RSSA Potpourri of Observations and Intimations
Gene Lalor | March 29, 2009
We live in a busy and tempestuous world and, indisputably, all too interesting times. Some headlines, however, give cause for reflective amusement.
“Canada Says Will Defend Its Arctic.” http://www.breitbart.com/article.php?id=CNG.92e661444313b232e8931de00c29c73b.3a1&show_article=1.
Canada, that huge but mostly inhospitable and uninhabitable country to America’s north, is in a dither. Torn between its quest to be taken seriously as a member of the community of nations and its requisite reliance on the United States for its survival, it is now threatened by the Russian Bear that Governor Palin can see from her porch.
Resurging Russia, of late deflated by oil prices in its own quest to regain its status as a world power, is eyeballing the Arctic as a source of almost limitless natural resources, principally oil and gas reserves. Made accessible thanks to the natural and cyclical effects of selective global warming and ice melt, those resources have now become a point of contention between the Bear and the Canucks.
Bravely, Canada, which has always been a staunch American ally but which has gotten testy of late as it evolves into a European-style socialist state, is asserting it “will defend its northern territories and waters after Russia earlier announced plans to militarize the North.”
“Canada is an Arctic power,” a spokeswoman for Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon, said. “The government is engaged in protecting the security of Canada and in exercising its sovereignty in the North, including Canadian waters.”
If we can get serious for a moment, Canada is as capable of defending its sovereignty or borders as it is capable of defending its Eskimos from marauding polar bears and hungry wolves. Canada has been a de facto defense dependency of the United States for the better part of a century.
There are at least eight northern regional nations vying for a piece of the Arctic resources action plus China, which makes its own rules as to what it can vie for. Canada’s Prime Minister’s proclamation that “I’ve been very clear that we have significant plans for national defence and for defence of our sovereignty, including Arctic sovereignty,” and his boast of beefing up its military presence and buying three new icebreakers, unfortunately doesn’t transform fantasy into reality: http://www.timesonline.co.uk/tol/news/world/article721377.ece
I will grant Canucks bragging rights on their defensive capabilities but only in exchange for Canada returning to its former self, i.e., ceasing to carp at its ultimate defender over trite, inconsequential issues. It’s not as if we could or should kick our northern neighbor under a steamrolling Russian bus but some deference to its southern neighbor, and ultimate protector, is called for.
“The Sadness of ‘Sexting’ ” http://www.cnsnews.com/public/content/article.aspx?RsrcID=45756
“Police Identify 200 Children As Potential Terrorists,” http://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/crime/police-identify-200-children-as-potential-terrorists-1656027.html.
Britanistan, that island nation in Western Eurabia, is waking up to the Islamic threat to its autonomy and security. Long a favorite for emigres from Muslim nations, as are Francistan, Hollandistan, and Germanistan, Brits have been aware of that threat for years but are still bending over sideways to mollify resident Islamists despite that awareness.
“Sir Norman Bettison, the chief constable of West Yorkshire Police and Britain’s most senior officer in charge of terror prevention” revealed that “Two hundred schoolchildren in Britain, some as young as 13, have been identified as potential terrorists by a police scheme that aims to spot youngsters who are ‘vulnerable’ to Islamic radicalisation.”
Considering the Muslim upheavals that are becoming almost commonplace throughout Eurabia and Britanistan, including the burning of the Brit flag, abusing troops returning from war, and 8 Muslims now on trial for attempting to blow up trans-Atlantic air flights, that was pretty bodacious of Sir Norman to say.
Also, considering the intimidation factor of some 2 million, unhappy, restless, mostly poor Muslims who reproduce like virtual bunnies and who now call Britanistan home, that announcement by Sir Norman was even more nervey.
However, he could find just 200 young Muslims that are radicals-in-training? Methinks that was a radical understatement meant as a sop to Brit Islamists intended to connote that their budding terrorists were a pittance, “a mere bag of shells” in the overall population, as Ralph Kramden might say.
One does not want to unduly upset that edgey demographic, as Sir Norman seemed to realize as he then stressed that the system was not being used to target the Muslim community. “The whole ethos is to build a relationship, on the basis of trust and confidence, with those communities,” added Sir Norman, in a veddy Brit fashion.
Before he gets too carried away with his mollification, Sir Norman should review the immigration numbers and the stats on the birth rates among the followers of Mohammed. He should also peruse Tony Blankley’s semi-fictitious novel, The West’s Last Chance: Who Will Win the Clash of Civilizations? 
and, especially, my article the misery of “Poor Brits . . . ,” http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=211
“Connecticut School Bans Physical Contact,” http://wcbstv.com/local/school.bans.hugs.2.969949.html.
In a classic and typical overreaction by public school administrators, Connecticut’s East Shore Middle School Principal Catherine Williams has declared in a letter to parents that a “no touching” policy has been instituted for her students. School personnel have observed kids ”kicking others in the groin area, grabbing and touching of others in personal areas, hugging and horseplay.” To counter this untoward behavior, “Physical contact is prohibited to keep all students safe in the learning environment.”
On the surface, such a policy is commendable. Beneath that surface, it’s beyond the pale.
Parents are understandably outraged, not because they want their kids kicked in their privates or like the idea of their daughters, or sons, willingly engaging in intimate activity and/or being the victims of uninvited intimate behaviors in school, but because the no-touch policy would outlaw innocent hugs and high-fives and general “goofing around:” 
East Shore parents and students shouldn’t despair that their school will become a site of emotionless automatons since Ms. Williams will probably cave under any exerted pressure and either reverse or greatly modify her dictates. At the very least, offenders who high-five in the halls or pat a bud on the back for a job well done won’t be expelled, as threatened.
No one would endorse injurious school behavior of any kind but irrational overkill by administrators and sapping the exuberance of 12 and 13 year olds isn’t the answer either. I wonder if apprehending and punishing the “observed” kickers and deviants would be a viable alternative, or would such actions result in too many lawsuits?
“DNA Says 13 Year Old Isn’t a Dad,” http://news.aol.com/article/british-boy-isnt-father/398888?icid=main|htmlws-main|dl1|link3|http%3A%2F%2Fnews.aol.com%2Farticle%2Fbritish-boy-isnt-father%2F398888.
Readers may recall the recent scandal in formerly Great Britain that wasn’t considered much of a scandal by the individuals involved. I refer to the matter of young Alfie Patten, the Sussex lad who believed he had impregnated his neighbor, Chantelle Steadman, when he was all of 12 and she an apparently quite promiscuous 14. See here for all the lurid details: http://www.genelalor.com/blog1/?p=837 
The waifish Alfie and the unlikely object of his lust both contended he was the daddy of Baby Maisie but then competitor teen lotharios popped out of the woodwork and claimed that dubious honor. Word was that Chantelle’s mum was trying to protect her daughter’s rep, which was already pretty well shredded, as well as trying to cash in on the story by selling it to Britain’s The Sun.
Well, truth will always out, thanks to the marvel of DNA testing, and the latest in this continuing seamy saga is that Alfie lost out in the paternity sweepstakes and some other laddie, as yet unidentified, is the winner. No doubt Alfie’s mum will encourage her cherubic offspring not to despair and to try, try, try again.
After all, aren’t stiff upper lips and dogged determination iconic traits of Brits or have those traits succumbed to European Union looser character standards?
Contributor's website: http://www.genelalor.com/
Content posted by users from other sites is posted for commentary and news purposes under fair use and each author is responsible for their own postings and a particular posting should not be construed as being endorsed by this site or its owner.
Leave a Reply
Loading ...Recommended Reading:
