Israel Must Prepare for War With Russia

Russia’s invasion of Ukraine is only the beginning. Does anyone really think that Russian President Vladimir Putin will stop after he conquers Europe’s bread basket? Don’t get your hopes up. Putin wants ALL the countries of the Soviet Union back under Russian rule. In fact, he wants more than that. He wants Russia to dominate Europe. He wants Russia to be the dominant power in the world.

In the midst of Russia’s growing assertiveness, and now outright aggression, the State of Israel has straddled both sides of the fence. On the one hand, maintaining strong ties with its greatest ally, the United States, and on the other hand, keeping relations with Putin’s Russia as cordial as possible. Israel cannot afford to enrage Russia, which is why the Israeli government initially hesitated to condemn Putin’s invasion of Ukraine. Former Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu knew that it was important to maintain friendly relations with Russia. Fortunately, current Prime Minister Naftali Bennett has followed his example.

But there will come a time when Israel can no longer sit on the fence between the West and Russia. At some point, the Jewish state will have to pick a side. I have no doubt that Israel will choose to side with the U.S. and the rest of the Western world in countering Russian aggression. When this happens, the Jewish state will have to prepare itself for direct conflict with the world’s largest country. In other words, Israel must prepare for an eventual war with Russia.

Putin’s Russia and Israel are already on opposing sides of a new Cold War. The Russians routinely support our enemies in Syria and Iran. Russian expertise built much of Iran’s nuclear infrastructure. Furthermore, Russia has continued to arm the tyrannical regime of Syrian president Bashar Al-Assad, who probably would not still be in power if not for Putin’s support. Some of the weapons that Russia has supplied to Syria have made their way to Hezbollah, the Iran-backed terrorist group sworn to Israel’s destruction. Russia also maintains an important military base in Syria, from which Russian forces could attack the Jewish state in the future. It may not be long before Russian missiles and bombs rain down on Israel.

So how can Israel prepare for the likelihood of a war with Russia? I am no military strategist or intelligence expert, thus I don’t really have the answer. There are, however, a couple of ideas that come to mind. Firstly, Israel should try and persuade Jews living in countries that are vulnerable to Russian aggression to leave. The reason is that once Israel becomes an enemy of Russia, Putin will no doubt begin persecuting the Jewish populations of any territory he controls, arguing that they are a fifth column. At a certain point, the borders of Russia and any other territory under Putin’s control will close, preventing Jews from finding refuge elsewhere, so it is imperative that Israel help get these people to safety before then.

Another way Israel can prepare for a war with Russia is by increasing its strategic importance. Right now, the Jewish state already has a high level of strategic importance because of its proximity to the world’s leading producers of oil and gas. Israel itself is also emerging as a major gas exporter to the extent that, in 2020, it signed a deal with Cyprus and Greece to build a pipeline that would allow Israeli gas to flow to Europe. Building such a pipeline would substantially raise the level of the Jewish state’s strategic importance because it would reduce Europe’s dependence on Russia for its gas supply. Unfortunately, U.S. President Joe Biden has decided not to support this project. It is vital, then, that Israel makes every effort to convince the U.S. to reverse its decision so that the pipeline can get built, because if the Jewish state can help fulfill Europe’s energy needs and reduce its reliance on Russian gas, the European powers will be more inclined to protect Israel from Putin’s Russia in the future.

Updates:

I'm not the only person saying that Israel can be Europe's future gas supplier. Check out this article in the Jerusalem Post: https://www.jpost.com/business-and-innovation/energy-and-infrastructure/article-698808

https://www.israelhayom.com/opinions/israel-must-step-in-to-replace-russian-gas/

The Threat of China

There are plenty of reasons to be angry at China, or more specifically, the communist dictatorship that rules it. COVID-19 is just the latest threat that has originated from the Middle Kingdom, and its dictatorial regime bears direct responsibility for it. They knew about the outbreak months before it made world headlines. Furthermore, they hoarded personal protective equipment (PPE), and when the pandemic started showing up in the rest of the world, the Chinese government began selling that PPE at inflated prices. Such actions are very becoming of one of the world’s most evil regimes.

 

When people talk about threats to freedom and democracy, they usually refer to the regimes of countries like Iran and North Korea. But I would contend that China’s communist dictatorship is a much greater threat to the free world. In fact, China’s foreign policy is one of the reasons that rogue regimes like those of Iran and North Korea still exist. Indeed, without their alliance with China, North Korea’s totalitarian regime would likely have ceased to exist shortly after the fall of the Soviet Union. As for Iran, China’s ties with the Islamic Republic have been growing steadily over the years. China has been Iran’s biggest trading partner since the early 2000s, and has been instrumental in building up the Islamic Republic’s infrastructure, including its nuclear facilities. It’s not unusual for dictators to be chummy with each other, which is why a new eastern bloc composed of the dictatorships of China, Iran, and Russia has been gradually emerging since the turn of the century.

 

Meanwhile, China has been expanding its military at a rapid pace. The country’s communist regime’s ultimate objective is to match the military strength of the United States, or even surpass it by mid-century, and they’re well on their way to doing that. They are modernizing their forces, expanding their navy, building aircraft carriers, and bolstering their missile capabilities. Most recently, China has been expanding its presence in the South China Sea, which it claims in its entirety. The Chinese military has set about building a number of military bases on the small islands located therein. China has also been increasing harassment towards the activities of other countries in the South China Sea, such as Vietnam, Malaysia, and the Philippines. But China’s communist dictatorship is not content with expanding its military power in its own region. It wants China’s military power to expand worldwide, which is why it recently built a base in the small African state of Djibouti. It may be China’s first overseas base, but it definitely won’t be the last.

 

Then, there is China’s Belt and Road Initiative, designed to expand China’s economic influence around the world. In a nutshell, the initiative involves heavily investing in countries and markets all over the globe, particularly in developing countries, to create a modern Silk Route of trade corridors connecting to the People’s Republic. By doing this, China hopes to eventually turn its economic power into political power so that it will have sway over a growing number of countries, especially in Africa, where the communist regime is heavily involved in building the infrastructure of the continent, replacing aid from the West. Indeed, a new cold war is taking shape as China and the West jockey for influence among less powerful countries. The more China’s influence among these countries grows, the fewer allies the West may have in any future military conflict with the communist dictatorship as it forges itself into a new evil empire.

 

If you want a glimpse of what China’s regime has in store for the rest of the world, look no further than within China itself, where there is no free speech, little religious freedom, and almost zero protection for the country’s minority populations. In fact, China’s rulers have set about destroying the country’s minority cultures. They have relentlessly persecuted the Tibetan people for decades, trying to rid them of their religion and culture. They have put an untold number of Uighur Muslims in internment camps in an attempt to brainwash them so that they no longer maintain their language and religion. In general, China’s dictators have sought to impose the culture and language of the Han Chinese majority on the country’s entire population.

 

The free world must prepare itself for an eventual military conflict with China’s communist dictatorship with the ultimate goal of destroying it and giving the people of the Middle Kingdom their freedom. But what would a free China look like? First of all, it would probably be smaller, because after the dictators are removed, the regions of Xinjiang, Tibet, Inner Mongolia, and Manchuria, now under Chinese occupation, would be given their freedom. China would have a new constitution that guarantees the rights and freedoms of all of its citizens, and eliminates the use of armed conflict in order to resolve disputes, similar to stipulations put in Japan’s post-World War Two constitution. The dictators themselves will be put on trial for the crimes they have committed against their own people and the people abroad who have suffered as a result of their actions, just as the leaders of Nazi Germany were. All of this may sound like wishful thinking for now, but such an outcome is possible, if the leaders of the free world act in unison to oppose the ambitions of one of the world’s most evil regimes.

Trudeau the Fraud

 

In the 2015 federal elections, Justin Trudeau won a majority government after convincing Canadian voters that he was different from other politicians, and that he was offering genuine change. But has Trudeau the younger ushered in real change in Canada and in Canadian politics? Not by a long shot.

Most of the change that Trudeau has brought to Canada is simply a change back to old Liberal policies. In fact, most of what the Trudeau Liberals have done has all had to do with reversing the policy decisions of former Prime Minister Stephen Harper and the Conservatives. Easing requirements for Canadian citizenship, increased environmental regulations, a return to the long-form census, more emphasis on multilateralism in Canadian foreign policy, you name it, it’s all just been about changing back, not moving forward. Whatever actual changes Trudeau’s Liberal government has made are either cosmetic or consist of policies stolen from other parties.

 

For example, Prime Minister Trudeau has always made a big deal about having gender parity in his cabinet, “because it’s 2015,” he said, shortly after winning the elections that year. He is supposed to be a feminist, after all. Yet he has no problem keeping the centuries-old first-past-the-post electoral system, even though he promised that the elections of 2015 would be the last to take place using the unfair and outdated method. I’m sure he is also well-aware that countries with systems of proportional representation tend to elect more women and minorities. But of course, why do away with the system that has made his Liberal Party the natural governing party of Canada? Yes, a cabinet with gender parity makes for good optics, but it doesn’t ensure that more women will have a greater chance of being elected to political office in the long term.

 

In fact, Trudeau has been an impediment to women’s success in politics. Just ask former Liberal Jody Wilson-Raybould. She was Trudeau’s Attorney-General and Minister of Justice until early 2019, when allegations surfaced that the prime minister tried to pressure her into granting construction and engineering giant, SNC Lavalin, a deal that would have saved it from prosecution for suspected bribery. Wilson-Raybould wouldn’t give in to Trudeau’s wishes, and so was demoted to the Ministry of Veterans’ Affairs. But soon after, she resigned from cabinet and bravely spoke out against Trudeau’s handling of the SNC Lavalin case. For this, she was ultimately expelled from the Liberal Party caucus. So much for Trudeau’s supposed love of strong female leaders. So much for Trudeau’s feminism. The fact is that Justin Trudeau has the ability to be just as arrogant and corrupt as any other person who has ever sat in the Prime Minister’s Office.

 

Fortunately for Trudeau, the SNC Lavalin scandal and his poor treatment of Jody Wilson-Raybould, did not cost him his job as Prime Minister. He won re-election last year, albeit with a minority government. During the campaign, and even before it, Trudeau always delighted in mentioning how the Canada Child Benefit, which his government introduced in 2016, was lifting many Canadian children out of poverty. He wasn’t lying, for a change. According to Statistics Canada, there were 278,000 fewer children living below the poverty line in 2017, compared to 2015, when the Trudeau Liberals were first elected. This is good news that Prime Minister Trudeau and his Liberals have repeatedly taken credit for. They are not deserving of any credit for it, however, because the program was never their idea in the first place. It was, in fact, an idea stolen from the Conservative Party.

 

In 2006, Stephen Harper and his Conservatives won a minority government. Among the promises in Harper’s platform was to give each Canadian family with children a direct payment that would allow them to pay for whatever daycare they deemed appropriate. Ironically, this was an idea opposed by the then Paul Martin-led Liberals, who instead, wanted to create a federal government-run daycare program. To make a long story short, the idea of giving government funds directly to parents for their children was originally a Conservative idea, not a Liberal one. In other words, the Trudeau Liberals are plagiarists. They rip off ideas from other parties and present them as their own. Plagiarizing in university can get you expelled, but apparently in Canadian politics, it gets you elected.

 

And don’t think for a second that the Liberals only rip off ideas from the Conservatives. When Trudeau was first elected in 2015, his whole campaign might as well have been taken straight out of the NDP playbook. The Trudeau Liberals positioned themselves the furthest to the left out of all three major federal parties. So much so, in fact, that they managed to siphon off most of the votes that had once gone to the NDP, thereby getting elected with a majority government and relegating the real placeholders of the left to third party status, once again.

 

The Trudeau Liberals have been riding high based on the fact that Canada has not been as adversely affected by COVID-19 as some other countries, most notably our neighbours to the south. Actually, the fact that the closest world leader that Canadians can compare Trudeau to is none other than U.S. President Donald Trump, makes the Prime Minister look a lot better than he should be given credit for. The reality is, however, that Prime Minister Justin Trudeau is neither a harbinger of genuine change, nor is he any different than other politicians. His policies are recycled from the Liberals of the past, or ideas stolen from others, and not one thing he has done has led to fundamental change for the better in Canada.

Up yours, Trump! Up yours, Trudeau!

I really enjoyed hearing about the two biggest assholes on both sides of the Canada-U.S. border, President Donald Trump and Prime Minister Justin Trudeau, getting torn apart by people who used to be their allies.

Up here in the Great White North, we may be seeing the demise of our arrogant, selfie-loving, virtue-signalling fraud of a prime minister thanks to his former justice minister, Jody Wilson-Raybould, someone who represents two of the groups he has always claimed to want to help: women and aboriginal people.

Down south, President Trump's former lawyer, Michael Cohen, summed up the wannabe dictator perfectly, saying, "He is a racist. He is a conman. He is a cheat."

One would assume that Trump and Trudeau are completely different because they're on opposite ends of the political spectrum. But they're more similar than you might think. They're both frauds, they're both liars and they're both hypocrites. And I would like nothing better than to see both of these two idiots go down in flames.

Ideology is a prison

The political world is so polarized nowadays. There seems to be no middle ground. Now of course, ideologies have existed for centuries. The difference now is that more and more people are parking themselves firmly on the right or the left of the political spectrum. Political centrism is on the retreat. Too bad, because I think that when you adhere strictly to any particular ideology, it's like you're putting yourself in prison. A prison that prevents you from considering any ideas from the other side of the political spectrum that might actually make sense and may be part of a solution to whatever problem you're trying to address.

For example, the topic of immigration is now a very hot-button issue here in Canada now. Unfortunately, the discourse about it is now dominated by those who think we should throw our doors wide open to anyone seeking refuge from some form of hardship or persecution and those that want to slam the doors shut and not let anyone into this country simply because they're from the "wrong" part of the world or don't embrace a rigid, Westernized mindset. What happened to the days when we could be tolerant and welcome people from all over the world, but still keep are borders secure from potential threats?

I can of course cite many other cases where ideology has ruined the discourse on most issues at hand. For instance, people on the left tend to automatically equate private enterprise with greed and inequality, but consider anything controlled by government to be in the public's interest and always the best way forward. In contrast, folks on the rigid right automatically equate anything that is controlled by government as inefficient, bloated and wasteful, while assuming that the private sector always does the job better and more efficiently.

I like to think outside the box that ideology can put people in. So for instance, I am strongly in favour of school choice and some sort of private sector involvement in Canada's health care system. At the same time, however, I don't want American-style two-tier health care, nor do I want to gut public education. I don't want to shut the door on people trying to get into this country, but I don't want people pouring across the border without going through customs and security screenings. And while I don't think public transit runs very well in Toronto and would like the TTC's monopoly to end, I certainly do not support privatizing the TTC and leaving mass transit entirely in the hands of profit-seeking private interests.

Someone once told me that politics is about compromise. But nowadays, people all over the world seem a lot less willing to budge on any given issue. There is less and less room for constructive dialogue. I think this needs to change, otherwise we're in for much more savage times.

Why I can't pursue my passion for politics

Since I was fourteen years old, my number one passion has been politics. Too bad, I sometimes think, because if I had some other interest, I probably wouldn't be as angry and frustrated as I've been for most of my life. I've been frustrated by the fact that although I'm obsessed with politics and would like nothing better than to be someone who affects change, I've been stifled by a Canadian political system that is rigged to prevent people like me from ever having a voice for change in this country.

It's not like I haven't tried. For example, I used to be part of a political party, but I found out that when you're the member of the party, you're just expected to follow the party leader like a well-trained dog follows its master. Just tow the party line. Oh yeah, and give them your money. Not a month went by without someone from the party calling me asking for a donation. Here in Canada, the party leader is everything. He or she rules the party like an absolute monarch. And if you stray away from the party's script, you will inevitably be kicked out. Now, I won't have anything to do with any political party in this country. Quite frankly, I spit on all of them. 

I still do vote. Well, sort of. In provincial elections, I show up at the polling station and decline my ballot, because I can't bring myself to support any of the incompetents we call leaders in Ontario. I would probably do the same federally too, but one doesn't have the option of declining their ballot in federal elections. So I just vote for the folks who I think will support Israel the most, since none of the main parties offer the kind of substantive changes I'm looking for, which include proportional representation, an end to excessive party discipline, an elected or abolished senate, and a freer economy. 

I was once told that if I didn't like this country's pitiful excuse for leaders, I should run for office myself. But of course, to do that, I'd have to join one of the parties I hate. Then, if I was elected, I'd have to vote in lockstep with my party and not say anything that contradicts the party line, or be kicked out of caucus. Well, there's always municipal politics. Oh, wait. Unseating an incumbent councillor is virtually impossible, and I don't think I'd have a chance in hell running for mayor, because you need to be a household name to do that and have a realistic chance of winning. 

So for those of you who accuse me of just complaining and doing nothing to affect change, I ask you, in light of everything I just said, what the hell am I supposed to do!?

Status Quo Toronto

Another municipal election in Toronto has come and gone. What's changed? Basically nothing. Toronto will continue to be governed by the same cabal that have been dragging the city on the road to ruin for decades. The only difference is that there will be less of them after our illustrious premier, Doug Ford, decided to downsize the city council. In fact, there were only three wards out of a total of 25 in which voters chose candidates that weren't running for re-election. Actually, only two of these wards, Beaches-East York and Scarborough-Rouge River, will be represented by people who can truthfully say that they are new to politics. The third ward, Eglinton-Lawrence will be represented by Mike Colle, who lost his seat in the provincial legislature earlier this year, but couldn't bring it upon himself to give up the politicians' pig trough.

People in Toronto complain left, right and centre about things in this city that don't work. Bad roads, bad transit, bad municipal services and so forth. Yet, when we have the opportunity to make changes. we flock like sheep to the same idiots who have been screwing up this city. Then again, I can't say this about all Toronto voters, particularly the ones who failed to show up to the polling station, which was roughly 60% of the electorate. Well Torontonians, the next time you complain about something in this city that doesn't work, just remember how you voted yesterday, or how you didn't vote.

Statue of Sir John A. Macdonald should not have been removed

A statue of Sir John A. Macdonald no longer stands at City Hall in Victoria, British Columbia. Some people are happy about it, some are not. On one hand, it is true that Macdonald was an architect of Canada's residential school system; a system that was responsible for what was no less than a cultural genocide against Canada's native peoples, not to mention the scene of other heinous crimes. But on the other hand, he was Canada's first prime minister and a principal architect of the country itself. We certainly shouldn't honour someone who was an orchestrator of genocide, but at the same time, should we not honour those who were instrumental in creating this great country we call Canada? The problem with Sir John A. Macdonald is that he falls into both categories. So how to decide?

I think the simplest solution to such a problem lies in weighing the positives and negatives of the historical figure in question. So in the case of Sir John A. Macdonald, we should ask ourselves, does his contribution to Canada's founding outweigh his involvement in the cultural genocide of native Canadians, or vice versa? I honestly would not have removed the statue, because although Canada's first prime minister was complicit in cultural genocide against this country's aboriginal population, his role as a founding father of the country cannot simply be overlooked. And there are other ways to promote reconciliation without removing homages to Canada's founders. How about, for example, restoring aboriginal names to places in Canada now named after various figures of the country's colonial past. Maybe before Victoria's city council thought about removing the statue of Sir John A. Macdonald, they should instead have pondered changing the city's name so that it honours the city's original inhabitants rather than some long dead British monarch. This kind of thing has been done before. In fact, not too far from Victoria are the Haida Gwaii islands. They used to be known as the Queen Charlotte Islands, but in 2010, B.C.'s provincial government graciously decided to change the name of the archipelago to honour its original inhabitants of the Haida First Nation.

Actually, what I think would count for real reconciliation is improving the lives of aboriginal people in this country. Maybe I'm wrong about this, but I'm wagering that most native Canadians place more importance on having decent housing and clean water to drink than on whether or not a statue of Canada's first prime minister stands somewhere. Just a thought.  

Beggars are annoying. But poverty is a lot more annoying

If you live in a big city, chances are you've run into panhandlers on the street asking you for money. Toronto is no exception. Whenever I walk my dog in the morning, I come across beggars on pretty much every block. But I don't just encounter them walking down the street. I've been approached by them when I'm driving. They sometimes approach my car while I'm waiting for a traffic light. Some of them will even block traffic and force drivers to swerve to avoid them. There's no avoiding them on the TTC either. I've often seen panhandlers just sitting on the ground and asking for spare change just as they would if they were on a street corner. Sometimes, they will approach you directly asking for money. Some panhandlers will even come inside of restaurants or cafes to ask people for spare change.

If I'm making this sound like it bothers me, it does. Like a lot of people, I don't appreciate being approached by strangers begging for money, especially while I'm doing something like eating or driving. But of course, the folks who do this probably don't appreciate being poor and having to resort to begging in order to survive. I seldom give money to panhandlers. Not because I'm insensitive to their situation, but because I don't know their situation. They could very well be genuine cases of poverty. People who have no home, no job and no one to help them. But they could also be people trying to feed an addiction, whether that addiction involves booze or drugs. This is the reason that whenever I have given anything to panhandlers, it's always in the form of food or offering to buy them something to eat. In general, however, if I want to be charitable, I will donate to reputable organizations rather than giving money to random people on the street.

Yes, panhandlers can be a nuisance. But poverty is a much bigger nuisance. So it would help if governments at all levels would do something to help these people instead of simply perpetuating their poverty. I'm talking about things like permanent, affordable housing, skills training and better addiction and mental health services, not band-aids like shelter beds and temporary respite centres. 

Doug Ford has been a disappointment so far

It's been just over a month since Doug Ford was sworn in as Ontario's Premier and so far, I'm not impressed with what he's done. Yes, I understand that it's way too early to pass judgement on him and his government, but he's not earning any points with me so far.

Firstly, he scrapped the sex-ed curriculum that the Liberals introduced in 2015. He promised to do so during the election campaign. But he also promised to create a new curriculum based on consultation with parents. Until then, he's decided that Ontario's students will learn from the old sex-ed curriculum. A curriculum that's twenty years old, which doesn't talk about things like sexting, gender identity or other factors that play into sexual education that were not present when the 1998 curriculum was introduced. These are things that kids need to learn, regardless of what Ford's social conservative backers think. His government later changed its tune a bit and said that kids would still learn about things like social media in regards to sex-ed. So we have a lot of inconsistency here. No one seems to have concrete answers on just what kids will be learning when they go back to school this September. The better thing to do would have been to keep the curriculum that the Liberals introduced in 2015 until the government could create a new one. Okay, yes, maybe the curriculum that the previous Liberal government was controversial, but at least Ontario's youngsters would still learn about what is for all intensive purposes the world of sex and gender in the 21st century.

The new Ford government has also moved to scrap the cap-and-trade system that was introduced by the Liberals. I'm not a fan of carbon taxes of any kind and think it's just a simple cash grab. Nevertheless, climate change is a clear and present danger to the entire world's population. If Ford wants to scrap cap-and-trade, he should at least present an alternative plan to address environmental concerns. He cannot just ignore the problem. I should also mention that there are severe financial consequences to cancelling the cap-and-trade system. Contracts that were made between the Ontario government and other parties under this scheme will now have to be terminated, leading to possible lawsuits and perhaps billions of dollars in financial penalties from cancelling these contracts. Now of course, Ford and his entourage will try and blame the Liberals for any of the financial costs associated with cancelling the contracts. But blaming the previous government isn't going to plug the big financial hole that will be dug once cap-and-trade is done for. So how will Ford's government make up the shortfall? The answer is, surprise, surprise, deep cuts to things like health care and education. As always, the books will be balanced on the backs of those who cannot afford it.

Many of the cuts that will inevitably come from the Ford government will be felt in the province's capital, Toronto. And Ford has already taken a page out of former premier Mike Harris' book by shoving changes to the city's governmental structure down the throats of Torontonians. Just as folks in Toronto are about to vote in municipal elections, Ford has moved to cut the size of the city's council almost in half. That means less elected officials representing more people. It's already hard enough for Torontonians to reach their representatives at City Hall. Now Ford wants to make it even harder. And inasmuch as I would love to see many of Toronto's councillors lose their jobs, the size and structure of Toronto's city council should be decided by Torontonians, not by Queen's Park. If Ford wants to improve the way Toronto operates, he should start by giving the city's mayor stronger powers so that he's not just a eunuch who can't do much more than the members of council he presides over. I'm talking, of course, about a strong mayor system. The kind that big U.S. cities, like Chicago and New York have. Hell, Douggie himself said he supported such a system, yet he won't put his money where his mouth is. So Toronto's municipal government will continue to be disfunctional with different councillors peddling their own pet projects and agendas. They'll just have bigger fiefdoms this time.

Again, I can't pass judgement on this government as it's way too early to do so. But I'd say Ford and his posse are off to a pretty bad start.   

Bad pedestrians are driving me crazy!

We've all heard complaints about bad drivers and bad cyclists. But there's another group of people we hear about a lot less. Bad pedestrians. And nowadays, they've been driving me nuts. I live in a very busy neighbourhood in Toronto, so of course I see plenty of traffic every day, both on wheels and on foot. What's driving me to the wall is that a lot of the folks pounding the pavement with their feet think they're invincible, so they'll do pretty much any stupid thing in the book while they're walking about. It's like they're oblivious to the world around them.

As you might expect, most of my issues with bad pedestrians come up when I've driving. Jaywalking is the most common infraction that I see among people walking in my area, but I have a bigger problem with the idiots who think it's okay to cross the street when the light is red and believe they're guaranteed not to be struck by a vehicle. I also get really pissed off at the morons who have their heads in their cellphones or are talking and/or texting when they're crossing the street. Hell, I've even seen people jaywalking while using their cellphones. How dangerous and stupid can you be!? Then there's the people who cross the street at the last moment before the light turns red yet don't even have the decency to hurry up so that they're not in the intersection when the cars get a green light. Okay, if you're old or disabled and you can't get across in time, I'll give you a pass. As for the rest of you, MOVE YOUR ASSES!

Now in the interests of fairness, I don't make myself out to be a perfect pedestrian any more than I could pretend to be the perfect driver. I jaywalk every now and then. It's hard to blame people for doing it when the nearest crosswalk is ten blocks away, although if you must jaywalk, at least don't do it while using a cellphone and not paying attention. I've even crossed the street while using my cellphone a couple of times, though I certainly don't make a habit of it like a lot of other people do. Yes, we've all done stupid things while walking in busy neighbourhoods. The problem is that too many people are making a habit of not being responsible while navigating on foot. I just wish that bad pedestrians were as accountable for their actions as motorists are expected to be.

Mayor John Tory has to go

Four years ago, I and many other Torontonians elected John Tory as mayor of our great city. I supported him because I wanted someone who wasn't divisive, like late former mayor Rob Ford was. John Tory seemed to fit the bill. But over the years, he has gone from simply wanting to reach a consensus with other city politicians to basically giving them everything they want. For example, he's let the city's would-be social engineers run wild, installing bicycle lanes where they shouldn't be and making it harder and harder for anyone who dares to drive an automobile in this city to get from point A to point B. The social engineers wanted bike lanes on Bloor. He let it happen. They wanted bike lanes on Woodbine. He let it happen. They wanted a streetcar right-of-way on King St. between Bathurst and Jarvis. He let it happen. And what are the results of these social engineering projects? More traffic chaos and a significant hit to the bottom lines of many businesses.

Tory has also spent much of his time and effort trying to appease the folks on the militant left. Groups like Black Lives Matter, which to me is nothing but a hate group. The police have had their hands tied by the mayor and the rest of the stooges of political correctness. As a result, gun crime has soared, the latest incidence of which was yesterday's shooting near Danforth and Logan in Greektown that killed two people and injured fourteen others. Drug dealers and other criminals are taking over the city's downtown core, while the mayor and the rest of the incompetents on Council refuse to clean up the mess left by users of the safe-injection sites and homeless shelters that the city has set up. As a result, folks who live near these homeless shelters and safe-injection sites have to deal with things like dirty needles, human feces and the fear of being accosted by some of the people using these services.

Clearly, Mayor John Tory lacks a backbone. He doesn't have the courage to stand up to the city's social engineers and militant, cop-hating groups like Black Lives Matter. Hence, I can no longer support him. I want someone who's going to clean up this city and stand up to the folks who are making it worse. What I would really like is a Torontonian version of Rudy Giuliani, the former mayor of New York City, who made that vast metropolis livable again. He got rid of much of the city's criminal elements, despite the overwhelming opposition he faced for his methods. We need someone like him in Toronto. Someone who will put fear into criminals and give power back to our police force. Someone who will get this city moving, instead of making war on the car and making it harder for the vast majority of this city's residents to get from place to place. If such a person exists, would that person please stand up and run for Toronto's mayoralty this fall? I and many other Torontonians would really appreciate it.

Bibi, do the right thing and allow Israel's LGBTQ community to access surrogacy services

Today, members of Israel's LGBTQ community took to the streets to protest the recently passed Surrogacy Law, which mandates the use of surrogacy services to Israelis unable to conceive children, but which excludes the LGBTQ community from accessing those services. They have the support of several well-known Israeli businesses, who allowed their employees to skip work to take part in the protests. As a fellow Israeli citizen, I would also like to give my wholehearted support to these people in their ongoing struggle for equality.

Now just to be fair, Israel is light years ahead of other countries in the Middle East in terms of its tolerance for people who are gay, bisexual, transgender, etc. In fact, it's the only country in the region where a person who is a member of the LGBTQ community can live without the constant fear of persecution and even death for the lifestyle they have chosen. Nevertheless, members of this community still significant discrimination in the country's laws and are still victims of persecution and hate in various sectors of Israeli society. Having children and raising a family is a fundamental human right, so not allowing Israelis in the LGBTQ community to access services of surrogate mothers is a clear violation of this right. Therefore, I call on Prime Minister Netanyahu and his government to amend the Surrogacy Law to allow members of the LGBTQ community to access these services and take another step towards equal rights in Israel.

Israel's new Basic Law wastes time and changes nothing

The Knesset recently passed the new Basic Law: Israel - The Nation-state of the Jewish People and everyone's making a fuss about it. The usual folks who want to see Israel destroyed and its Jewish population thrown into the sea are predictably calling the new law racist and equating it with apartheid. Some are simply calling it provocative. But the adjective I would use to describe the new Basic Law is redundant. It doesn't say anything that hasn't already been said in other pieces of the state's legislation, nor does it change anything.

Contrary to what Israel's enemies say, the law does not mandate Jewish-only settlements, nor does it compromise the status of Arabic as an official language. In fact, when I look at the text of the new Basic Law, I can't help but say to myself, "Tell me something I don't already know." The people who drafted this law might as well have written down, the sky is blue and the grass is green. Now if you folks who were elected by the Israeli people to govern could stop wasting your time trying to determine who is the most Zionist among you and focus on the country's real problems, that would be great.

Israel: Don't Deport Migrants Back to Danger in Africa. Why Not Send Them to Canada?

Israel has quite a moral dilemma on its hands as its leaders decide what to do with tens of thousands of migrants from Africa who have entered the country illegally over the past few years. Our government wants to get rid of these people, as do many Israelis, describing them as "infiltrators", because many of them come from countries that are hostile to Israel. Not all Israelis, however, share the view that these people represent a threat to the country and should be deported as soon as possible. I am one of them.

Yes, many of these migrants are from countries hostile to Israel. Yes, some recent criminal activity in Israel has been attributed to these people. Yes, many of them are probably not genuine asylum seekers and have made their way out of their home countries and into Israel for economic reasons. And yes, Israel must ensure secure borders, meaning that no one can be allowed to cross the border illegally. After all, a porous border is a threat to the security of Israeli citizens. But I still think that Israel needs to be more compassionate to these people. Not to the extent of allowing all of them to remain in the country, but by allowing them to keep their dignity and their lives. Simply deporting these people back to Africa, to third countries like Rwanda or Uganda, is wrong and contravenes both Jewish and universal morals. Our Bible teaches us to treat the foreigners among us with compassion, reminding us of our bitter bondage in Egypt. Our most recent history also teaches us that we should treat people looking for a better life with dignity and tolerance, lest we forget that when the Nazis were slaughtering us by the millions, those of us trying to escape the Holocaust were turned away by most countries. We as Jews cannot show the same disrespect and intolerance shown to us in the past, otherwise we are no better than those who closed their borders to us and let millions of us perish in the concentration camps. In fact, for this reason, some Holocaust survivors have publicly discouraged Israel from deporting the African migrants.

Now just to be fair, Israel has already shown these people a lot more compassion than some of its neighbours. In fact, if these people had been caught in Egypt trying to cross the border into Israel, they may not be alive today. They may have been shot and killed as soon as they came within sight of Egyptian authorities, as has happened in the past. Yet the world's media makes Israel look like the villain for wanting to deport the migrants. At least in Israel, these people have a roof over their heads and food to eat. They are not tortured and killed as they are in the Arab world simply because they have darker skin and non-Arab heritage.

So what should Israel do with these people? Well, a few days ago, it appeared that a solution had been found when the Israeli government reached an agreement with the United Nations to deport half of the migrants to Western countries that would be willing to take them, including Canada. The remaining migrants would be allowed to stay in Israel. But under pressure from members of his coalition government and his own party, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu quickly reneged on the deal. Now we're back to square one.

In his heart, I think Bibi knows that deporting the migrants back to Africa is wrong. But of course, he's a politician and most politicians want to stay in power above all else. He still has a chance, however, to remove the migrants from Israel and still be humanitarian and compassionate while doing so. The deal with the U.N. may be dead, but I think the idea of Western countries taking in some or all of the African migrants. Now of course, immigration of any kind is very unpopular in Europe and the U.S. right now. But Canada is still welcoming immigrants with open arms. Indeed, Canada represents the other extreme of immigration policy. That policy being to open the borders to anyone who wants to come, with little regard for whether or not potential newcomers will be a benefit or a burden to the country. In light of this, I think that Israel should approach the Canadian government about taking some or all of the African migrants, and should do so as soon as possible.

Another Israeli lost to Palestinian terrorism. Enough is enough!

Today, Israel lost another one of its sons to terrorism. Raziel Shevah, a 35 year old father of six, was murdered by a Palestinian terrorist in a drive-by shooting. The terrorist has yet to be caught. We've heard this kind of story over and over again. Israelis being shot, stabbed, run over by cars, or killed in any other way that Palestinian terrorist minds can think of.

So how do we put an end to this crap, because clearly what we're doing right now isn't working. We put terrorists in jail, we destroy their houses and still the attacks continue. I think it's time we tried something new. One idea that's been bandied about lately is giving death sentences to terrorists. I honestly don't think that's going to work. In fact, it might even encourage more attacks as many would-be terrorists seek martyrdom. So why give them what they want?

I think the ultimate solution to preventing more terrorist attacks and more Israeli deaths lies in curtailing the promotion of extremism and terrorism. This starts, above all, with Palestinian children. Each and every day, young Palestinians are taught to hate Israel and the Jewish people. They are told that Israel and its people need to be destroyed and that they should sacrifice their lives to achieve this objective. It makes me wonder why, after being in control of Judea and Samaria for more than five decades, has Israel not taken control of what Palestinian youth are taught. Indeed, it is my contention that in order to reduce the incidence of terrorism against our citizens, Israel must assume control over Palestinian education. We've let the likes of UNRWA, Hamas and the Palestinian Authority pollute the minds of young Palestinians for far too long and it's time to put a stop to it.

But of course, re-shaping the minds of young Palestinians will take time. I would say, at least a generation, if not longer. So what about the here and now? I think a good short-term solution would be to convince the Palestinians that killing Israelis will not drive us from Judea and Samaria, but will do just the opposite. To do this, I suggest that each time one of our people is killed by a Palestinian terrorist, we respond by formally annexing one of the communities that we have built in Judea and Samaria. So for example, since a Palestinian terrorist has just murdered a very upstanding Israeli citizen in Raziel Shevah, leaving his six children fatherless, including an eight-month old baby, Israel should respond by passing a law formally annexing, say, Maale Adumim, Gush Etzion, or one of the other thriving communities we've built in our Biblical homeland.

Will Iran's Islamist dictators launch a war against Israel to save their skins?

Today, I read a summary of Israel's Institute for National Security Studies (INSS) Strategic Assessment for this year. Among other things, the assessment talks about the possibility of another war breaking out on Israel's northern front, which would involve Hezbollah and possibly Syria and Iran. The worst case scenario involves a conflict involving all of the aforementioned three. I'm not 100% sure, but I don't think that this assessment was done in time to take into consideration the popular uprising now taking place in Iran. I mention the assessment and the Iran protests in the same context because I think those protests could increase the chances of the worst case scenario taking place.

History teaches us that ruling regimes often use foreign wars in order to deflect their people's attention away from domestic problems. Remember the period between George W. Bush's inauguration as U.S. President and the September 11th attacks? Bush had won what was arguably the most controversial election in American history, ultimately decided by the U.S. Supreme Court voting along party lines and handing him the presidency. As Michael Moore noted in his film Fahrenheit 911, Bush struggled to get any of his agenda carried out and looked like a lame duck president. I was an undergraduate at the University of Toronto at the time, and I still remember one of my professors predicting that Bush would be a lame duck president because of the way he got elected. But then 9/11 happened. After that, Americans rallied around the flag and their president in the war on terror. And the rest is history.

Right now, Iran's Islamist regime is facing a full-scale revolt by the Iranian people. It's not surprising that they're accusing their enemies of sowing the seeds of dissent in the Islamic Republic. I think there is a real possibility that Iran's Islamist rulers will try and instigate a conflict with Israel in order to refocus their people's attention. Just think about it for a moment. If Iran attacked Israel, the Jewish state would certainly retaliate and the Islamists could use the destruction that such retaliation would bring in order to rally Iran's people behind the flag and end the uprising, just as U.S. President George W. Bush used the 9/11 attacks to deflect attention from his unpopularity. It's a frightening thought, but unfortunately it's quite possible for such a scenario to play out.

World must support Iran protests

Citizens throughout Iran are taking to the streets to protest against the brutal, despotic Islamist regime that has ruled the country for nearly four decades. What started as protests over bread and butter issues, such as prices for food and gas, is quickly turning into a full-scale revolt against the country's rulers. The plain and simple truth is that despite sanctions relief as a result of the deal Iran made with the U.S. and other world powers to curb its nuclear program, the lives of ordinary Iranians have not improved. Why? Because the Islamist cabal that rules Iran is using any extra revenues that sanctions relief has provided, not to provide better lives for the Iranian people, but to support their terrorist friends and continue building the country's missile arsenal to threaten its neighbours. Yes, more money for Hezbollah and Hamas, more money to support Syrian dictator Bashar Al-Assad as he slaughters his own people, and more money for missiles to strike Israel or anyone else Iran's mullahs don't like. But for the Iranian people? Squat. 

Far from lauding their Islamist rulers' support for terrorists in the Middle East and beyond, Iranians are now calling for an end to support for groups like Hezbollah. They're also making it clear to their oppressors that they want their country's resources to go towards solving problems at home rather than fueling conflict elsewhere in the Middle East. Above all, Iranians want freedom. The question is, will they get it this time? It was just under a decade ago, in 2009, that Iranians took to the streets to protest the re-election of then president Mahmoud Ahmedinidjad. Hopes were high that perhaps the Iranian people would overthrow their despotic rulers. But unfortunately, that popular uprising fizzled out and the Islamists prevailed. If the masses in Iran are going to succeed this time, they need all the support from the international community that they can get. So I hope that other world leaders will follow U.S. President Donald Trump's lead and declare that they stand behind the Iranian people in their quest for freedom.

An end to the Islamic Republic would be a giant step towards peace in the Middle East, because it would bring an end to terrorist groups like Hezbollah and Hamas, who depend on Iran for the resources they need to carry out their terrorist activities. Just think of the Middle East without Iranian-backed terrorists. No more Hezbollah to hold the people of Lebanon hostage or assist Syria's Assad in the killing of his own people. No more Hamas to rule over the Gaza Strip and use it as a base from which to attack Israel. But none of this will be possible unless Iran's Islamist rulers are toppled. So in essence, the Iranian people are not just fighting for their own freedom. They're fighting for the peace of the region. I hope they succeed.

Arab attitudes towards Israel changing for the better

There's been an awakening. Have you felt it? Yes, this is a quote from Star Wars: The Force Awakens. But in this case, I'm not talking about an awakening in the force. No, I'm referring to an awakening in the Arab world. To put it simply, some Arabs are awakening to the realization that Israel is not the threat that they have always perceived it to be. Quite the contrary. Israel is slowly being seen by a growing number of Arabs as a valuable ally against what really threatens the Arab world: The Islamic Republic of Iran.

Unfortunately, the vast majority of people on the Arab street still see Israel as their most hated enemy. But a growing number of notable figures in the Arab world are singing a different tune about the Jewish state. For example, the Grand Mufti of Saudi Arabia recently issued a ruling saying that it was forbidden to make war on Jews, even going so far as to call the Palestinian Islamic fundamentalist group, Hamas, a terror organization. I've been following Middle Eastern politics since I was a teenager and I never thought I'd hear anyone in Saudi Arabia, let alone its chief cleric, say something like this. And he isn't the only one sounding off on a more amicable attitude towards Israel and the Jewish people. A prominent Saudi academic went so far as to defend U.S. President Donald Trump's decision to recognize Jerusalem as Israel's capital. In addition, an Egyptian writer argued that Jerusalem had no religious significance for Muslims and called for greater cooperation between Jews and Muslims. Another writer from Kuwait praised Israel and called on Arab leaders to recognize the legitimacy of the state.

Some political leaders have also made favorable comments about Israel. The king of Bahrain, for instance, condemned the Arab boycott of Israel and said that he would allow his subjects to travel there freely. He made these comments at an event hosted by the Simon Wiesenthal Center in which Bahrain National Orchestra actually played "Hatikvah", Israel's national anthem. In Lebanon, the Prime Minister was recently recorded saying that Lebanon does not reject the Jewish state's existence and in fact respects Israel's right to safety.

One still has to be brave when saying anything positive about Israel in the Arab world. Anyone who does is almost immediately subject to condemnation and harassment on social media. Hell, they're lucky if they don't get death threats. But the fact a growing number of people in different sectors of the Arab public are willing to give Israel a chance is very significant. Now of course, I really don't think anyone in the Arab world has a love affair with Israel. Indeed, at this point, the increasing number of positive statements by notable figures in the Arab world pertaining to Israel may simply be a byproduct of the emerging Israeli-Arab alliance against Iran. In other words, it may simply be because of the old adage, "The enemy of my enemy is my friend."

Movie-going experience ruined by commercials

I saw the latest Star Wars movie, The Last Jedi, today. Don't worry, I won't spoil it for anyone. Instead, I'm going to talk about what's really bugged me about going to the movies over the last few years, besides the exorbitant ticket prices and overpriced snacks. What really drives me nuts at the movies these days is those damn annoying commercials.

If you're my age or older, you'll remember going to the movies and not having to sit through a seemingly endless series of ads. When I went to the movies as a kid, you saw some coming attractions and then the movie. I wish this was still the case, but unfortunately it isn't. Now, you're inundated with commercials while you wait for the movie to start. Then the lights in the theater dim and guess what? More commercials! By the time you finally get to the coming attractions, you may have sat through up to ten minutes of ads, or more depending on when you entered the theater. 

Nowadays, ever time I go see a film, I can't help but say in my head, "Enough is enough. Just show us the f*cking movie already!"