Home > abuse of power, Canada, Government, Terrorism, Uncategorized, United States of America, war > “The Interview” Should Never Have Been Made But there Is Another Lesson To Be Learned By The Militarily Strong

“The Interview” Should Never Have Been Made But there Is Another Lesson To Be Learned By The Militarily Strong


c557919c9244d4cb9576e67236544003What is up Canada? Why are the governments of Canada and the United States of America surprised at the reaction of Kim Jong-un, North Korea’s Supreme leader to a movie that Sony Pictures made called, “The Interview?” The stars of the movie are 2 American reporters on a USA sanctioned mission to assassinate him during an interview he granted them. I would ask what if this movie had been made in North Korea, Syria, Russia, or by ISIS and the person to be assassinated was  President Obama of the USA, or Canadian Prime Minister Harper? Do you think that they, the secret services of both countries and the citizens of both countries would still be referring to, “The Interview,” this as a satirical comedy and saying that although we may find the subject matter personally distasteful that it falls within the grounds of freedom of speech and expression? I think not, but then again I think that the west is being taught a different type of lesson and that is that through technology the battlefield has been changed and the weapons that used to make a nation most powerful now make it the most vulnerable.

In Canada our government is passing all sorts of laws that restrict what we say in any form about Jewish people calling it anti-Semitic, or anything that is supportive of any person, or persons that it has deemed to be a terrorist, a terrorist group, or a nation supporting, or promoting terrorist activity I find it rich that it would spout rhetoric about freedom of expression and allowing for the freedom for everyone to have the right to say what it is we are feeling, without fear of threat from our government, or any other government.

Stephen Harper and his government have gone as far as to repeal the citizenship of any dual citizen, revoke the passport of any permanent resident and arrest and charge any Canadian born in Canada if it can be proven that they are guilty of espousing what it calls terrorist propaganda, or contributing to a terrorist cause whether they knew they were doing it or not. In other words Stephen Harper is willing to strand people with Canadian passports in foreign countries without due process for availing themselves of their right to freedom of speech.

Am I wrong in saying that during the  Iraq war the USA interfered in the freedom of the press and in doing so interfered with freedom of speech by embedding reporters and forcing them to sign a contract and agree to allow their reports to be reviewed by military officials prior to release, to be escorted at all times by military personnel, and to allow the government to dismiss them at any time for any reason?

Would it be such a far stretch to say that Kim Jun-un could think of the USA as a terrorist regime out to remove him from power by any means necessary? Are the USA and North Korea both not guilty of taunting each other, each knowing that the other will do nothing overtly in terms of taking action that would cause the other to go to war.

 I find it discomforting that the only thing that Harper and Obama can agree on lately is their nations and allies justification for the taking of innocent life along with the guilty in bombing raids and shelling. (Israel’s intentional shelling and bombing of civilian targets that killed over a 100 children.) Obama and Harper have finally found something else on which they agree and once again they do not seem to care that it puts at risk innocent lives even though those innocent lives are those of their own citizens. Both leaders publicly stated that Sony should not have pulled the movie and given into threats and that it was a mistake to give into terrorist threats and demands. Obama was of the opinion that Sony should have talked to him 1st and in Harper’s opinion they should have shown it and Canada would have done something to show their support. I agree with Sony that in the end they could not have opened that movie in theaters for several reasons after they received the threat:

  • All those saying that Sony caved in and shouldn’t have I believe would be the 1st in the land where suing is a national past time to hold Sony responsible for every injury, or death resulting from the movie being shown after they were prior warned of the possibility of harm to movie goers.
  • What kind of movie theater owner would endanger the lives of its patrons by showing a movie that has received terrorist threats saying that they will harm movie goers if the movie is shown. When places where important work is being conducted are  shut down when a terrorist threat is received until the threat can be proven to be false, like, office buildings, schools, Capitol Hill, Parliament Hill, airports, metros, train stations  and a whole lot of other places, why in this instance with the threat to lives of people going to see a movie would the  president of the USA and the prime minister of Canada both state publicly they felt Sony made a mistake not releasing the film? Would they really have sent their children to see the movie, or were they both just willing to risk the lives of our children and other citizens to show that the USA and Canada cannot be intimidated?
  • What kind of nut would have brought their children, or attended a movie that had received threats of terrorism after 9/11 and what does that say about them. I do not think that people who run to danger for thrill seeking reasons instead of away from it to safety are brave I think that they are sick and in need of help and anyone who would bring their children into a possible potentially life threatening situation, just to prove they cannot be intimidated, should have those children taken away from them, because they do not deserve them until they get their priorities straight.I feel that we in the west only care about how we envision what the world should look like and what should be practiced in it in terms of governance, environmental controls, religion, culture and rights and freedoms? I feel that we have created a world where the word justice in reality has come to be defined as, “just for us.” I feel that we have created a justice system that is filled with double standards and half-truths, where punishments for breaking laws and treaties fall swiftly and mercilessly on our enemies, but are justified when we are the one found to be guilty.  We in Canada and in the USA might not  threaten to blow up movie theaters, but we do kill innocent people every minute of everyday in our pursuit of what we call justice and the spreading of our values.
  •  I think that before we begin bragging about of American and Canadian values and why we should be trying to get the adopted all over the world, that we should consider that those values allowed for
  • The government of Canada and the government of the USA have proven through their actions of late that they are willing to sentence and  condemn whole countries, the along innocent with the guilty to a future with no hope, where it is every citizen will die a slow torturous death due to hunger, thirst, or sickness, because our governments  have  imposed trade restrictions, sanctions, blockades and embargoes against their countries making it next to impossible to be able to get enough food to eat, clean water to drink and medicine to save the lives of their injured and sick, because we do not like what their governments stand for and yet both the government of Canada and the government of the USA seek to claim some high moral ground  protecting what in my opinion a  racist movie that glorifies the assassination, or the planning of it by the government of the USA. Why is this movie not considered promoting terrorism, or terrorist activity, or is it only these things when these actions are planned and carried out against members of the Western Alliance?
  • The intentional torture of prisoners by the USA that actually caused the deaths of some of the prisoners
  • That torture was casually explained away and justified, with the simple statement that after 9/11 they needed information, so that they exact revenge and that Canada actively participated in that effort.
  • Both the Canadian and American governments insist that the use of this type of methods as rectal feeding was not torture, but done to save lives and that waterboarding was just a way of seeking information and getting justice and not extremist in the slightest; just them protecting themselves.Is this really a movie that should have been made considering the USA’s recent history of not only sanctioning, the assassination of foreign leaders that it feels are a threat to their people and the USA, but putting a bounty on the heads of  leaders they are at odds with? If you were Kim Jong-un, would you consider this movie funny, or a serious potential threat? this is not the 1st movie of this nature that American movie makers have made and I guess it will not be the last, but I think that in the interest of doing what is morally right and decent they should be discouraged.

I think that the real lesson in the whole America’s Sony versus North Korea’s Kim Jon-un is that  this is an example of how small the world has become with the advances of modern technology. What has happened to Sony is a mild example of what can be accomplished by a knowledgeable person in procession of a sophisticated computer. This is irrefutable evidence that military might alone is not enough to keep even the most powerful of countries safe anymore. Any knowledgeable person in procession of a sophisticated computer has the capacity of either disarming a militarily strong nation, destabilising a nation’s economy, or turning a nations weaponry against it by hacking into its systems, or simply shutting down that country’s ability to use their technology. With hackers being among some of the most knowledgeable in the cyber world they have in effect acquired the power to influence how the world is to be run.

  • It should also be noted that when an Islamic nation, engages in this type of retaliatory action, no matter how obvious it fits the circumstances and reasoning and criteria that prompted the American and Canadian government to engage in torture and war after 9/11, they are called terrorists.
Advertisements
  1. No comments yet.
  1. No trackbacks yet.

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: