Oui chers lecteurs, cet article est le centième (100e) publié sur Keep Right depuis sa création, le 28 novembre 2005! Ça fait déjà un an que le blogue existe! Incroyable comme le temps passe vite, non? J’ai l’impression d’avoir lancé ce blogue il y a à peine quelques mois! Et le décompte de commentaires laissés sur le blogue par vous jusqu’à date, chers lecteurs, est maintenant à 160!

Merci à tous ceux qui ont visité KR depuis le début et contribué à en faire ce qu’il devenu!

En espérant qu’une autre centaine d’articles y paraissent dans le futur! 

MERCI!

—

Indeed, dear readers, this is my hundredth (100th) post on Keep Right since its creation, on November 28th, 2005! This blog is now one year old! Time sure does fly, no? I could swear I launched this blog only a couple months ago! And the comments left by you, dear readers, now total 160!

Thanks to everyone who has visited KR in the past and contributed in making it what it has become today!

And, here’s to hoping that another hundred posts show up here in the future!

THANK YOU!

Pourquoi? Il se passe trop de choses sur lesquelles j’ai beaucoup trop à dire. Surveillez ce blogue de près dans les prochains jours. Ça va barder…

Et, il faut dire que je m’ennuyais de bloguer aussi…

—

Why am I back? Well, there’s a lot of stuff going on right now, and I absolutely refuse to keep my mouth shut any longer. Watch this blog in the coming days. I’m going to shake things up big time…

And, I have to say that I kind of missed blogging too…

"Who’s up for some college FOOTBALL? I sure am! GOOOOOO GAITERS!"

Hey, it’s been a while, ain’t it?

I’ve been extremely busy lately, moving out of my parents’ place and moving into my new life, as a Bishop’s University student living in residence. I have now added a blip on the map where Lennoxville is, which is the town I now live in (which has been merged with the city of Sherbrooke in 2003) and where Bishop’s University is located.

I took some pictures to show you what moving into residence meant for me. You’ll also get to see my room as it looks now, and the surroundings of my campus residence:

This is pretty much all of my stuff, piled up downstairs in my parents’ home the night before I moved out.

That’s the trunk of my car with some of my stuff in it, the morning I left. I doubted everything would fit in my car, but I still tried to pack it up as much as possible.

So yeah, my car WAS pretty full, as you can see. And unfortunately, it became painfully clear that one car would not be enough because I had a lot of stuff left.

So we loaded up my mom’s Aveo as well. (I have to mention, however, that some of the stuff in the trunk of that car was my parents’ and not mine, but the most part is…)

Both cars loaded and ready to hit the road! (It’s a 5 and a half hour drive, by the way.)

This is what Bishop’s "New Side" residences look like.

Inside. Pretty spacious, and well laid-out.

The view outside, with the edge of my bed, my toaster and my XM Satellite Radio antenna set-up.

My stereo, XM Satellite Radio, TV, VCR/DVD player and my book, movie and CD collections. (I later bought an antenna at The Source and I only get the CBC! Arrrghhh!)

And, most importantly, my fridge, my microwave oven and my computer, from which this blog is published right now.

So yeah, all in all, I’m very well set-up. I have nothing to complain about. I eat at the school cafeteria. We can’t do any real cooking in "New Side" residences at Bishop’s. But on the plus side, I don’t have to cook at all.

I’ve only started studying there (classes started on Sept. 6th) and already I’ve met people from all over the country. I’ve even met some from the United States, and also from Europe. This is so cool. I’m majoring in Political Science, but the University encourages students to pursue diversified studies, so I have an introductory Spanish course and a History course as well. Here are the courses I’m taking this semester:

Politics-related:

Constitutional Law & The Canadian Gov’t, Introduction to International Relations and Introduction to American Politics.

Non-politics-related:

Spanish I, and The United States Since 1945 (History).

I might be getting involved with the Bishop’s University Debating Club pretty soon, as well as the Conservative Club, but we’ll see how my time gets laid out. I’m now also working part-time as well for 10-12 hours a week at the University Bookstore for another week or so. Pretty cool. After that, I will switch over to the Centennial Theater to work as an usher for the remaining of the semester. I won’t have too much time on my hands, so I’ll be most likely blogging on weekends or so. Unfortunately, I think it must be that way.

Everything seems to be going great right now. I got new friends, a new environment, I have great classes, I have fun, so yeah, this is looking out to be a great year here at one of the smallest universities in Canada!

Will keep you guys posted! Wish me luck!

And from what they posted on their own blogs, they sure do have a lot of "ammo" for pacifist liberals…

They’re angry because I totally infuriated them with this post, published just before the one you’re now reading.

First, there’s Canadian Cynic. I quoted him here for your convenience, so you can know what I mean:

"Honestly, every time you think you’ve met the absolutely dumbest right-wing wank imaginable, it turns out you have to re-calibrate your wank-o-meter. It never fails, does it?"

Ah, that’s not too nice.

But hey, that’s what you do when you’ve got nothing intelligent to throw back at the guy, you insult and launch all kinds of personal attacks on him.

Since he insulted me first, I took the liberty to fire back at him in my own post’s comments section:

"And as for you, Canadian Cynic, I read a couple of your posts and I can say that you’re as much a cowardly leftist socialist utopist hippie AND moonbat as I am “the absolutely dumbest right-wing wank imaginable”.

Plus, you disrespected me based on my political beliefs. That alone shows what kind of person you really are deep down. Political debate must be kept to civility. And you’ve got to learn to accept that people have the right to think in a different way than you do.

And strangely, you do seem to have a problem with that: I read your little intro: “These views are not necessarily the same views held by Canadians in general. But they should be.”

Maybe you’d like a thought-police, forcing all people to think alike in some kind of totalitarian leftist regime in Canada?"

So I guess we’re kind of even. But wait, there’s more: Red Tory has picked up on the story on Canadian Cynic’s blog.

If you thought CC was nasty, you ain’t seen nothin’ yet:

"Wanker extraordinaire and angry bed-wetting pawn of the neocon right, Xavier R. Dubé"

"Wanker extraordinaire and bed-wetting pawn of the neocon right"! HA HA HA, I love it! Like I said, this just goes to show you what they are like deep down. The old Liberal tactic of defamation against your political adversary at work here. And anybody who’s even merely a remotely occasional reader here just knows that I have just about as much in common with neocons as I have in common with, um, let’s say, communists for instance.

"wants America to pick up all of its toys and storm out of the sandbox to teach the world how absolutely essential it is to global well-being. “Let’s show them how a world without the United States is REALLY like. America doesn’t have to put up with a bunch of utopist ingrate leftist governments who can’t tell the difference between good and evil. Let them fend for themselves and see how bad they screw up” squawks Mr. Dubé from his remote academic hideout in the Laurentians."

"The Laurentians!" Red Tory, I got some news for you. I DO NOT live in the Laurentians. Never did. They’re located northwest of Montreal. Did you flunk Geography in high school or something?

You know, they could have left a comment here on KR, we could have gotten into a healthy political debate right there, it would have been fun and everything, like blogging is meant to be. Which is always what I seek to do when I publish something. It’s always about starting a debate, or, in some cases, venting. 

But no, instead, they resort to pointless name-calling and language of the lowest kind.

Pretty much pitiful.

And if you ask me, I’m in for the long haul and the worst has yet to come. Red Tory’s posts all show up on the main page of Liblogs, a Liberal Party of Canada Political bloggers’ blogroll (kind or like the Aggregator at Blogging Tories). And if they all react alike in utter stupidity, I will be completely bombarded by inane observations on my own person and below-the-belt attacks of all kinds pretty soon.

Otherwise said, the shit’s going to hit the fan… luckily I’m out of here for 5 days starting tomorrow. Heading down to the Eastern Townships and New Hampshire’s White Mountains for a trip before school starts. 

But, keep in mind that it’s always shamefully shallow reactions from nincompoops like those that keep me further and further motivated to leave this country and settle south of the 49th.

UPDATE (08/21/2006 - 5:02 PM) This post has totally disgusted and infuriated a leftist blogger and a bunch of his commenters over at Canadian Cynic. Funny as hell!

This is an essay recently published on July 4th, in the honor of America’s birthday, by Heritage Foundation senior fellow Peter Brookes. Needless to say, of course, that I agree with him entirely. My comments and other personal observations will follow.

— 

Why They Need Us

July 4, 2006 — FOR all the worldwide whining and bellyaching about the United States, today - America’s 230th birthday - provides an opportune time for them to consider for just a moment what the world might be like without good ol’ Uncle Sam. The picture isn’t pretty.

Absent U.S. leadership, diplomatic influence, military might, economic power and unprecedented generosity, life aboard planet earth would likely be pretty grim, indeed. Set aside the differences America made last century - just imagine a world where this country had vanished on Jan. 1, 2001.

On security, the United States is the global balance of power. While it’s not our preference, we are the world’s "cop on the beat," providing critical stability in some of the planet’s toughest neighborhoods.

Without the U.S. "Globo-cop," rivals India and Pakistan might well find cause to unleash the dogs of war in South Asia - undoubtedly leading to history’s first nuclear (weapons) exchange. Talk about Fourth of July fireworks…

In Afghanistan, al Qaeda would still be an honored guest, scheming over a global caliphate stretching from Spain to Indonesia. It wouldn’t be sending fighters to Iraq; instead, Osama’s gang would be fighting them tooth and nail from Saudi Arabia to "Eurabia."

In Asia, China would be the "Middle Kingdom," gobbling up democratic Taiwan and compelling pacifist Japan (reluctantly) to join the nuclear weapons club. The Koreas might fight another horrific war, resulting in millions of deaths. A resurgent Russia, meanwhile, would be breathing down the neck of its "near abroad" neighbors. Forget the democratic revolutions in Ukraine and Georgia, Comrade! In Europe, they’d be taking orders from Paris or Berlin - if those rivals weren’t at each other’s throats again.

In Africa, Liberia would still be under Charles Taylor’s sway, and Sudan would have no peace agreement. And what other nation could or would provide freedom of the seas for commerce, including the shipment of oil and gas - all free of charge?

Weapons of mass destruction would be everywhere. North Korea would be brandishing a solid nuclear arsenal. Libya would not have given up its weapons, and Pakistan’s prodigious proliferator, A.Q. Khan, would still be going door to door, hawking his nuclear wares.

Also missing would be other gifts from "Uncle Sugar" - starting with 22 percent of the U.N. budget. That includes half the operations of the World Food Program, which feeds over 100 million in 81 countries.

Gone would be 17 percent of UNICEF’s costs to feed, vaccinate, educate and protect children in 157 countries - and 31 percent of the budget of the U.N. High Commissioner for Refugees, which assists more than 19 million refugees across the globe.

In 2005, Washington dispensed $28 billion in foreign aid, more than double the amount of the next highest donor (Japan), contributing nearly 26 percent of all official development assistance from the large industrialized countries.

Moreover, President Bush’s five-year $15 billion commitment under the Emergency Plan for AIDS Relief is the largest commitment by a single nation toward an international health initiative - ever - working in over 100 (mostly African) countries.

The United States is the world’s economic engine. We not only have the largest economy, we spend 40 percent of the world’s budget on R&D, driving mind-boggling innovation in areas like information technology, defense and medicine.

We’re the world’s ATM, too, providing 17 percent of the International Monetary Fund’s resources for nations in fiscal crisis, and funding 13 percent of World Bank programs that dole out billions in development assistance to needy countries.

And what does Uncle Sam get in return? Mostly grief, especially from all the ungrateful freeloaders who benefit tremendously from the global "public goods" we so selflessly provide with our time, effort, blood and treasure. How easily - and conveniently - they forget… unless they need help, of course.

But let us never forget, especially today, that despite the name-calling, the jeers, the petty jealousies, we’re the envy of the world - and rightfully so.

The fact is that no matter what anyone says: No country has given so much to so many so often - while asking for so little in return - for so little gratitude than this great country of ours. So Happy birthday, America! Stand tall and proud - you’ve earned it.

Heritage Foundation Senior Fellow Peter Brookes

peterbrookes@heritage.org

—

That essay, my friends, consists of exactly what you should answer to anti-american individuals who firmly believe the United States are responsible for all evil and every problem on the face of this planet. I, as an individual with a strong belief in the goodness of America in today’s world, welcomed this text heartily.

This essay also explains why an isolationist U.S. president would spark up a new episode of appreciation for the United States’ actions in the world by the international community. And, the more I see in foreign policy from the international community nowadays, the more I begin to think it would be quite interesting to try it.

That’s why, if I were President of the United States, I would try the isolationist card. People are whining about the United States because they’re everywhere and controlling pretty much everything? The country remains universally hated, no matter how much good it does to the human race? Fine. Let’s show them how a world without the United States is REALLY like. America doesn’t have to put up with a bunch of utopist ingrate leftist governments who can’t tell the difference between good and evil. Let them fend for themselves and see how bad they screw up. Within ten years, we’ll see either one of those two outcomes happen:

1. The entire world will be on their knees, shamelessly PLEADING with the United States to start "meddling" militarily, commercially and politically again in the affairs of everyone.

2. The entire world will be fustigating the U.S. EVEN MORE for not caring enough, isolating themselves from the world and not doing anything anymore, just like before World War 2. (Leftists, you CAN’T have your cake and eat it too.)

At this point the United States will have taken those ten years to work on their own society, fixing most of America’s problems and channelling most of the money normally used in military expenses abroad within their own borders. They will have all the latitude to do whatever they want: should they decide to start maintaining order in the world again, they will be positioned even better to do so. Should they develop a taste in focusing on themselves, they will be able to let the world "take care of itself"’ while developing their defenses at home against rogue countries.

One thing is certain though: whatever the U.S. chooses to do at this point will change the world we live in forever.

And anti-americanism will fade out like the "fashionable new craze" it really is.

—

Sources:

Why They Need Us by Peter BROOKES

Vraiment, la columnist Lise Payette est à côté de la "track" quelque chose de rare. Avez vous-vu ses deux récentes "colonnes" dans le Journal de Québec? L’une s’intitule "Harper et sa troupe d’amateurs", publiée le 24 juillet dernier en page 13, et l’autre, "Harper est brûlé au Québec", publiée le lundi 7 août, aussi en page 13.

Je ne sais pas pour vous, mais on dirait que cette ultra-féministe socialiste de go-gauche plutôt frustrée (avouée que c’est quand même vrai) n’a rien de mieux à faire que de s’acharner sur le dos du gouvernement Harper, qui, je dois le souligner, agit selon moi de manière très satisfaisante et fait exactement ce qu’il a dit qu’il ferait. Que Harper fasse une erreur ou une bonne action, ce n’est jamais correct de son point de vue à elle. D’ailleurs, elle est tellement aveuglée par sa haine du premier ministre canadien actuel qu’elle déblatère n’importe quelles sornettes sans même réfléchir aux conséquences qu’elles impliquent. Franchement, madame Payette commence sérieusement à me tomber sur les nerfs avec ses niaiseries.

Dans la première de ses deux chroniques mentionnées plus haut, cette grande prêtresse de l’establishment socio-démocrate et régressiste du statu quo au Québec lance la phrase suivante au tout début de son texte : "Que ceux et celles qui ont voté pour Harper se mordent les doigts. En voyant les dégâts dont il est capable comme premier ministre minoritaire, imaginez ce que ça aurait été s’il avait été majoritaire."

Je déteste les gens qui sont incapables de voir autre chose que le bout de leur nez et leur propre vision des choses. On dirait que madame Payette est incapable de concevoir dans sa petite tête qu’il y a des gens qui ont voté pour Harper en toute connaissance de cause et en sachant EXACTEMENT ce qu’il allait faire. On dirait que, pour elle, tous les Québécois qui ont voté conservateur à la dernière élections sont des brebis égarées, incapables de décider par eux-mêmes et séduits par les belles promesses du chef conservateur, et qu’il faut que le bon berger du Bloc Québécois ramène toutes ces belles têtes de bétail dans le "droit chemin", en l’occurence la go-gauche syndicaliste pro-Hezbollah.

Les gens qui pensent que les Québécois qui ont voté conservateur ne savent pas pour quoi ils ont voté m’irritent au plus haut point. On n’est pas des caves, madame Payette. J’ai voté pour Harper parce que je voulais réellement que le Canada se tasse plus à droite et qu’il suive de plus près les États-Unis, nos alliés et amis de toujours. Les relations canado-américaines se désintégraient à vue d’oeil sous le régne de 12 ans des Libéraux et ça devait changer coûte que coûte.

Mais ce n’est pas tout. Madame Payette en remet, cette fois contre les États-Unis: "Sa politique internationale consistait en un rapprochement avec les USA. À n’importe quel prix. C’était sa définition du succès pour lui."

J’ai juste une question à poser à madame Payette : S’il arrivait, par un incroyable coup de hasard (si on se met dans sa tête, c’est sûrement irréaliste que les USA aient raison sur quoi que soit), que les USA pratiquent une politique étrangère sensée, refuserait-elle de les suivre juste parce qu’elle les déteste?

J’ai des petites nouvelles pour vous, madame Payette: les États-Unis ont présentement une excellente politique étrangère en Israël et au Liban et je suis fier que le Canada les ait suivis. Mais vous, chers gauchistes du Québec, par votre obsession irrationnelle anti-américaine, vous en venez à supporter tous les organismes qui s’opposent aux États-Unis et à Israël (que vous mettez dans le même panier) dans cette guerre, ce qui finit par donner suite à des démonstrations soi-disant "pacifistes" complètement stupides, par exemple celle de Pierre Falardeau et de Julien Poulin faisant fièrement flotter un drapeau du Hezbollah lors d’une manifestation à Montréal dimanche dernier.

(Merci à S.I.C.W.E.B. - http://sicweb.blogspot.com) 

Révoltant, non?

Expliquez-moi, madame Payette, comment la go-gauche québécoise, dont vous êtes une représentante, en a pu VENIR À SUPPORTER UNE ORGANISATION TERRORISTE, responsable de la mort de milliers de gens en Israël ET au Liban dans le conflit qui se déroule présentement au Liban? Mais de quelle logique tordue usez-vous donc? Réveillez-vous, chers gens de la gauche, parce que vos déblatérations stupides dans le conflit Israël-Liban sont en train de vous faire perdre pas mal de votre reste de crédibilité.

Un peu plus loin, toujours dans sa première chronique, madame Payette se félicite carrément du fait que le Canada ait maintenu des relations avec le Cuba de Fidel Castro, "malgré les pressions américaines". Comme si c’était une bonne chose! Je n’attends qu’une chose moi, c’est que Castro meure et que Cuba vire au capitalisme comme partout ailleurs dans le monde (sauf la Corée du Nord).

Elle se plaint aussi que Harper ait commandé pour "17 milliards de dollars d’équipement militaire, faisant passer cette dépense bien avant d’autres besoins". Christie, les soldats canadiens étaient devenus la risée du monde entier à cause de leur équipement désuet! Voulait-elle que Harper fasse comme les Libéraux et achète encore des sous-marins qui coulent et des hélicoptères qui ne volent plus? Y’a un bout à tout quand même!

Finalement, elle termine sa première chronique en écrivant: "Il a fait la démonstration qu’il n’a rien compris au Québec, qui ne le suivra pas dans une politique étrangère dont l’objectif ultime est de faire de nous des valets des Américains. Au Québec, on souhaite la paix dans le monde. Point final."

Ouais, justement madame Payette. On souhaite tous la paix dans le monde. Mais pas à n’importe quel prix. Et il y a bien des moments où l’on doit faire la guerre pour ensuite obtenir une paix durable.

Nous devons défendre les démocraties de l’Occident qui sont nos alliées afin de garantir une paix à tout le monde. On voit bien que la gauche ici ne comprend rien à rien dans ce conflit. Un groupe terroriste (Hezbollah) prend en otage les institutions parlementaires et gouvernementales d’un pays innocent (le Liban), enlève deux soldats de l’armée israélienne et se met à lancer des roquettes sur le nord d’Israël et sur des maisons de civils israéliens et vous voudriez qu’Israël nuance sa position, et se laisse taper dessus les bras croisés sans rien faire? Voyons donc!

En tout cas, moi je n’ai pas de difficulté à choisir qui supporter dans ce conflit. Israël la victime démocratique et occidentalisée qui se défend ou le Hezbollah, un cancer terroriste islamo-fasciste et barbare qui l’affronte?

A no-brainer.

—

Sources

Le Journal de Québec, 24 juillet 2006, page 13 "Harper et sa troupe d’amateurs" par Lise Payette

Le Journal de Québec, 7 août 2006, page 13 "Harper est brûlé au Québec" par Lise Payette

Now here’s something I’ve been longing to see happen in the United States: tougher language and immigration laws.

It’s come to the point where they have become absolutely necessary. Kind of like here in Québec, after all. It’s kinda sad, but still true : the use of the English language now needs to be protected in the United States from the constant onslaught of "hispanicization" brought by Spanish-speaking immigrants to this great country.

I swear, you can’t even tell some parts of the United States apart from Mexico anymore. Last year, I had my car washed in Flushing NY on a trip to my friend Andy’s place in Queens (New York City) and he had to translate what I told the Mexican car wash attendants in Spanish so they could understand. And on the same trip, when I got to New Haven CT, I could hear Spanish spoken by people all around me. IN FREAKIN’ CONNECTICUT! This ain’t Arizona or California, dang it! But the fact remains : you DO hear more words in Spanish than in English on the streets of New York City and Washington D.C. nowadays.

Like they say, something’s gotta give.

So, I was delighted when I heard on the O’Reilly Radio Factor on XM Satellite Radio about the mayor of a Pennsylvania town that took matters in his own hands. Along with the support of the city council, he passed a series of laws and ordinances restricting illegal immigration and the use of the Spanish language in all municipal buildings and publications.

It’s about time America fights back agains illegal immigration and the omnipresence of Spanish in cities across the country.

So, without further ado, here’s the FOXNews.com article in question I found in relation to the subject :

—-

Pennsylvania Town Enacts Strict Illegal Immigration Ordinance

Friday, July 14, 2006

HAZLETON, Pa. — Illegal immigrants seeking to make a home in this northeastern Pennsylvania city could face barriers to finding a home and job after the city council passed one of the nation’s strictest ordinances to fight illegal immigration.

City documents would be printed in English, landlords would face $1,000 fines for each illegal immigrant found renting their properties and business who employ illegal immigrants wouldn’t be granted licenses.

The ordinance, designed to make the city one of the most hostile in the country for illegal immigrants, passed on a 4-to-1 vote after two hours of passionate debate.

"The illegal citizens, I would recommend they leave," said Mayor Lou Barletta, who said he wore a bulletproof vest to the vote as a precaution because the issue was emotionally charged.

The measure has divided the former coal town about 80 miles northwest of Philadelphia and thrust the 31,000-population city to the fore of the national debate on illegal immigration. After the vote, hundreds of people on both sides of the issue congregated outside City Hall, separated by a line of police officers brought in anticipation of any trouble.

Barletta proposed the Illegal Immigration Relief Act last month as a response to what he said were Hazleton’s problems with violent crime, crowded schools, hospital costs and the demand for services. Opponents argued it was divisive and possibly illegal, but supporters argued illegal immigrants’ growing numbers have damaged the quality of life in this northeastern Pennsylvania city.

"What you see here tonight, really, is a city that wants to take back what America has given it," Barletta said.

Outside City Hall, about people gathered with opponents of the measure, some with signs that read "Bias," separated by a line of police from supporters, some waving American flags.

Anna Arias asked the council, "Are any of us ready to support U.S. citizens born of someone who is undocumented?" Several people in the audience responded, "Yes!"

She warned the council that approving the ordinance would make Hazleton "the first Nazi city in the country."

The ordinance adopted at the meeting had been extensively amended from an earlier draft; one change would deny a license to any business that provides goods or services to an illegal immigrant. City solicitor Christopher B. Slusser said the provision would likely be invoked only against business people who knowingly violated it, and the city would deal with violators "on a case-by-case basis."

The number of Hispanic residents in Hazleton has increased dramatically in the past six years. City officials acknowledge they do not know how many are illegal immigrants, whom Barletta has blamed for higher crime rates, failing schools and a diminished quality of life.

In a letter sent to Barletta earlier this week, attorneys with the Puerto Rican Legal Defense and Education Fund threatened to sue on the grounds that the ordinance infringes upon the federal government’s power to regulate immigration.

Other municipalities across the country also have considered acting to address illegal immigration. Ordinances similar to the Hazleton measure have been proposed in the Florida communities of Palm Bay and Avon Park and the California towns of Escondido and San Bernardino.

Carolina Taveras, a 30-year-old naturalized citizen from the Dominican Republic who moved to Hazleton from New York City a year ago, said the mayor’s proposal has made her feel unwelcome.

A few doors down from where Taveras was getting her hair done at a downtown beauty salon that caters to Hispanic women, restaurant owner George Giannakouros said he is sympathetic to Barletta’s approach.

"I agree with the mayor, there is a problem," Giannakouros said. "I work at my business at night, I like to feel safe."

—-

Sources:

http://www.foxnews.com/story/0,2933,203513,00.html

OK, that’s it. I can’t take it anymore, I’ve got to come forward and voice my point of view.

I was trying to lay low on this, not really knowing what to think about the conflict for the past week or so, but with all the anti-Israel awful stuff I’ve been reading and hearing in Québécois French-speaking media and by U.N.-worshipping, magically-thinking, jew-hating, and, worst of all, Hezbollah-supporting liberal peaceniks about this conflict, I just can’t keep my mouth shut anymore. I hope that they get the message someday. You just don’t negotiate with a terrorist faction backed by countries whose main ambition is to have Israel destroyed…

So here it is for all to see, the flag of Israel, in all its glory, symbolizing my position in the conflict:

I FIRMLY AND STRONGLY SUPPORT THE NATION OF ISRAEL IN ITS FIGHT AGAINST INTIFADAH-FUELED INJUSTIFIED VIOLENCE, DECADES OF RANDOM ACTS OF TERRORISM DIRECTED AT CIVILIANS AND ISLAMOFASCISM AS A WHOLE!

So there you have it. No freaking wiggle room. Fuck creating a Palestinian State if they want to act like total asses. Compromises work both ways, buddies.

In thinking like I do, I oppose myself to a great majority of my fellow Québecers. I feel Israel is well within its right to drop bombs on Southern Lebanon considering what’s happened over these past years with Hezbollah. I am deeply sorry for the people of Lebanon who have absolutely nothing to do with this, but it has to be done. And if at least Lebanese leaders didn’t harbor or provide a hideout for Hezbollah terrorists, maybe they wouldn’t have to incur Israel’s wrath today.

But what irks me even more is the incessant criticism of Harper’s position in the conflict, which, by the way, strongly resembles mine. Speaking of which, here’s what Thursday, July 20th’s copy of Le Journal de Québec said about it, on page 2: "So, Stephen Harper’s lack of initiative in rescuing Canadians in Lebanon and his quite hasty condemnation of Hezbollah have cost him serious support."

WHAT? His quite hasty condemnation of Hezbollah? What are these people smoking? Who’s going to believe such a thing? And exactly whose support has this cost him? Islamofascist grassroots movements in Canada, perhaps? He can very well do without this kind of support, for Hezbollah is, after all, a terrorist movement which HAS TO BE CONDEMNED AT ALL COSTS.

But wait, there’s worse.

According to a recent poll, "Two out of three Québecers (67%) do condemn Stephen Harper’s position, which supports Israel’s operation in Lebanon, while only 48% of Canadians disapprove of it."

It sounds as if in Québec, we prefer the random bombings of Israeli civilians by Islamofascists that would love to see the Hebrew state destroyed rather than the self-defensive riposte of a westernalized, democratic country like Israel.

Pitiful. Shamfully pitiful.

I can only cringe at the thought of which policies and treaties an independent Québec would be pushing forward if it had the chance.

-

Sources:

Le Journal de Québec, Thursday, July 20th, page 6.

Yeah, I got great news from the University on Tuesday of last week.

First off, they’re giving me an entrance award!

See below:

The Jeff Cannon Memorial Entrance Award, valued at $1000!

Here’s what the Bishop’s University website says about this award:

"JEFF CANNON MEMORIAL ENTRANCE AWARD

Value: $1000

Preference will be given to students who demonstrate extensive school and community involvement; exhibit leadership qualities; show an entrepreneurial spirit. Awarded by the Awards and Bursaries committee."

Way cool! It really paid off to apply! That’s REALLY going to help my budget!

But I’ve got to tell you that when I first opened the envelope, I couldn’t believe my eyes. I was in shock. I slowly climbed up the stairs from my room downstairs up to the kitchen where my parents stood, my eyes wide open and my face looking like I’d just seen an alien landing on the surface of the Earth. My parents were ecstatic, and once I realized what that meant, I was, too.

The other news I got from Bishop’s are also great. I got them on Wednesday, when I called the University Residence Services to ask a couple questions. I was told that Bishop’s had changed food contractors, and now Sodexho is the new one. But what’s really exciting is the new meal plans: they ALL offer the possibility of continuous dining: You can eat non-stop from 7 AM to 12 AM EVERY DAY at the Dewhurst Dining Hall, and whether you have 1 meal a day, 3 meals or 20 (if you’re an ogre) you get to pay the same price. Isn’t that great? What used to be with the old food contractor (Chartwells) that you had to make sure to save enough credits on your meal plan to last you the whole year is not in effect anymore. I remember that when I laid out my budget along with my parents for next year, we were really unsure about how often I could eat at the Dining Hall every week without running out of credits before the end of the year. So we were ready to buy all kinds of cooking accessories, from woks to microwaves, and to rent a mini-fridge in my room. That just won’t be needed anymore, thanks to the new plan, so my parents will be able to provide me with more money for my studies.

I also am making arrangements to go to Bishop’s around the end of August (most likely on the 22nd) so I can apply on part-time jobs, meet some people and be interviewed before school starts on September 6th. I’ll probably take advantage of this opportunity to go and treat myself to two days in the White Mountains of New Hampshire with my aunt and my cousin before school starts for good. I booked a room for two nights at the Littleton NH Econo Lodge. Hope it all goes well and that I have fun!

Can’t wait to be there!

So far, everything’s going much better than expected. I’ll also get to keep my car after all, as long as it doesn’t break, and I don’t use it too often. I actually AM looking forward to get there.

L’anti-américanisme est devenu tellement répandu et systématique de nos jours qu’il en est maintenant banalisé. C’est dommage, car l’anti-américanisme aveugle les gens au point de ne plus être capable de voir la vérité. Personne n’est capable d’avouer son anti-américanisme puisque nous en sommes rendus au point où seuls les gens qui désirent réellement faire du mal aux États-Unis et au peuple américain sont considérés comme étant réellement anti-américains. Ceci est une déformation monstrueuse du concept de l’anti-américanisme et il faudrait que les gens sachent qu’il en faut beaucoup moins que ça pour mériter le qualificatif "d’anti-américain".

J’ai trouvé aujourd’hui le blogue de Joe User, (http://www.joeuser.com) qui a créé un excellent mini-test pour savoir si vous êtes anti-américain ou non.  (http://draginol.joeuser.com/articlecomments.asp?AID=31802&s=1)

Je l’ai donc traduit, et voilà ce qui en résulte:

Vous êtes peut-être anti-américain SI:

1. Vous croyez que l’Américain moyen est "stupide", "mouton" ou "brainwashé".

2. Vous préférez les lois faites par des juges nommés plutôt que celles faites par des politiciens élus. 

3. Vous croyez que les États-Unis constituent, en entier, la "plus grande menace à la paix mondiale".

4. Vous croyez que la culture américaine est un cancer grotesque qui s’étend au monde entier. 

5. Vous croyez que les États-Unis constituent la plus grande menace à l’environnement.

6. Vous croyez que les attaques du 11 septembre 2001 étaient "courues d’avance" dû à la "politique étrangère" des États-Unis depuis plusieurs années.

7. Vous espérez que les États-Unis perdent en Irak.

8. Vous voudriez voir la Chine, la Russie ou l’Union Européenne agir comme contre-pouvoir militaire face aux États-Unis.

9. Vous considérez Bush, Clinton ou n’importe quel autre président des États-Unis comme un "criminel de guerre".

10. Vous croyez que le capitalisme à l’américaine entraîne la ruine du monde entier, la dégradation des individus ou les catastrophes environnementales.

C’est tout. Si vous avez répondu "oui" à plus de deux affirmations, selon moi, vous êtes anti-américain. Il n’y a pas d’autre solution possible.

Donc, environ 80% des Québécois sont probablement anti-américains. Même s’ils vous disent non ou refusent de l’admettre, c’est quand même vrai.

Si vous visitez ce blogue et que ce test vous apprend que vous êtes anti-américain, je vous invite tout spécialement (vous pouvez le lire quand même si vous n’êtes pas anti-américain, comme moi) à lire l’excellent texte que j’ai traduit en français de Peter Brookes écrit pour l’occasion du 4 juillet 2006, la fête d’indépendance des États-Unis, avec lequel je suis ENTIÈREMENT d’accord, et dont le titre est:

POURQUOI ILS ONT BESOIN DE NOUS

Le 4 juillet 2006 – POUR toutes les fois ou le monde entier s’est plaint à propos des États-Unis et a râlé contre eux, cette journée – Le 230ème anniversaire de l’Amérique – constitue un temps opportun pour que ce monde considère et se demande, ne serait-ce qu’un moment, à quoi ressemblerait un monde sans le bon vieux Oncle Sam. Ce ne serait pas beau.

Si le leadership, l’influence diplomatique, la puissance militaire, le pouvoir économique et la générosité sans précédant des États-Unis étaient absents, la vie sur cette planète serait probablement très monotone et triste. Même en ne tenant pas compte de la différence que les États-Unis ont faite au courant du siècle dernier – imaginez un monde ou ce pays aurait disparu le 1er janvier 2001.

Pour ce qui est de la sécurité, les États-Unis à eux seuls sont l’équilibre global des pouvoirs. Et même si ce n’est pas ce que nous préférerions, nous sommes bien l’ « agent de la paix » du monde entier, permettant ainsi une stabilité plus que nécessaire dans plusieurs « quartiers chauds » de la planète.

Sans les É.U. jouant un rôle de « Globo-Cop », l’Inde et le Pakistan pourraient très bien trouver un prétexte pour se déclarer la guerre en Asie du Sud – ce qui mènerait sans doute au premier échange de détonations nucléaires de l’Histoire. Tu parles de feux d’artifice du 4 juillet…

En Afghanistan, Al-Qaeda serait encore un « invité honorable », manigançant un califat global s’étendant de l’Espagne à l’Indonésie. L’organisation terroriste n’enverrait pas de combattants en Irak; à la place, le gang d’Osama se battrait bec et ongles de l’Arabie Saoudite à l’ « Eurabie ».

En Asie, la Chine serait le « royaume du milieu », avalant la démocratie de Taiwan et obligeant le pacifique Japon à rejoindre (à contrecœur) le club des pays détenant des armes nucléaires. Les deux Corées pourrait se livrer une autre guerre horrifique, de laquelle résulteraient des millions de morts. Une Russie résurgente, pendant ce temps, intimiderait gravement ses voisins. Oubliez les révolutions démocratiques en Géorgie et en Ukraine, Camarade! En Europe, ils recevraient des ordres de Paris ou Berlin – en supposant que ces rivaux ne se battent pas entre eux encore.

En Afrique, le Liberia serait encore sous l’emprise de Charles Taylor et le Soudan n’aurait aucun accord de paix. Et quelle autre nation pourrait ou voudrait assurer la liberté de commerce sur les mers, incluant le transport du pétrole et du gaz – sans rien demander en retour? Les armes de destruction massive seraient partout. La Corée du Nord brandirait un solide arsenal nucléaire. La Libye n’aurait pas rendu les armes, et le proliférateur par excellence du Pakistan, A.Q. Khan, ferait encore son porte-à-porte, véhiculant son message de guerre.

Il manquerait aussi bien d’autres cadeaux de l’ « Oncle Sucre » - en commençant par 22% du budget des Nations Unies, ce qui inclut le budget nécessaire à la moitié des opérations du Programme Alimentaire Mondial (PAM), qui nourrit plus de 100 millions de personnes dans 81 pays.

Absents seraient aussi les 17% du budget de l’UNICEF servant à nourrir, vacciner, éduquer et protéger les enfants de 157 pays – et 31% du budget du Haut Commissariat aux Réfugiés (HCR) des Nations Unies, qui vient en aide à plus de 19 millions de réfugiés partout dans le monde.

En 2005, Washington a contribué 28 milliards de dollars en aide étrangère, plus que le double du montant du deuxième plus grand donateur (le Japon), ce montant constituant à lui seul presque 26% de toute l’assistance officielle au développement provenant des grands pays industrialisés.

En plus, l’engagement du Président George W. Bush de 15 milliards de dollars sur cinq ans sous le couvert du Plan d’Urgence contre le SIDA s’avère le plus grand engagement d’une seule nation dans une initiative internationale pour la santé – à jamais – œuvrant dans plus de 100 pays (majoritairement africains).

Les États-Unis sont le moteur économique du monde entier. Nous n’avons pas seulement la plus vaste économie, nous dépensons 40% du budget mondial en recherche et développement, permettant une innovation aux limites du réel dans des champs comme les technologies de l’information, la défense et la médecine.

Nous sommes aussi le guichet automatique du monde entier aussi, fournissant 17% des ressources du Fonds Monétaire International (FMI) pour les nations en crise fiscale, et finançant 13% des programmes de la Banque Mondiale qui transfère des milliards de dollars en assistance au développement aux pays qui en ont besoin.

Et qu’est-ce que l’Oncle Sam reçoit en retour? Surtout du mépris, tout spécialement de la part des profiteurs ingrats qui bénéficient incroyablement des « biens publics » globaux que nous fournissons si généreusement avec notre temps, nos efforts, notre sang et notre trésorerie. Ils oublient si vite – et si bien… à moins qu’ils n’aient besoin d’aide, bien sûr. Mais nous, nous n’oublierons jamais, et spécialement aujourd’hui, que malgré les insultes, les railleries, les petites jalousies, nous sommes l’envie du monde entier – et ils ont raison de nous envier.

Le fait est que peu importe ce qu’ils diront : Aucun pays n’a autant donné à autant de monde aussi souvent – en demandant si peu en retour – pour aussi peu de gratitude et de reconnaissance que notre grand pays à nous. Alors, Bonne fête, Amérique! Reste grande et fière – tu l’as bien mérité.

Peter Brookes, Membre Senior de la Heritage Foundation

peterbrookes@heritage.org

Adresse du texte original (anglais) - New York Post