[ad_1]
Content of the article
Censorship close to home
Anyone who has followed the COVID-19 situation beyond the confines of the mainstream media is aware that doctors and medical researchers who oppose the established narrative are being silenced, censored and even removed from office. They are often accused of spreading “disinformation” and even “outright lies”. That dedicated and sincere doctors and scientists are treated in this way is reprehensible and a repudiation of the democratic principles that the citizens of the free world hold dear. What happened to freedom of speech and expression?
Content of the article
Sad to say, The Expositor is guilty of similar injustices. Despite their claim that “we want to hear from you” (newspaper readers), some views are clearly undesirable and summarily dismissed. Over the past few months, I have submitted five letters to The Expositor that have not been published. True, all of these submissions opposed the established narrative, but each was fact-based and contained confirmed data and literal quotes from medical experts.
Obviously, going against the grain is not respected by this newspaper, which amounts to outright censorship. It is absolutely one-sided and a rejection of the essential principles of freedom of speech and expression. Is it sad?
John harley whitlock
Brantford
When it comes to debt, governments and households are different
Re: Prepare for Tax Hikes to Pay Liberal Expenses (December 15)
Columnist Tasha Kheiriddin bases her claim that the federal government is “drowning in debt” by likening the federal government to a household above its head in debt. A household must earn income to repay its debts and may be forced into bankruptcy. The federal government, however, has a central bank, is the issuer of Canadian currency, and can never run out of its own money.
Practical spending limits are not imposed by federal debt levels, but by the actual available resources of the country, including labor. As long as 1.2 million Canadians are unemployed, targeted spending can put them back to work. The benefits could include modernizing our health system, tackling climate change, and reducing inflationary pressures through increased production of goods and services.
Content of the article
Larry Kazdan,
Vancouver, BC
Secularism laws do not benefit Canada
The Quebec law on secularism is contrary to everything Canada stands for. Millions of people have migrated here due to religious persecution in other countries.
I belong to the Ahmadi Muslim community which is severely targeted in Pakistan and there are specific laws in place in the constitution which prevent them from living a free life while keeping their faith. It essentially forces them to choose between freedom and faith. The recent episode of a grade 3 teacher fired for wearing a hijab is no different.
Supporters of these laws need to understand that they do not benefit our country or our province in any way. It’s not as if it will have a positive impact on the economy or bring peace to society. In fact, the opposite is true. Discrimination on the basis of faith will cause more anger and hatred.
Everyone should take a stand against such discriminatory laws, especially Quebecers. Otherwise, it will embolden those people more and they might come looking for you based on your lifestyle or ideology.
Luqman Ahmed,
Cumberland, Ont.
[ad_2]
Source link
