure, although admittedly to a lesser extent than the native-born.

Now there are other stereotypes regarding immigrants, but those are the ones I personally have had people say to me. Stereotypical remarks are not only made about immigrants, but also about aboriginals. One stereotype I often heard in my youth was the stereotype of the “drunken Indian”. It was assumed by some that if you were of aboriginal ancestry you had a drinking problem.

According to a CBC News article, employers felt justified in refusing employment to aboriginal people based on this stereotype. Landlords would not rent to aboriginal people. Some establishments, bars mostly, refused to let aboriginal people enter. Taxi drivers drove past aboriginal people on the street. The daily humiliations added up to real social and economic barriers.

Not all aboriginal people have a drinking problem. That is a fact! I can personally attest to this as I have had the privilege of working with First Nations peoples over the years. Having said that, aboriginal communities have high rates of alcohol and drug use and consequently high rates of Fetal Alcohol Syndrome among their children. The reasons why aboriginal people have struggled with addictions have been studied for years. The root causes are pretty well documented. It all connects to residential schools, the Indian Act, child welfare issues, Indian agents, geographic isolation, racism, intergenerational trauma and so on. I like the way the CBC article ends.

Let’s spend our energy in supporting the healing, rather than propping up a label that only makes the healing process that much harder.

Now let’s address the most common typecasting that is occurring in our society today; the stereotyping of Muslims. According to the Huffington Post, there are five common stereotypes.

One such stereotype that I have heard is, “Muslims hate Jews and Christians’. This is simply wrong. There are multiple chapters in the Quran that mention non-Muslims. Now the Quran, like the Christian bible is subject to interpretation and there are plenty of verses that could be interpreted as Muslims are called to reject non-Muslims. However, there are verses in the Quran stressing that justice be given to even those who show hostility and hate to Muslims. Qur’an 5:8 says; “Do not let the hatred and animosity of other people prevent you from being just. Be just! That is nearer to righteousness”. That does not sound like a hatred to me.

Another stereotype is, ‘Muslims don’t believe in Jesus Christ’. What does that mean exactly? Does that mean that Muslims do not believe that Jesus existed. What people don’t know is Jesus is actually mentioned more times in the Quran than Muhammad is. Muslims believe that Jesus is an important prophet, but they do not recognize Jesus is the son of God as the Christians do. Nor do Muslims believe that Jesus died on the cross. They believe Jesus escaped crucifixion somehow. Muslims do believe in God, but call God “Allah”, the Arabic word for God.

The most common stereotype I hear is; “Muslims are terrorists” or ‘Islam promotes groups like Al Qaeda and ISIS’. This is not so. The Huffington Post rationalizes it this way.

ISIS most closely follows the ideals of Wahhabism and Salafism, which are extremist and radical branches of Islam. By best estimates, 87-90 percent of Muslims are Sunni and 10-13 percent are Shi’a, with small numbers belonging to other sects. If we go with these statistics, it’s safe to assume that Salafism and Wahhabism are less than five percent of the global Muslim population, and most likely does not represent the beliefs, thoughts, opinions, or actions of other Muslims. Additionally, Islam was not meant to have sects. However, Islam does not promote, nor does it encourage, joining radical groups. If you see stories of how people get radicalized, it’s usually through ISIS members themselves on radical jihadist forums.

In June, a Muslim “peace march” against Islamic terrorism was held in the German city of Cologne. (see Muslim Peace March). Hundreds of marchers held banners including one that said: “Love for all, hatred for none,” and “A Muslim protects lives and does not take them”. This clearly refutes the stereotype that Muslims are terrorists. Clearly there are some who are not.

To have “a fixed, over generalized belief about a particular group or class of people.” is simply ridiculous. To declare that all world leaders are ‘idiots’ based on the reported idiotic behaviour of one or two world leaders (no names mentioned) is flawed logic. There always have been some ‘idiot’ leaders and some fantastic leaders. It is wrong to lump a group of people together and think that they all act the same. Not all Christians act the same. Not all Caucasians act the same. Why would we think all immigrants, indigenous people and Muslims act the same? Ridiculous.

Not Another Terror Attack

A commentary on the latest terror attack in England.

Yet again, the world has witnessed a horrific terror attack by a radicalized 22-year-old individual linked to ISIS. On Monday, May 22 where twenty two mostly young people were killed. In fact, 12 children under the age of 16 were injured or killed, one as young as an eight-year-old. At least 59 people were injured by the suicide bomber attack in total. This terrible event occurred at a concert of singer Ariana Grande in Manchester, England. (see CBC’s Taken too soon).

Reflecting on this latest act of terrorism, I began to wonder: Are we presently living in more turbulent and unstable times compared to other times in history? Is there more terrorism today then before? If you listen to and believe the rhetoric coming from the American president, you would likely answer yes. I did some research to find out.

I focused on the historical time period in which I was alive. I grew up in the 1960s and 1970s, so I’ll look at each decade starting with the 1960s. Here is but a small sampling of terrorism and turmoil starting with the 1960s.

1960s

In Canada, Quebec separatists set off bombs and robbed armories in a bid to establish a separate French-speaking country. The Front de libération du Québec, or FLQ, (in English “Quebec Liberation Front”) was a separatist and Marxist-Leninist paramilitary group in Canada’s province of Quebec. The FLQ promised to destroy “all colonial symbols and institutions, in particular the Royal Canadian Mounted Police (RCMP) and the armed forces.
On August 13, 1961, the Berlin Wall was erected in the dead of night. It was a physical division between West Berlin and East Germany in order to keep East Germans from fleeing to the West.
The disastrous Bay of Pigs Invasion occurred. This was when a CIA financed and trained group of Cuban refugees to invade Cuba attempting to topple the communist government of Fidel Castro. The attack was an utter failure.
The frightening Cuban Missile Crisis befell with the confrontation between the United States and the former Soviet Union over the American deployment of missals in Italy and Turkey causing the Soviets to deploy missiles in Cuba. The confrontation is often considered the closest to a full-scale nuclear war the world has ever come.
On November 22, 1963, President, John F. Kennedy, was assassinated by Lee Harvey Oswald while he and Mrs. Kennedy were riding in a motorcade in Dallas, Texas.
On April 4, 1968, American Civil Rights leader Martin Luther King was assassinated by James Earl Ray in Memphis, Tennessee while standing on a motel balcony.
On June 5, 1968, Robert F. Kennedy, presidential candidate and brother of John F Kennedy, was assassinated at a campaign victory celebration in a Los Angeles hotel after primary victories.

Regarding terrorism in 1960s

It was in the 1960s when “The Troubles” occurred in Northern Ireland eventually ending with the Good Friday “Belfast” Agreement of 1998.This was a conflict between nationalists (self-identified as Roman Catholic) and unionists (self-identified as British or Protestant). Although the Troubles mainly took place in Northern Ireland, violent acts of terror (bombings, etc.), spilled over into parts of the Republic of Ireland, England and mainland Europe.

1970s

In Canada, the FLQ or October Crisis of 1970 happened. Pierre Elliott Trudeau’s federal government reacted toughly to the kidnapping of two high-ranking men and murder of Quebec Labour Minister Pierre Laporte. A state of war was declared in Quebec when the War Measures Act was instituted. Hundreds of intellectuals, political activists and trade-union leaders were imprisoned.
The Munich massacre takes place at the 1972 Summer Olympics Munich, Germany, where Palestinian Arab terrorists of the Black September terrorist organization kidnap and murdered eleven Israeli athletes.
United States President Richard Nixon resigned as President on August 9, 1974, while facing charges for impeachment for the Watergate scandal.

Regarding terrorism in 1970s

The use of terrorism by militant organizations across the world such as the Red Army Faction in Germany, Action Directe in France and the Red Brigades in Italy escalated in 1970s.
On September 6, 1970, the world witnessed the beginnings of a series of plane hijackings. It started on what is today called Skyjack Sunday. Palestinian terrorists hijacked four airliners and took over 300 people on board as hostage. The hostages were later released, but the planes were blown up.

1980s

The 1984 anti-Sikh riots in India took place. This was when Hindu militants rioted against Sikhs in response to the assassination of Indian Prime Minister Indira Gandhi by a Sikh militant.
In 1989, the Tiananmen Square protests occurred in the People’s Republic of China, in which pro-democracy protesters demanded political reform. The protests were crushed by the People’s Liberation Army.
Canada saw political unrest in the province of Quebec, due to the differences between the dominant francophone (French) population and the Anglophone (English) minority, which caused the provincial government to call a public referendum on partial separation from the rest of Canada in 1980. The referendum ended with the “no” side winning majority (59.56% no, 40.44% yes).

Regarding terrorism in 1980s

Air India Flight 182 was destroyed on June 23, 1985, by Sikh-Canadian militants. It was the biggest mass murder involving Canadians in Canada’s history.
On December 21, 1988, Pan Am Flight 103 was blown up over the village of Lockerbie, Scotland, while on route from London’s Heathrow Airport to New York’s JFK. The bombing killed 270 people who were citizens of 21 nationalities. The bombing was and remains the worst terrorist attack in United Kingdom.
The Rome and Vienna airport attacks took place on December 27, 1985, against an Israeli airline. The attack was done by militants loyal to a militant Palestinian splinter group backed by the government of Libya.

1990s

The shameful Rwandan Genocide occurred between April 6, 1994 until mid-July 1994 involving mass killing of hundreds of thousands of Rwanda’s Tutsis and Hutu political moderates. Over the course of approximately 100 days, at least 500,000 people were killed. It resulted in serious criticism of the United Nations for failing to stop the genocide.
Oka Crisis

In 1990, Canada had the Oka Crisis involving an armed standoff between people of the Mohawk nation (indigenous peoples in Canada), and the Canadian military over a dispute involving land held via treaty to the Mohawk people.
The 1995 Quebec referendum on sovereignty was held in the province of Quebec in Canada. If accepted Quebec would become an independent country with an economic association with Canada. The proposal is narrowly rejected by Quebec’s voters by 50.4% no, and 49.6% yes.

Regarding terrorism in 1990s

The 1993 World Trade Centre bombing occurred when a truck bomb detonated in New York City intending to send the North Tower crashing into the South Tower potentially killing tens of thousands of people. Thankfully, it failed to do so but killed six people and injured over a thousand.
In 1995 was the Oklahoma City bombing when a bombing of a federal building in Oklahoma City, Oklahoma killed 168.
After the bombings of United States embassies in Kenya and Tanzania by Al-Qaeda militants, the United States naval forces launch cruise missile attacks against Al-Qaeda bases in Afghanistan in 1998.
Ironically, on 15 June 1996, the IRA set off a bomb in Manchester, England targeting the city’s infrastructure causing widespread damage in which 212 people were injured.

2000s

In 2001, the war on Terror was launched largely against Islamist groups such as al-Qaeda, Hezbollah and Hamas from posing a threat to the U.S. and its allies.
2003–2011 was the Iraq War when the United States, the United Kingdom, Spain, Australia and Poland invaded and occupied Iraq.
2001–2014 was the war in Afghanistan when the United States, the United Kingdom, Italy, Spain, Canada and Australia invaded Afghanistan seeking to oust the Taliban and find al-Qaeda mastermind Osama bin Laden.

Regarding terrorism in 2000s

We all remember 9/11 when on September 11, 2001, 19 militants associated with the Islamic extremist group al-Qaeda hijacked four airliners and carried out suicide attacks against targets in the United States. Two of the planes were flown into the World Trade Centre towers in New York City, a third plane hit the Pentagon just outside Washington, D.C., and the fourth plane crashed in a field in Pennsylvania.
On the 7^th of July 2005, London experienced bombings in which a series of coordinated terrorist suicide bomb attacks targeting civilians in London’s underground public transport system during the rush hour was carried out.

Sadly, there has not been a decade in my life time where there has not been turbulence and terrorism happening on our planet. It seems we humans just can’t seem to get along with one another. Why can’t humans just be loving and get along? My answer is ego. Vocabulary.com defines the ego as an inflated feeling of pride in your superiority of others. It is ego that causes us to push our beliefs and values onto others. The Rig Veda the oldest of the Vedas, the Hindu sacred scriptures, says “Ego is the biggest enemy of humans.” I would have to agree. Dorothee Solle, a German theologian once said, “With the disappearance of God, the Ego moves forward to become the sole divinity.” Until humanity learns to control the ego, nothing will change.

Malala Yousafzai: One of Today’s Heros

A commentary on the impact of Malala Yousafzai

On April 12, Malala Yousafzai became a honourary Canadian in a ceremony in our parliament in Ottawa. That is when Canadian citizenship is bestowed upon a foreigner for extraordinary distinction. It is purely a symbolic honour as recipients do not take the Oath of Citizenship or receive rights, privileges, or duties typically held by a Canadian citizen. Only five other foreigners have received honorary Canadian citizenship before Malala. Two notables are Nelson Mandela and Tenzin Gyatso. In 2001, Nelson Mandela, an anti-apartheid activist, former President of South Africa, and recipient of the 1993 Nobel Peace Prize became a honourary Canadian citizen. In 2006, Tenzin Gyatso, the 14th Dalai Lama and recipient of the 1989 Nobel Peace Prize also became a honourary Canadian citizen. Malala Yousafzai became the sixth person in history to receive such an honour.

Ms. Yousafzai is a Pakistani student and education activist who was born July 12, 1997, making her a mere 19 years old. She is known for her crusade for girls’ and women’s rights, most especially for a girl’s right to go to school. Sadly, she was a victim of a gunshot attack in October 9, 2012, when she was shot by the Taliban. The Taliban are a radically militant Islamic group that controlled some 90% of Afghanistan between 1996 and 2000. They set out to create the world’s most pure Islamic rule by introducing a disturbing and deeply revolutionary form of Muslim culture. Under the Taliban, women were forbidden to work outside the home, were forced to wear a head-to-toe covering known as a burka, and could not leave the home without a male guardian. The Taliban also prevented women from having access to health and education. After the assassination attempt, Malala was given emergency treatment in Pakistan and then moved to Great Britain for more medical treatment.

Malala Yousafzai is one impressive young lady. For a person who has only lived 19 years, she has had an enormous impact on this planet. At age 11, she became known because of a weblog published by BBC News. The BBC issued translated writings about her life under Taliban rule. In October 2013, a book about her life I am Malala: The Girl Who Stood Up for Education and Was Shot by the Taliban was published, with her help. This is a very educational and inspiring book, so I would encourage you to read it. Yousafzai was chosen by TIME magazine as a candidate for 2013’s Person of the Year. She was nominated for the World’s Children’s Prize for the Rights of the Child in 2014. Also in 2014, Yousafzai has won a Nobel Peace Prize, the youngest person ever to do so. She will also be given a Doctor of Civil Law degree by the University of King’s College located in Halifax, Nova Scotia. I’m sure her list of accomplishments will grow. This is a person I have grown to admire and in fact consider a hero. If you haven’t heard the speech she delivered on April 12, here it is.

I happened to be waiting for our SUV to be serviced in a waiting room in the car dealership with the TV on. At that moment, a news channel was broadcasting Malala’s speech. Two parts of her speech caught my attention. The first was:

The man who attacked Parliament Hill called himself a Muslim — but he did not share my faith. He did not share the faith of one and a half billion Muslims, living in peace around the world. He did not share our Islam — a religion of learning, compassion and mercy.

I am a Muslim and I believe that when you pick up a gun in the name of Islam and kill innocent people, you are not a Muslim anymore.

He did not share my faith. Instead, he shared the hatred of the man who attacked the Quebec City mosque in January, killing six people while they were at prayer.

The same hatred as the man who killed civilians and a police officer in London three weeks ago.

The same hatred as the men who killed 132 schoolchildren at Pakistan’s Army Public School in Peshawar.

The same hatred as the man who shot me.

Malala is confirming what I have stated before in posts such as; Are All Muslims Extremists? Contrary to the rhetoric we’ve heard south of the border, all Muslims are NOT terrorists. Most Muslims are peaceful, law-abiding individuals. As Malala says, “when you pick up a gun in the name of Islam and kill innocent people, you are not a Muslim”. The same holds true for Christians as well. When a person picks up a gun in the name of Christianity and kills an innocent person(s), you are not a Christian. In fact, the same is true for any world religion as when you get down to the core beliefs or practices of any world religion, they all advocate for peaceful coexistence. It is when people start interpreting religious sacred scripture in ignorance that the true teachings of the religion become warped.

The other portion of Malala’s speech that caught my attention is:

I have travelled the world and met people in many countries. I’ve seen firsthand many of the problems we are facing today — war, economic instability, climate change and health crises. And I can tell you that the answer is girls.

Secondary education for girls can transform communities, countries and our world. Here’s what the statistics say:

If all girls went to school for 12 years, low and middle income countries could add 92 billion dollars per year to their economies.

Educated girls are less likely to marry young or contract HIV — and more likely to have healthy, educated children.

The Brookings Institution calls secondary schooling for girls the most cost-effective and best investment against climate change.

When a country gives all its children secondary education, they cut their risk of war in half.

Education is vital for security around the world … because extremism grows alongside inequality — in places where people feel they have no opportunity, no voice, no hope.

When women are educated, there are more jobs for everyone. When mothers can keep their children alive and send them to school, there is hope.

But around the world, 130 million girls are out of school today. They may not have read the studies and they may not know the statistics — but they understand that education is their only path to a brighter future. And they are fighting to go to school.

Now as an educator for 35 years, I know this to be true. Secondary education, not just for girls, but for all people can transform communities, countries and our world. I especially was struck by her statement, “When a country gives all its children secondary education, they cut their risk of war in half”. It seems to me that the cure for violence and conflict is education. This makes sense to me as through education we can teach tolerance and understanding. It is ignorance, and especially fear, that breeds tensions and conflict. It is education that will decrease a fear of Muslims. It is education that will prove to sexists and misogynist that the sexes are equals. Science has unequivocally proved this. To quote Nelson Mandela, “Education is the most powerful weapon which you can use to change the world”. So as Malala says, “Education is vital for security around the world”.

What happened to the Golden Rule?

Growing up I was always reminded of the Golden Rule, both at school and by my parents. Being raised in a Christian community this rule was always emphasized. It wasn’t always stated as “treat others the way you wish to be treated” but often in other ways such as, “show respect to your elders” and “always respect your teachers.” I have always believed that if all people could bring themselves to live by this ethic, humankind would be in a much better place.

The Ethic of Reciprocity, or what is better known as the Golden Rule, simply states that we are to treat other people the same way we would wish to be treated. It can be worded in various forms. Wikipedia describes this rule in three forms:

Positive or directive form: One should treat others as one would like others to treat oneself.
Negative or prohibitive form: One should not treat others in ways that one would not like to be treated.
Empathic or responsive form: What you wish upon others, you wish upon yourself.

No matter how the rule is stated, it boils down to the word respect. Merriam Webster dictionary defines respect as “a feeling of admiring someone or something that is good, valuable, important, etc” or  as “a feeling or understanding that someone or something is important, serious, etc., and should be treated in an appropriate way.” So when a person shows respect for another then they treat that person the way they would wish to be treated.

What always astounded me about the Golden Rule is that all organized religions have this ethic.

In Christianity it is found in Matthew 7:12 (NRSV) of the Christian bible where it is written, ‘in everything do to others as you would have them do to you; for this is the law and the prophets.”
In the Buddhist tradition it is found in a collection of verses known as the Udanavarga. In chapter 5, verse 18 of the Udanavarga it says, Hurt not others in ways that you yourself would find hurtful.”
In Hinduism, it is found in their sacred scriptures Mahabharata 5:1517 where it is written, this is the sum of duty: do not do to others what would cause pain if done to you.
Judaism has it in two places, the Talmud and Book of Tobit. The first book of the Talmud is about Shabbat, the Jewish day of rest. In Shabbat 31a. It states, “What is hateful to you, do not do to your fellow man. This is the law: all the rest is commentary.” In the Jewish scriptures, specifically the book of Tobit, it says, “And what you hate, do not do to any one.” (4:15)
In Islam, it can be found in a compilation of forty hadiths by Imam al-Nawawi, an influential Sunni hadith scholar. A hadith is one of various reports describing the words, actions, or habits of the Islamic prophet Muhammad. Number 13 of Imam Al-Nawawi’s Forty Hadiths, it says, “None of you [truly] believes until he wishes for his brother what he wishes for himself.”

The Golden Rule is such a simple thing and makes a lot of sense. It begs the question, why is it so important to live by the Golden Rule. The answer to that question has to do with the idiom, “What goes around comes around” or stated another way, “as you sow, so shall you reap”. These are simply reminding us that when people do bad things to other people, bad things will happen to them. This is what the expression, “you’ve made your bed, now lie in it,” refers to as well. An individual must accept the unpleasant results of something they have done. Really all of these expressions could be understood as karma, the law of cause and effect. Karma is a Sanskrit term that literally means “action” or “doing”. In the Buddhist tradition, karma refers to action driven by intention, which leads to future consequences. Good intent contributes to good karma and happiness in the future, while bad intent contribute to bad karma and suffering in the future.

The Huffington Post article on Karma puts it this way:

“Everything we say and do determines what’s going to happen to us in the future. Whether we act honestly, dishonestly, help or hurt others, it all gets recorded and manifests as a karmic reaction either in this life or a future life…There is no exact formula that is provided for how and when karmic reactions will appear in our lives, but one can be sure they will appear in some form or other. One may be able to get away with a crime they committed, or avoid paying taxes, but according to karma, no one gets away with anything for long.”

What I find even more thought provoking is that science supports this idea of “cause and effect”. Science, specifically Quantum Physics, is providing evidence that the mind can affect matter. There is a theory known as quantum entanglement. According to Space.com, the theory states when changing one particle it changes the other even if they are on opposite sides of the galaxy, 100,000 light-years apart. In other words, they behave like one object even though they are physically apart. Einstein called this idea “spooky action at a distance”.

Quantum Entanglement: What It Is And Why It’s Relevant says,

“Quantum entanglement means that every action, thought, feeling and emotion is connected and can affect the whole in one manner or another. We are all made up of atoms, photons and electrons. We are all in a constant state of vibration. Our emotions, feelings, hearts and minds have the ability to affect what frequency our molecular structure vibrates at. Quantum entanglement is observed at a physical level, meaning what we do to one particle at one location, happens for another particle at the a different location.”

So even science reinforces the idea that every single thing that a person does, thinks, etc. has an affect. Now I know from experience that when I said something hurtful to a student or to a family member there was an effect. The impact was typically in the form of parental wrath or an angry family member.

9-11 We’ve all felt the impact of the actions of an individual or group of people. There are many examples of this in history, such as the terrorist attacks in Paris in 2015. The affect of this event has made many people fearful and afraid to travel. We still feel the effects of the 9/11 attack in New York City as flight travel is much more cumbersome with all the extra security. Terrorism initiated by ISIL or ISIS caused much of world community to participate in a bombing campaign, bombing areas where the terrorists were located. What goes around comes around.

It’s fair to say that one person can impact the world. We just need to look at the legacies of Mahatma Gandhi and Martin Luther King Junior to see this. Mahatma Gandhi once said, “In a gentle way, you can shake the world.”

So remember every action you take, every word you say to someone, or even every action you don’t take has an impact on your community, on your planet or maybe even the universe. It seems to me that in this time of Islamophobia, fear of terrorists, and anti-immigration, the Golden Rule is very much needed. Perhaps people (no names mentioned) who spout anti-Muslim, anti-immigration, and racist rhetoric ought to remember, “What goes around comes around”.

Should the World be Worried About Trump?

A commentary on the actions of Trump’s first week in office.

January 27^th was International Holocaust Remembrance Day. This is a day in which the victims of the Holocaust are to be remembered. The Holocaust was a genocide (the methodical killing of a large group of people) that resulted in the death of an estimated 6 million Jewish people, 200,000 Romani people, 250,000 mentally and physically disabled people, and 9,000 homosexual men by the Nazi regime during the 1930s and 1940s. As a social studies teacher, I taught my students about this event and emphasized the importance of remembering such events so that such atrocities would never happen again. Now I have to wonder if history is about to repeat itself.

My New Year’s resolution this year was to watch less news which I’ve been successfully doing for the most part, but on January 27th, everyone that I met or connected with on social media was talking about Trump’s travel ban. Mr. Trump signed an executive order implementing a travel ban of people from seven majority Muslim countries for 90-days. The seven countries are Iran, Iraq, Somalia, Syria, Sudan, Libya and Yemen. This order also suspends all refugee admissions for 120 days with “case-by-case” exceptions and suspends entry of Syrian refugees indefinitely. This caused confusion as permanent residents and green card holders didn’t know if they could enter the country due to conflicting advice sent to airlines by the White House. It also sparked outrage in the form of protests across the United States (see Protests Held). The President claims he is “Protecting the nation from foreign terrorist entry into the United States”.

According to the Huffington Post, from 1975 to 2015, foreign nationals from Iran, Iraq, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen killed exactly zero Americans on U.S. soil. The article sites an analysis of terror attacks by the Cato Institute. In 2016 alone, 188 people were killed on U.S. soil in mass shootings not involving Muslim American extremists, the report says. Meanwhile, there have been 230,000 murders in the U.S. since 9/11. These are Americans shooting Americans.

The White House stated “Numerous foreign-born individuals have been convicted or implicated in terrorism-related crimes since September 11, 2001,” when it issued the order. What is interesting to note is on Sept. 11, 2001, 19 militants hijacked four commercial airlines to carry out terrorist attacks on the U.S. that killed 2,996 people and wounded more than 6,000 others. The 19 men were associated with al-Qaeda, led by Osama bin Laden. Of the 19 hijackers, 15 were from Saudi Arabia, two from the United Arab Emirates, one from Egypt and one from Lebanon. None of these countries are on the ban list. People from those three countries are still welcome to apply for U.S. visas and travel permits. This made no sense in my mind. The question is why? According to the Daily News, Trump’s business empire holds multi-million dollar licensing and development deals in all of those countries raising alarming questions over what actually went into the decision process behind the executive order.

On Facebook, a video went viral of an Irish Senator, Aodhán Riordáin, reacting to the victory of Donald Trump. I encourage you to have a look. (see Trump is a Fascist). What struck me is that the senator referred to Trump as a fascist. During the U. S. Primaries last year my son sent a text me and referred to candidate Trump as a “modern day Hitler”. I’m now beginning to wonder if there might be some truth in his assessment of the man. There are several definitions of fascism but I like the definition on businessdictionary.com. It defines fascism as a

“Political ideology that imposes strict social and economic measures as a method of empowering the government and stripping citizens of rights. This authoritative system of government is usually headed by an absolute dictator who keeps citizens suppressed via acts of violence and strict laws that govern the people. The most noted form of fascism was implemented under Benito Mussolini and Adolf Hitler, who both stripped citizens of their rights and maintained strict regimes that resulted in the deaths of thousands of humans. Some of the defining characteristics of fascism are: (1) racism, (2) militarism, (3) dictatorship, and (4) destructive nationalistic policies”.

Now if we look at the entire definition, we cannot say with conviction that the Trump administration is a fascist government. The key part of the definition that would dispute this is “headed by an absolute dictator who keeps citizens suppressed via acts of violence.” Mr. Trump was elected democratically, has not carried out acts of violence to my knowledge and is not an absolute (as in his word is final) dictator although signing executive orders is sort of dictatorial since it hasn’t been approved by the Senate or House of Representatives.

Are citizens being stripped of their rights? The January 21 Women’s March was held because woman, believed women’s rights, LGBTQ rights, racial equality, freedom of religion, and workers’ rights were all threatened under a Trump presidency. The Independent reports that Donald Trump’s travel ban has been denounced by the UN as “mean-spirited” and illegal under international human rights law. Discrimination on nationality alone is forbidden under human rights law. Essentially, this ban is removing human rights on the basis of nationality and religion. There is little doubt that citizen’s rights are being infringed upon. That smacks of fascism to me.

The above definition says, “some of the defining characteristics of fascism are: (1) racism, (2) militarism, (3) dictatorship, and (4) destructive nationalistic policies”. Are these characteristics of the Trump administration?

Racism: According to dictionary.com, a definition of racism is “intolerance of another race”. The travel ban targets Muslim majority nations, and one could argue the Muslim religion, since no terrorist acts on US soil have been carried out by people from these seven countries. How does this protect Americans? Sounds like intolerance to me. The only logical explanation is racism. So is the Trump administration racist? Looks that way to me.

Militarism: Is Trump militaristic? He just signed an executive order to rebuild the military. You be the judge.

Dictatorship: Is Trump a dictator? He has signed several executive orders. These orders were not investigated by legal, policy, or political staff to ensure acceptability. An executive order is an official statement from the president about how the federal agencies he oversees are to use their resources. The president’s executive orders are recorded in the Federal Register and are considered binding, but they are subject to legal review. What this means is Trump is governing by decree; as if he had been elected dictator. One definition of a dictator is undemocratic rule. Close enough for me.

Destructive Nationalistic Policies: Is Trump putting into place destructive nationalistic policies? The travel ban sounds destructive to me or at the very least divisive, and is certainly a nationalistic policy since it is a policy based in fear. Nationalism is the policy of asserting the interests of one’s own nation separate from the interests of other nations or the common interests of all nations. According to that definition, all of Trump’s actions are nationalistic. Sounds eerily like fascism to me.

donaldtrumpadolfhitler — from .breakingnews.ie

I think it is fair to say that some of the things Trump is doing draws parallels to the Nazis. Hitler was able to tap into the Germans’ frustration by blaming the Jews. He claimed the Jews were taking over the country by stealing high-paying jobs. He was able to animate the uneducated by saying that Jews were destroying Germany. Now compare that to what is happening now. The Trump “movement” claims that the Mexicans are stealing jobs and are responsible for much of their crime. He is also perpetrating the idea that Muslims are terrorists. Most of his support appears to come from the uneducated. The Vox article, Election Results 2016, reports, Trump won “on the basis of overwhelming support in rural areas, particularly among non-college-educated whites”

Now there are two ways to look at this mess. We could all be fearful and think the worst convincing ourselves that the beginnings of WWIII are happening. I refuse to believe that. It excites me that the actions of Trump appear to be “waking” the American people up. Perhaps this will force the United States to decide what type of a society they truly desire. Do they want a society based in fear, isolationism, individualism, and nationalism; a society that seems to have lost the of values “human dignity and respect.” Or, do they want a society that cares about its citizens or even better all citizens; a society that values human dignity and a society that loves, cares and respects all people and not just their own. I like to think that Americans desire the latter and are waking up to the reality that Trump is creating the opposite of what American’s desire; a society built on fear, intolerance and perhaps even hate. The Huffington Post has an article called, The Inevitability of Impeachment, which states “Impeachment is gaining ground because it’s so horribly clear that Trump is unfit for office”. I sincerely hope they are right!