And the delusional dumbass of the month award goes to…

11.12.06

Nicholas Roach of Brossard, who writes in a letter published in today’s Gazette:

U.S. ambassador David Wilkins is mistaken when he assumes all Canadians would be offended if our prime minister’s name were placed in the same sentence as Kim Jong Il and Osama bin Laden. I believe that it is insulting to put Kim Jong Il and Osama bin Laden’s names in the same sentence as Stephen Harper’s and George W. Bush’s.

Why? Because Kim Jong Il’s country is not destroying the planet’s environment and bin Laden is not in bed with Saudi oil anymore. They are not the reason future generations will die from global catastrophes. Future generations will hail North Korea for its lack of energy use and bin Laden for fighting imperialists who mess up the environment.

Yes, just as future generations today hail Adolf Hitler for tackling that pesky problem of overpopulation in Europe.

{ 7 comments… read them below or add one }

1 Puck 11.13.06 at 7:21 PM

Another great Hitler comparison there. It is so good, I bet Hitler would say something like that.

You would think that recorded history started in 1938 and nothing interesting has happened since.

Reply

2 amevoy 11.15.06 at 5:28 PM

You did kind of shoot yourself in the foot on that one, chick.

Reply

3 Michael 11.15.06 at 6:39 PM

I can’t believe that so many Canadians are deluded by the leftist disease that is infecting our media and our country. Harper has done a lot of good for Canada. He has stuck to his principles, which is more that we can say for the Liberal party. Kim Jong Il and Osama bin Laden are evil in an absolute sense. And anyone to question that, even mockingly, is incredibly numb.

Reply

4 Puck 11.16.06 at 4:25 PM

Harper has put on a good showing except for this new government nonsense. Why exactly did Ambrose travel to Nairobi just to say that they were not liberals?

There is no absolute evil. I am rendered numb by your ad hominem.

Reply

5 Michael 11.17.06 at 2:15 PM

I beg to differ. There is such a thing as absolute evil. Are you silly enough to be defending Osama bin Laden and Kim Jong Il as just being evil in our own eyes? You are being quite ignorant.

Reply

6 TM Lutas 11.18.06 at 6:28 AM

For the record, the dung/wood fires that N. Koreans are reduced to using to keep warm are incredibly polluting. All throughout the communist bloc, environmental disasters on a scale unheard of in the West are/have been the norm.

As for bin Laden not being in bed with Saudi oil. Bin Laden wants to *become* Saudi oil (and Iraqi oil, and Kuwaiti oil). That’s what that whole Caliphate thing is all about.

So, yes, a moron of the first order.

Reply

7 DaninVan 11.20.06 at 12:41 AM

I think Puck was speaking in Philosophical terms. Evil is a Human concept; WE decide what is or isn’t. It doesn’t have any connection with the rest of the Universe and in that sense, doesn’t have an absolute.
Having said that, it isn’t necessary for
something that is “evil” to be absolute in order to be so reprehensible that it’s indefensible.
How could a political scientist (much less the common person) defend Pol Pot’s actions?
We always seem to come back to the basic premise that ‘good’ is the norm (for Humanity). I’d suggest that the default state is one of aggresion, killing, and domination.

Reply

Leave a Comment

Previous post:

Next post: