Life Behind the IRon Drape: Letters to the Editor

Blog description.

Accentuating the Liberal in Classical Liberal: Advocating Ascendency of the Individual & a Politick & Literature to Fight the Rise & Rise of the Tax Surveillance State. 'Illigitum non carborundum'.

Liberty and freedom are two proud words that have been executed from the political lexicon: they were frog marched and stood before a wall of blank minds, then forcibly blindfolded, and shot, with the whimpering staccato of ‘equality’ and ‘fairness’ resounding over and over. And not only did this atrocity go unreported by journalists in the mainstream media, they were in the firing squad.

The premise of this blog is simple: the Soviets thought they had equality, and welfare from cradle to grave, until the illusory free lunch of redistribution took its inevitable course, and cost them everything they had. First to go was their privacy, after that their freedom, then on being ground down to an equality of poverty only, for many of them their lives as they tried to escape a life behind the Iron Curtain. In the state-enforced common good, was found only slavery to the prison of each other's mind; instead of the caring state, they had imposed the surveillance state to keep them in line. So why are we accumulating a national debt to build the slave state again in the West? Where is the contrarian, uncomfortable literature to put the state experiment finally to rest?

Comments Policy: I'm not moderating comments, so keep it sane and go away with the spam. Government officials please read disclaimer at bottom of page.

Showing posts with label Letters to the Editor. Show all posts

Tuesday, November 17, 2015

Today’s Letter to the Editor | For Anthony Green, Muslim Association of Canterbury.

I suspect this letter has zero chance of seeing publication.

Anthony Green of the Muslim Association of Canterbury says, quote, "the teachings of Islam forbid the killing of civilians...', (17/11), which is great to know. However, although I agree not every Muslim is a terrorist, (obviously), every terrorist currently is a Muslim, so can the Press please give Mr Green the space of an op-ed to explain why so many murderers of civilians justify their actions by their Muslim beliefs. Including an explication of ISIS please. Because I want to live in an open, peaceful, pluralistic society, but there is something seriously wrong with Islam that so many are reading the Koran ‘then’ turning themselves into murdering psychopaths, and I can't be bothered reading the Koran or any other fantasy tract to understand this, nor is that demand on me, because I think it’s fantastical BS. You may as well believe in the Hobbit. So Mr Green: an explanation please, and give him the wordage Press.

Update 1:

The Press today published letters in support of Green's position - Islam is peace - not a single letter, including my own above, questioning why this religion of peace kills so many civilians. And that, right there, is the problem. Who'd a though; The Press sees itself as a safe place.

Wednesday, October 28, 2015

Today's Letter to the Editor - Christchurch Press | Euthanasia

To the naysayers against euthanasia – including Chris O’Brien (28/10/15) - you will find not one instance of abuse of euthanasia in the jurisdictions it is legal. Your generalised surmisings of abuse with no factual proof is scurrilous fear mongering and offensive. And you all conveniently forget euthanasia will be voluntary (with many safeguards). You can still choose to die suffering if you wish, but to seek to assert others do so, due to your beliefs, is selfish, arrogant and without compassion. The NZMA does not represent all doctors. The NZMA’s sophistry they are against euthanasia, yet it is ethical to administer a pain killing regime (successful or not) that hastens death, is negligent. We self-manage our health issues throughout our lives; the choice of euthanasia, if desired, merely the end of that process. Let’s grow up.

Mark Hubbard, Geraldine.

[142 Words.]

Thursday, July 16, 2015

Euthanasia: The Doctors Survey. [NZ.]

Below is my letter to the editor sent today to the Christchurch Press, in response to a letter published from Ken Orr (advocate for the Catholic run Right for Life lobby; writing against euthanasia, abortion, and thus an individual’s right to own their life - because God does).

If I choose euthanasia, that is between me, my family, and a compassionate doctor; it is no business of the meddling Ken Orr and his medieval faith which preaches the insanity of suffering as religious observance. Given euthanasia is voluntary, I fail to understand why those against it deserve a say in this debate: they can die unaided. The position against euthanasia by NZMA is unethical and negligent, because they yet allow it as ethical to administer a pain remediation regime that ‘may hasten death’. What does that mean? In that contradiction the one in ten doctors who have conceded to (mercifully) facilitating a euthanasia, are having to risk ‘everything’ in aiding those whose lives have become intolerable to them. We need euthanasia legislation to put this finally above board, and have an individual’s inalienable right to die with dignity, and an ethical service for that, conjoined.

Also, a question for the New Zealand Medical Association. When your UK counterpart polled its members, it was voted in the majority that euthanasia was a question to be decided by society, not the doctor members of UKMA, and that should be recognised in the debate. Why will the NZMA not poll its members on this matter? The evidence from this recent doctor survey clearly shows the NZMA does not speak for all of its members, perhaps not even a majority of them.