Monday, January 23, 2006
a MOST interesting and disturbing Question.
Consider the following excerpts from the Rome Statutes establishing the International Criminal Court.
The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction in accordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes:
(a) The crime of genocide;
(b) Crimes against humanity;
Article 6: Genocide
For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Article 7: Crimes against humanity
For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population;
(a) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;
(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;
(k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.
Now consider: the actions of the City government against the group of people who constitute the homeless in light of their attempt to “cleanse” the homeless from the city. Actions taken in the name of Abbotsford and its residents.
The jurisdiction of the Court shall be limited to the most serious crimes of concern to the international community as a whole. The Court has jurisdiction in accordance with this Statute with respect to the following crimes:
(a) The crime of genocide;
(b) Crimes against humanity;
Article 6: Genocide
For the purpose of this Statute, "genocide" means any of the following acts committed with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such:
(b) Causing serious bodily or mental harm to members of the group;
(c) Deliberately inflicting on the group conditions of life calculated to bring about its physical destruction in whole or in part;
Article 7: Crimes against humanity
For the purpose of this Statute, "crime against humanity" means any of the following acts when committed as part of a widespread or systematic attack directed against any civilian population;
(a) Deportation or forcible transfer of population;
(h) Persecution against any identifiable group or collectivity on political, racial, national, ethnic, cultural, religious, gender as defined in paragraph 3, or other grounds that are universally recognized as impermissible under international law, in connection with any act referred to in this paragraph or any crime within the jurisdiction of the Court;
(k) Other inhumane acts of a similar character intentionally causing great suffering, or serious injury to body or to mental or physical health.
Now consider: the actions of the City government against the group of people who constitute the homeless in light of their attempt to “cleanse” the homeless from the city. Actions taken in the name of Abbotsford and its residents.
The worst sin toward our fellow creatures is not to hate them,
but to be indifferent to them: that's the essence of inhumanity.
George Bernard Shaw
I voted - did you?
I went and voted today. As I wrote earlier having become one of the “undesirables” I have a vested interest in protecting the Charter of Rights. This seems to be particularly important in light of the city government’s current war on the underclass to which I belong. I was allowed to cast my vote. It appears that in the eyes of the Federal government I still have citizenship rights and the right to cast my ballot. In fact it appears that the Federal government considers me a citizen of Abbotsford, in spite of what the city government may claim, as they accepted my right to vote in a downtown Abbotsford poll.
A tip of the hat to Elections Canada with regards to voting. Although they had to look up the procedure for a homeless person to vote, the people at the poll were courteous and unfazed by my homelessness. I needed ID and to swear an oath but that was to be expected and reasonable. Nice to see that at least one level of government is in touch with reality with respect to the existence of the homeless.
A tip of the hat to Elections Canada with regards to voting. Although they had to look up the procedure for a homeless person to vote, the people at the poll were courteous and unfazed by my homelessness. I needed ID and to swear an oath but that was to be expected and reasonable. Nice to see that at least one level of government is in touch with reality with respect to the existence of the homeless.
Saturday, January 21, 2006
NO letters to the editor for YOU!
-local newspapers tell homeless
Borrowing from Jerry Seinfeld, this is what the newspapers tell the homeless. Adding insult to the injury their failure to accurately inform the public of the truth and reality of the homeless situation in Abbbotsford by denying them any editorial voice as well.
"letters...include an address and daytime phone number to be used for verification purposes"
Let us consider these requirements. I am homeless, therefore I have no fixed address to give them. I cannot afford shelter or food and certainly have no money to waste on luxuries such as a phone. "Money talks" is an old expression, but seems true in ways I had not thought of before. The truly needy are so poor that newspapers deny them any voice. They will no doubt claim the need to be able to verify letters are not fake, perhaps even citing cases of fake letters in the past. Anyone, including some local journalists, who chose to make the effort required had no problem verifying the existence of, communicating with or meeting Mr. H. Although somehow I doubt they will claim laziness as their excuse for any verification problems.
The BC Press code states "newspapers first duty is to provide the public with accurate information". Hmmm. It also calls on newspapers to "defend the right of expressing opinions no matter how controversial". Hmmm. I suppose that neither actually requires newspapers to provide the with accurate information about major social issues. One could argue that an important part of defending a right of expression is to occasionally use that right. Homelessness is a major social issue. Newspapers claim to cover important issues so that people can make intelligent, informed decisions. HA! This is not a nice, neat, easy or simple issue to cover. It is not a popular issue, especially with the advertisers (whether businesses, local officials or government) and the powers that be. This has apparently led to news providers (newspapers, television, magazines) avoiding the issue and its assorted difficulties. Denying the homeless a voice and denying the public any true and accurate information for making decisions about addressing homelessness.
For the homeless such as myself, (who would like to begin to address the issue of the homeless and start to deal with the underlying problems that give rise to these social problems, rather than wasting money chasing the homeless from neighbourhood to neighbourhood around the city and all the other such wastes) it is far easier to tell about the reality of homelessness and make editorial comments to the entire world on the world wide web, than it is to reach our fellow citizens of Abbotsford through the local papers. Through the Internet I can speak to the world using www.geocities.com/homelessinabbotsford to share the arduous life lessons I have learned. Any citizen of Abbotsford interested in actually accomplishing something on this issue can join the rest of the world there to read my writings and get a view of what is really happening on the streets and within the current social assistance system with regards to this important issue. And hopefully, at some point, our local (news)papers.
"letters...include an address and daytime phone number to be used for verification purposes"
Let us consider these requirements. I am homeless, therefore I have no fixed address to give them. I cannot afford shelter or food and certainly have no money to waste on luxuries such as a phone. "Money talks" is an old expression, but seems true in ways I had not thought of before. The truly needy are so poor that newspapers deny them any voice. They will no doubt claim the need to be able to verify letters are not fake, perhaps even citing cases of fake letters in the past. Anyone, including some local journalists, who chose to make the effort required had no problem verifying the existence of, communicating with or meeting Mr. H. Although somehow I doubt they will claim laziness as their excuse for any verification problems.
The BC Press code states "newspapers first duty is to provide the public with accurate information". Hmmm. It also calls on newspapers to "defend the right of expressing opinions no matter how controversial". Hmmm. I suppose that neither actually requires newspapers to provide the with accurate information about major social issues. One could argue that an important part of defending a right of expression is to occasionally use that right. Homelessness is a major social issue. Newspapers claim to cover important issues so that people can make intelligent, informed decisions. HA! This is not a nice, neat, easy or simple issue to cover. It is not a popular issue, especially with the advertisers (whether businesses, local officials or government) and the powers that be. This has apparently led to news providers (newspapers, television, magazines) avoiding the issue and its assorted difficulties. Denying the homeless a voice and denying the public any true and accurate information for making decisions about addressing homelessness.
For the homeless such as myself, (who would like to begin to address the issue of the homeless and start to deal with the underlying problems that give rise to these social problems, rather than wasting money chasing the homeless from neighbourhood to neighbourhood around the city and all the other such wastes) it is far easier to tell about the reality of homelessness and make editorial comments to the entire world on the world wide web, than it is to reach our fellow citizens of Abbotsford through the local papers. Through the Internet I can speak to the world using www.geocities.com/homelessinabbotsford to share the arduous life lessons I have learned. Any citizen of Abbotsford interested in actually accomplishing something on this issue can join the rest of the world there to read my writings and get a view of what is really happening on the streets and within the current social assistance system with regards to this important issue. And hopefully, at some point, our local (news)papers.
Wednesday, January 11, 2006
The Homeless Party
What this country needs is a new political party. OK more of a replacement for the old Progressive conservatives. A party supporting Canadian Values, fiscally responsible and not the current government. I do not know what it is about Canadian politics, that no matter how well a Party does in matters affecting the governance of Canada, once re-elected the Party fails in matters of self governance, it is this failing that gave us the Liberal sponsorship scandal and all of the Mulroney Conservative scandals.
A new Party, free from favours owed, baggage or ideological blinders. A Party in the tradition and Values of Canada. In the Canadian Way – a stay out of the bedrooms, centrist, protect minorities and fiscally responsible Party. Not some American clone such as the Conservatives advocating American values – if we wanted to live in the USA we would (they should) move there.
Hmmmm?? A Homeless Party. Strikes me as an interesting idea. There are among the homeless those with education, experience and ability. Use to squeezing all the value out of every dollar. Knowing the importance of compassion and consideration for others. Having Arduous life experience, the best teacher of important, useful and tough real life lessons. With an unparalleled understanding and experience of the important of respecting and protecting the rights of all Canadians. Sounds like just the people and Party we desperately need to lead Canada into the future, providing a sound alternative to ALL the current political Parties.
A new Party, free from favours owed, baggage or ideological blinders. A Party in the tradition and Values of Canada. In the Canadian Way – a stay out of the bedrooms, centrist, protect minorities and fiscally responsible Party. Not some American clone such as the Conservatives advocating American values – if we wanted to live in the USA we would (they should) move there.
I AM CANADIAN!
Hmmmm?? A Homeless Party. Strikes me as an interesting idea. There are among the homeless those with education, experience and ability. Use to squeezing all the value out of every dollar. Knowing the importance of compassion and consideration for others. Having Arduous life experience, the best teacher of important, useful and tough real life lessons. With an unparalleled understanding and experience of the important of respecting and protecting the rights of all Canadians. Sounds like just the people and Party we desperately need to lead Canada into the future, providing a sound alternative to ALL the current political Parties.
VOTE for Leadership and Ability!
VOTE Homeless!!
VOTE Mr. H!! – I need the job.
Tuesday, January 10, 2006
Gasmask Required.
It started with radio ads, or at least it did for me since I currently seldom watch television. Not that it was unexpected, just not so many, over and over and over. Obviously I am speaking of the Conservative Party ads aimed at angering the Canadian public over the sponsorship Scandal. Although, based on the TV ad I saw last evening the $$$amount is increasing, now up to 300 million. What I want to know is, since the Conservative Party is screaming so hard about the Liberal waste of tax dollars, are they going to repay the 200 million wasted on the Inquiry? I doubt it. I have little doubt they will disavow responsibility for the Inquiry, even though they forced the government to hold the Inquiry – when the public knew that an inquiry would accomplish nothing (and were proved correct in this). The Conservatives are the reason that more hundreds of millions of our tax dollars were wasted. All so the Conservative party could cause embarrassment to the Liberals. I do not mind them trying for political advantage, I mind a great deal when they waste all those $$$ millions of our taxes dollars.
Before some hard core Conservative accuses me of being a Liberal – NO. The first vote I ever cast in my life was for Robert Standfield and I was a life-long Progressive Conservative, even serving as on of the foot soldiers during several election campaigns. Until the TRAITOR, he who should never be named (or elected), sold out the Progressive Conservative party in his lust for power. Now I find myself with no other reasonably acceptable course of action but to hold my nose and vote Liberal. Not because I fail to think we could use a change, but for the lack of an acceptable party to change to.
I will be voting Liberal because I feel the most important issue to Canada remaining Canada the need for a government that will act in a socially responsible and reasonable manner. I expect the Liberals to act in such a manner and to keep their promise not to use the “Not withstanding clause” of the constitution to override Supreme Court decisions because those decision conflict with their ideology - even if the Liberal’s promised attempt to add this to the Charter should fail.
Protecting the rights of groups who are not popular is the most important aspect of the Charter. In a society as diverse as that of Canada (geographically, politically and multi-culturally), that is continuing to become more diverse, it is of paramount importance. Not just to help us all deal with each other, but because tolerance is an integral part of being Canadian. On can only assume those who wish to force their vies on others (e.g. Religion, sexual behaviour) have become Americanized by all the USA media propaganda that flows across the border. I AM A CANADAIAN. When the Charter is functioning as it should, it is going to upset us. We are so diverse a people that there are going to be conflicts, the Charter protects the rights of the weak (smaller groups) to be treated equally and with respect. That is being Canadian.
The Conservatives stated policy is to force their views on groups they disapprove of on an ideological basis. Worse they will do this in the name of ALL citizens. Thus the Conservatives ideology is so UNCANADIAN that I am force to hold my nose and vote Liberal. It may stink, but not as badly as the Conservative Party’s attitude on the question of protecting citizens’ rights.
Before some hard core Conservative accuses me of being a Liberal – NO. The first vote I ever cast in my life was for Robert Standfield and I was a life-long Progressive Conservative, even serving as on of the foot soldiers during several election campaigns. Until the TRAITOR, he who should never be named (or elected), sold out the Progressive Conservative party in his lust for power. Now I find myself with no other reasonably acceptable course of action but to hold my nose and vote Liberal. Not because I fail to think we could use a change, but for the lack of an acceptable party to change to.
I will be voting Liberal because I feel the most important issue to Canada remaining Canada the need for a government that will act in a socially responsible and reasonable manner. I expect the Liberals to act in such a manner and to keep their promise not to use the “Not withstanding clause” of the constitution to override Supreme Court decisions because those decision conflict with their ideology - even if the Liberal’s promised attempt to add this to the Charter should fail.
Protecting the rights of groups who are not popular is the most important aspect of the Charter. In a society as diverse as that of Canada (geographically, politically and multi-culturally), that is continuing to become more diverse, it is of paramount importance. Not just to help us all deal with each other, but because tolerance is an integral part of being Canadian. On can only assume those who wish to force their vies on others (e.g. Religion, sexual behaviour) have become Americanized by all the USA media propaganda that flows across the border. I AM A CANADAIAN. When the Charter is functioning as it should, it is going to upset us. We are so diverse a people that there are going to be conflicts, the Charter protects the rights of the weak (smaller groups) to be treated equally and with respect. That is being Canadian.
The Conservatives stated policy is to force their views on groups they disapprove of on an ideological basis. Worse they will do this in the name of ALL citizens. Thus the Conservatives ideology is so UNCANADIAN that I am force to hold my nose and vote Liberal. It may stink, but not as badly as the Conservative Party’s attitude on the question of protecting citizens’ rights.
