DID ANYTHING IRRITATE YOU THIS WEEK, KEN?

DID ANYTHING IRRITATE YOU THIS WEEK, KEN?

Most of my readers probably think of me as very calm, level-headed, not easily excitable, and generally fairly reserved. On most days, in most weeks, that is true. The past couple of days, however, have had me ranting and raving over several issues that irritated me to the Nth degree. The irritations cover the gamut from politics to hockey to drunk drivers. I’ve been on a roll!

Let me begin with the Palestinian-Israeli peace accord presented recently to the two long-antagonistic foes by Trump’s son-in-law, Jared Kushner. Jared has quickly acquired, through his association with his all-wise father-in-law, the perception that he is more than capable of resolving any problem. Expertise, experience, or academic credentials are irrelevant when it comes to pulling together a peace initiative that has failed dozens of architects of such negotiations for over 75 years. Somehow, the Jewish graduate with a simple BA in government submitted his unbiased peace plan without any qualms. Not surprisingly the Palestinians swiftly rejected the plan, which catered to nearly every major Israeli demand and left the Palestinian demands by the side of the road.

But that only led to my second related rant. Neither side signed the proposed treaty, but that did not bother Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Without skipping a beat he indicated he will move on immediately to annex West Bank settlements which have all been illegally established since Israel came into existence in 1948. The ten-year Prime Minister does not seem to be distracted by the fact that he will soon face a trial on charges of bribery, fraud, and breach of trust stemming from three long-running corruption cases. The only event that will make me shake my head even harder over the pomposity of these two individuals will be when Kushner and Netanyahu are jointly awarded the Nobel Peace Prize in 2020!

In a lighter vein, I found out that not only did my Calgary Flames get thumped by the Edmonton Oilers recently, but the highlight of the game was a fistfight at centre-ice between the two goalies. The absurdity of this spectacle is beyond belief. The goalies are stationed at opposite ends of the rink about 175 feet away from each other. Anybody who can propose a rational explanation, besides the classical hockey mumbo-jumbo about sticking up for your teammates, can give it a try. This scenario is about as ridiculous as the team mascots duking it out in the stands or the two team general managers having a water fight in the executive suites above the ice. Sometimes sporting stupidity knows no bounds.

Finally, patient readers, let me moan about another distorted interpretation of our human rights legislation. In 2018, Ottawa introduced new laws that allow police to demand a breath sample from any driver they lawfully pull over, even if they have no suspicion of intoxication. Drivers who refuse to take a sobriety test are potentially subject to the same penalties as someone who is driving impaired. The new change is that the police will start every interaction with a stopped vehicle by administering a breath sample from the driver. Some in the legal profession argue it is a law that basically totally ignores the presumption of innocence and is unconstitutional.

Well to tell you the truth, I don’t care! Whether a driver has been drinking or not, the administration of a breathalyzer is a very simple, quick procedure. It is not a major imposition and it is designed to protect the safety and health of the larger population. If my trip is lengthened by five minutes while I offer a breath sample that’s OK. If you want to make a federal case about a safety measure designed to reduce drunk drivers on the road, maybe you can get some good advice from Jared, now that he has solved the Middle East peace problem!

I can hardly wait for next week’s news highlights!