These two "Letters to the Editor" appeared in a local newspaper, Lillooet News April 2, 2003. I thought the stark contrast between them was most interesting and worth sharing here.
War is never the answer
To the editor,
“A good end cannot sanctify evil means; nor must we ever do evil that good may come of it.” - William Penn, 1693
We are appalled and deeply saddened by the decision of the United Kingdom, the United States of America and other countries, such as Australia, to launch a war against Iraq. We pray for all those affected combatants and non-combatants alike. We pray for world leaders that God’s grace will lead them to bring a rapid cessation to the war.
War threatens to terrify, maim, kill, and bereave vast numbers of innocent people in Iraq who are already suffering the punitive effects of economic sanctions (half of Iraqi citizens are children). We fear that violence in the region will intensify, whilst efforts towards peaceful democratic change will be undermined. Bridge-building between the West and the Arab and Muslim world will become more difficult. Support for political extremists across the world appears likely to increase.
The primary purpose of the United Nations to save succeeding generations from the scourge of war through patient dialogue and disarmament has been cast aside by governments that claim to be world leaders in democracy and human rights. We are shamed, grieved and angered by the fact that a small minority of governments has chosen the unconscionable act of war, going against the will of the international community and against the will of many of their own citizens.
Despite our grief and shame, our spirits are heartened by the tens of millions of world citizens who are taking up the responsibility of citizenship to learn about global issues, to affirm the role of the United Nations and the Security Council, and to challenge the actions of government when their actions contravene what is moral and just.
Quakers recognize that the crisis over Iraq has presented extraordinary challenges to the international community. The world’s goal for Iraq must be the same as that for any nation - a just and sustainable peace for its people and neighbours. To this end, the United Nations weapons inspections and disarmament process appeared to be making progress. The lifting of indiscriminate economic sanctions against Iraq might have helped its people towards determining their T future according to their right.
War is not the answer, not now and not ever. War does not bring about peace. War does not bring about security. War hurts innocent people and generates new resentment and new impetus for revenge in generations to come. Faith in violence as a means of solving political problems is both dangerous and contrary to our understanding of God’s way. It is irresponsible for any nation to possess weapons of mass destruction and threaten their use against others. Peace between nations can only be won if the international community accepts a common responsibility for achieving disarmament and answering the vital needs of all. We implore world leaders to return to the tables of the United Nations with ever more resolve to solve international crises peacefully and to hold each other accountable for their actions in the global community.
Mary Ellen McNish General Secretary American Friends Service Committee Philadelphia, PA, USA
Margaret Clare Ford Clerk Canadian Friends Service Committee, Toronto
Liberals’ failure to support Yanks is the last straw
To the editor,
Don’t know about the rest of you but I for one am thoroughly disgusted and embarrassed by our Liberal government and the “little merry moron” from Shawinigan (our prime minister) in not backing our neighbour and allies in the fight against the terrorism and tyranny. Forty-eight other countries found the will and courage to back the biggest democracy in the world, which happens to be our immediate neighbour. Why not us? We’ve been under their protective wing since the Second World War and though they are very disappointed with our non-participation in the war would still, I’m sure, protect us in case of a foreign aggressor. I’m sure France, Germany, China and Russia wouldn’t under such circumstances.
This is the last straw for me and for many other non-Liberals. We sit by and watch our military virtually destroyed by under-funding. Our Canada is one of the highest-taxed countries in the free world. Our provinces are being taken over by the central government. Our wheat farmers are going to jail for bucking the Federal Wheat Board. The El Fund has been robbed of $34 billion put into general revenue. Billions of dollars are being wasted on the gun registry, Alberta’s $9 billion energy fund has been stolen. We open our borders to terrorists, HIV immigrants, tuberculosis immigrants and very few Caucasians. These are just a few of the Liberals’ snafus. The list goes on and on with no end in sight.
Let’s see if the SLRD will consider a full-page ad in the Washington papers saying we are American-friendly. I know for sure a lot of potential tourists are painting us with the same brush they are painting Parliament with. We don’t need it and we do need tourism from the USA, as well as their protection. Maybe we should all join the Western Separatist movement before it’s too late.
I'm ashamed to say I don't follow Canadian politics all that closely, although I did know they're very liberal, I can sympathise with Canadians. They have the most beautiful country imaginable but are really hobbled by whackos. Did they get so liberal simply by showing they are "Not the US"?
I can't imagine why Canadians need to "be under US protection". Allies, yes, but protected? Don't they find their beautiful nation worth defending? Why do Canadians (or any other nations) think the US wants to overshadow them? We've got our hands full just taking care of our own matters, ISTM.
Two comments, and one question. First this once again proves that liberalism is in fact a mental disease. Second its good to see that there is a "remnant" of conservatives still in Canada.
And now the question, what is the Western Separatist Movement? You guys want to be a commonwealth of the USA?
The Western Separatist Movement is for the most part based in Alberta, though there are some in B.C. They are fed up with the Federal Liberal government, not only for its liberalism, but for their ignoring the west in their politics. It isn't so much that they really want to separate from Canada (though there are exceptions); they just don't want to do business as usual, even if it means they separate from Canada. The Alberta government for the most part does it's politics for the most part more like the US, but is limited in their effectiveness because of they must abide with Canadian politics.<br>I do not believe they want to join the U.S. however, I believe they could not survive by themselves.
That is my understanding of this, however this information is gathered from information I have been able to gather, so it may not be completely correct.
For a thought provoking interview with the late Dr. Bahnsen on the subject of "just war" click below. It was recorded during the days of Desert Storm. I think Dr. Bahnsen might have supported this current war, but he most certainly did not support Desert Storm.
what is the Western Separatist Movement? You guys want to be a commonwealth of the USA?
This is an unofficial ad hoc group which is unorganized and mostly a sentiment among some people living in the western part of Canada. The reasons for their wanting to separate from Canada, which is mostly rhetoric, are varied. From what I have been able to ascertain, the majority are disgruntled over the Federal government's slighting of the West in most things which probably is understandable since the bulk of voters reside in the East. Further, whatever may be called "conservative" in this country has few representatives in Parliament thus the desires and needs of westerners is but a faint cry amidst the mass of Liberal voices. Another impetus for this talk of separation, although less prevalent than the representative issue is the difference in political philosophies. In all honesty there really isn't a truly conservative party in all Canada, at least any that are publicly known. The "Conservative Party" as they are want to call themselves are not much different than the Liberals philosophically; they are both strong Socialists. Then there is the "Reform Party" which is, relatively speaking, more conservative philosophically, at least it was originally, but over the past few years it has been moving more to the left in an attempt to attract more sympathizers in order to defeat the Liberals. This group is the only one even close to what might be considered "right wing". The more radical within that group could be considered to be truly "right wing", but are dismissed out of hand as being fanatics because they would like to see an abandonment of the Parliamentary system for a more Democratic one; similar to the U.S. Also, within the Reformed Party you will find an element that is somewhat openly quasi-Christian, at least in issues of morality, e.g., abortion, euthanasia, pornography, homosexuality, etc.
As to the matter of the Separatist Movement wanting to join with the United States, well there is a very small minority that has offered this as a possible alternative. But it is not anything that is taken seriously. Again, it's more rhetoric than anything else.
Quote
First this once again proves that liberalism is in fact a mental disease.
This is a true and astute observation on your part, Prestor! The technical name for this "mental disease" is classically known as "Cranial Rectosis".
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/pilgrim/pil_sig2.gif)
![[Linked Image]](http://www.the-highway.com/Smileys/pencil.gif)
