The struggle for equal rights never ends and must never end. Recent events in two parts of the world, seemingly disconnected but linked by the common element of who the targets are, are a reminder of this.
Firstly, the guilty verdicts yesterday in Kingston in the so-called "honour killings" of Zainab, Sahar and Geeti Shafia and Rona Mohammad Amir are not only welcome but perhaps finally causing the discussion we should have been having all these years. I'm not just talking about deliberately killing women because they just want to be themselves; it's that people bring their preconceived notions of what's right and wrong to Canada. Moreover there seems to be a willingness to completely isolate oneself from the community at large and force one's children born here to act and comply as if it is "the old country."
But what I find even more incredible is that this was not a case of refugees gone bad. No, one of the convicts, Mohammed Shafia, bought his way into Canada, via the Québec immigrant investor program. The others, second wife Tooba Yahya and son Hamed Shafia, managed to get in under suspicious circumstances. Of course Mr Shafia couldn't bring in both of his wives into Canada since polygamy is illegal here but he came up with a BS story that Ms Yahya was his cousin, and numb-nuts immigration officers overseas didn't run a background check.
I suppose there is a reason why we have to have a business class of immigrants; every province in fact runs a program although Québec's always seems to be the highest profile. It's because we need those skills and if it means fast-tracking the naturalization process then so be it. But is it too much to ask some questions beyond the normal questions we'd expect?
And it's not just would-be Canadians. It happens in long-established communities here as well and in all religious groups. Sadly, there are going to be more tragedies like this one. Every province will have its own goals on what it needs to achieve from immigration from all classes but surely we can all agree that leadership starts from the top, and that in particular it's the licensed religious leaders of all faiths who need to take a stand. Child protection authorities need to be more vigilant as well. There are far too many false apprehensions which cause nothing but grief on their own, but it's the failure to act even when victims don't want the help but obviously need it that's outrageous.
It's good to hear most Muslims in Canada and their leadership want to stop the cycle of violence. But it all goes back to where it begins. If someone wanting to come here to Canada refuses to recognize the equality of women, they should not even bother applying. If someone already here refuses to recognize equal rights for women and acts on that notion, the full force of the law should be applied.
This leads somewhat awkwardly to what's been going on in a number of places as of late and secular vs religious Jews. We have all heard about women who have been "ordered" to go to the back of the bus by ultra-orthodox Jews, or the eight year old who was attacked for the dress she was wearing to school and by grown men. Or even in Montréal a few years back when a women's only exercise studio caved into some radicals who said they wanted the windows tinted because they thought a woman in skin-tight exercise gear was offensive.
Set aside the principle that you should pick on someone your own size -- and gender. Many of these men have managed to get around mandatory conscription laws for far too long. They don't even have to subscribe to alternate service, such that existed in most Allied countries during World War II.
It's good to see people fighting back, in small but measurable ways.
The major principle I think we need to get around is that while as a secular society we are very accommodating to all ethnic groups and religions -- consider how boring dining would be if there weren't the choices of food out there, particularly Middle East and South Asian -- there has to be a limit to where we say this is what we are all about. That there are common values we all hold to. I'm not saying we have to agree on everything, because then we would not be a democracy any more. We need to however say that there is a point where we are willing to reasonably accommodate each other but at a certain point we need to have common rules of the road.
Because in this particular case whether we like it or not, religious based "tribunals" of all religions (and we see agitation to allow these alternate forms of arbitration, be it Sharia for Muslims, the Beth Din for Jews, the Curial courts for Catholics, etc.) are almost always stacked against women. Until relatively recently, even the law here was constructed to be against women. Women who were married weren't allowed to get their own property until the 1970s. We forget easily that spousal assault didn't even exist as a crime in Canada until 1983 and the principle of "no means no" wasn't enacted until a decade after that.
I've said this before and I'll say it again -- we need to see this for what it is, a war against women. There are too many men and sadly even many women too, who openly and enthusiastically support femicide. Until we all get around to this fact and push back, more will die. The longer we let this go on, sooner or later we'll get to the point where the blood will be sticking on our hands rather than those of the perpetrators.
To be honest I breathed a sigh of relief when the guilty verdicts came down yesterday. It's unfortunate however that the four life sentences each of the Montréal Three got are concurrent -- frankly a hundred year sentence is call for, not twenty-five. Actually, I would have gone even further, invoked that this was a crime of hate as an aggravating circumstance, and doubled it to two hundred years.
UPDATE (7:46 pm EDT, 0046 GMT 01-31-2012): Minor edits.
Monday, 30 January, 2012
Wednesday, 18 January, 2012
Harper: Right about Iran, but on the tar sands and "outsiders" ...
This week, the Prime Minister expressed aloud concerns many of us Canadian of all stripes have had either openly or privately – that Iran is a ticking time bomb with its nuclear program which without a shadow of a doubt has only one aim, to create a nuclear bomb that would threaten Israel. Meanwhile, the PM has been critical of “outside interference” in the debate over piping the oil sands south and west.
The priorities of the Western alliance got totally distracted by the Iraq debacle when it should have been aimed squarely at North Korea and Iran. And while Canada would almost certainly have no choice in the matter should there be a war, and hopefully one with only conventional weapons, there is also no doubt we should have done a more persuasive job in using our “good offices” (such that they are) to help calm things down, given that we have direct relations with Iran and the United States still does not, over thirty years after the hostage crisis ended.
Iran has threatened to close the Strait of Hormuz which would choke off oil supplies from Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates; but it would also have the result of of Iran blockading itself. So no one can really take that one seriously. But its willingness to crush internal dissent as well as diverting massive resources that could be feeding and educating its people but instead going into a fanatical voyage over the atom cannot be ignored. It rigged two elections in a row and loudly supports honour killings of women.
The whole idea of “Atoms for Peace,” as Eisenhower called it in the 1950s – the Fifties! -- is really a joke. Once you can control the atom, you can do almost anything, just short of being God (although you can certainly pretend to be the Almighty). No doubt nuclear energy has had its benefits in terms of power generation and practical uses ranging from irradiating food to nuclear medicine. But the ability to make weapons grade fuel, like Canada can, carries with it huge responsibilities.
While the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) regularly inspects our nuclear facilities, you never hear about it on the news because we comply fully with our international obligations. It's time for the world to take a firm and unequivocal stand with Iran. Iran has to open up their facilities, all of them, or face suspension from all UN agencies on which Iran has a seat. For a country that really doesn't care about world opinion, it may not mean much, but such shunning may spark the kind of revolt that has carried across much of the rest of the Middle East.
Briefly, as for Canada – well, as a democracy, we have to be willing to accept outside criticism of our policies as many in this country have those same anti-government views. The old saying goes, we hold our friends close and our enemies closer but we also hold our allies to a higher standard. Or in this case, to the standard that our allies hold us. We should be living up to that standard, quite frankly. The pipelines are almost certainly going to be built even if they are delayed for a time. That doesn't mean we can't listen to reasonable criticism and make alterations to the routes that ameliorate as much as possible the potential damage; while also settling once and for all the ensuing Aboriginal land claims as well.
Guess that makes James Cameron and Raffi Cavoukian agitators as much as Robert Redford and Kevin Bacon -- even though the former two are Canadians. I don't really like Cameron (for all the obvious reasons) and I outgrew Raffi decades ago, but they have as much right to complain as anyone else. And Redford and Bacon's opinions should be welcome, after all, the border is just a line in the map -- we share the same ballpark, more or less.
Guess that makes James Cameron and Raffi Cavoukian agitators as much as Robert Redford and Kevin Bacon -- even though the former two are Canadians. I don't really like Cameron (for all the obvious reasons) and I outgrew Raffi decades ago, but they have as much right to complain as anyone else. And Redford and Bacon's opinions should be welcome, after all, the border is just a line in the map -- we share the same ballpark, more or less.
We can't very well say one country can't have energy while we should have as much as possible. Of course every country is entitled to nuclear energy provided it truly is peaceful and any weapons grade level material is handled according to strict and accepted norms. For our part, we should be leading by example. After all, I thought Alberta was the land of the Four Strong Winds. Heck, even we're trying to “ride the wind” in Ontario too although it's costing us plenty with the "feed in tariff" (especially on windy days when windmill power makes up 10% of the "load".)
UPDATE (7:50 pm EST, 0050 2012-01-19 GMT): Looks like President Obama has indefinitely shelved Keystone XL. It'll eventually happen though not for another couple of years at least. But I still say we have to keep an eye on the ball that is Iran -- just as we should of after 9/11.
UPDATE (7:50 pm EST, 0050 2012-01-19 GMT): Looks like President Obama has indefinitely shelved Keystone XL. It'll eventually happen though not for another couple of years at least. But I still say we have to keep an eye on the ball that is Iran -- just as we should of after 9/11.
Monday, 16 January, 2012
Foot in mouth syndrome: What is Harper's real position on gay marriage?
Towards the end of last week, news emerged that the Harper Government was taking the position that thousands of same sex marriages in Canada may have never taken place because the institution was not valid in the home countries of the couples who took out marriage licenses here. Therefore, a gay or lesbian couple who later decides to get a divorce cannot access our courts to dissolve something that "never really happened." And this actually had me reeling. No matter what one may think about the practice it is perfectly legal in Canada and we've collectively made a decision, through our elected representatives, to just move on. Some time later, Team Harper appeared to backtrack slightly but nowhere near enough.
Here's what makes me angry about it: This is the exact same excuse many Southern States used to try to stop interracial marriage. They would not recognize any such marriages that had taken place out of state -- in clear violation of the "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution. Even mixed race couples who had clear roots in the North or West put themselves in peril when they travelled on vacation to the South. Since "ignorance of the law is not an excuse" many well-intended couples were summarily banished and ordered never to come back again, "or else." Eventually it was recognized that the heart wants what it wants, and that marriage should be as colour blind as public education or mass transit. Which is as well as it should be.
To use an analogy -- and I realize I'm hyper-extending, but bear with me -- in Israel, many couples of all stripes get married civilly in Turkey or Cyprus. In fact, make that most, somewhere like 80%. Reason? Because of the very strict norms imposed by the various religious heads -- the Chief Rabbinate for Jewish people, the Supreme Imam for Muslims, the Patriarch of Jerusalem for Catholics, and so forth. A civil marriage can only be contracted in Israel if both can prove a lack of connection to any confessional group -- and that's not really easy. Just one baptismal certificate for a Christian, for instance, and game over; you get married in that denomination in Israel, or not at all -- civil marriage is not an option.
This has proven problematic for those Jews from the former Soviet Union who took advantage of perestroika and immigrated en masse to Israel, and are in the opposite camp -- they want to get married under a chuppah. Under the Law of Return, part of Israel's constitution, they gained immediate Israeli citizenship as soon as they cleared customs in Tel Aviv. But because their parents and grandparents didn't practice Judaism (because they could not) the Chief Rabbi doesn't consider them to be Jewish. Seriously. So they have to take a trip out of the country to get their marriage contracted (or covenanted if your prefer). Crazy but true.
So what of the marriages contracted out of country -- civil or religious? Israel considers them to be perfectly valid. There was some dispute as to validity for decades, but it was established beyond a doubt in 2006 by the country's courts.
I wrote a few years back about a lesbian couple who validated their marriage in a northern state then the relationship soured, one of the partners won custody of their daughter, and the other took the child to another state and was charged with spousal kidnapping. The at fault party tried to invalidate the marriage by claiming her state of abode, Virginia, banned gay marriages in its state constitution. The courts ruled against her saying that whatever the position of the voters on this one, the federal constitution overrode that and a same-sex custody order from out of state could and would be enforced even in states where the practice was outlawed.
I cannot for the life of me understand what the problem is at this time. If this is an example of what to expect from the "hidden agenda" of Mr Harper I cannot imagine what he has planned next. Splitting hairs on legal points is to be expected from all political parties, one would suppose. But it does no good to the families who could be forced apart on a "technicality."
Here's what makes me angry about it: This is the exact same excuse many Southern States used to try to stop interracial marriage. They would not recognize any such marriages that had taken place out of state -- in clear violation of the "full faith and credit" clause of the Constitution. Even mixed race couples who had clear roots in the North or West put themselves in peril when they travelled on vacation to the South. Since "ignorance of the law is not an excuse" many well-intended couples were summarily banished and ordered never to come back again, "or else." Eventually it was recognized that the heart wants what it wants, and that marriage should be as colour blind as public education or mass transit. Which is as well as it should be.
To use an analogy -- and I realize I'm hyper-extending, but bear with me -- in Israel, many couples of all stripes get married civilly in Turkey or Cyprus. In fact, make that most, somewhere like 80%. Reason? Because of the very strict norms imposed by the various religious heads -- the Chief Rabbinate for Jewish people, the Supreme Imam for Muslims, the Patriarch of Jerusalem for Catholics, and so forth. A civil marriage can only be contracted in Israel if both can prove a lack of connection to any confessional group -- and that's not really easy. Just one baptismal certificate for a Christian, for instance, and game over; you get married in that denomination in Israel, or not at all -- civil marriage is not an option.
This has proven problematic for those Jews from the former Soviet Union who took advantage of perestroika and immigrated en masse to Israel, and are in the opposite camp -- they want to get married under a chuppah. Under the Law of Return, part of Israel's constitution, they gained immediate Israeli citizenship as soon as they cleared customs in Tel Aviv. But because their parents and grandparents didn't practice Judaism (because they could not) the Chief Rabbi doesn't consider them to be Jewish. Seriously. So they have to take a trip out of the country to get their marriage contracted (or covenanted if your prefer). Crazy but true.
So what of the marriages contracted out of country -- civil or religious? Israel considers them to be perfectly valid. There was some dispute as to validity for decades, but it was established beyond a doubt in 2006 by the country's courts.
I wrote a few years back about a lesbian couple who validated their marriage in a northern state then the relationship soured, one of the partners won custody of their daughter, and the other took the child to another state and was charged with spousal kidnapping. The at fault party tried to invalidate the marriage by claiming her state of abode, Virginia, banned gay marriages in its state constitution. The courts ruled against her saying that whatever the position of the voters on this one, the federal constitution overrode that and a same-sex custody order from out of state could and would be enforced even in states where the practice was outlawed.
I cannot for the life of me understand what the problem is at this time. If this is an example of what to expect from the "hidden agenda" of Mr Harper I cannot imagine what he has planned next. Splitting hairs on legal points is to be expected from all political parties, one would suppose. But it does no good to the families who could be forced apart on a "technicality."
Wednesday, 4 January, 2012
Lahey sentenced -- fire the bastard
We learned today that the disgraced Roman Catholic bishop of Antigonish, Nova Scotia, Raymond Lahey, was sentenced to time served for possession of child pornography on his laptop which he was stupid enough to have in his carry-on and not in checked luggage. Time served.
Some may say merely being disgraced in public fashion is punishment enough. But I have to disagree. As a member of the First Estate, indeed an "apostle" in the eyes of the church, Lahey not only should have known better but was expected to; and instead undermined the trust of a laity already disgruntled by the inaction of their church on sex abuse.
In my opinion, nothing less than excommunication (or dis-fellowship, if you prefer that term) is indicated. But that's something only the church can do, and I'm not wasting my time waiting for the Holy See to exhale on this one.
Some may say merely being disgraced in public fashion is punishment enough. But I have to disagree. As a member of the First Estate, indeed an "apostle" in the eyes of the church, Lahey not only should have known better but was expected to; and instead undermined the trust of a laity already disgruntled by the inaction of their church on sex abuse.
In my opinion, nothing less than excommunication (or dis-fellowship, if you prefer that term) is indicated. But that's something only the church can do, and I'm not wasting my time waiting for the Holy See to exhale on this one.
Wednesday, 28 December, 2011
Perry doesn't know how to shut his big mouth
Less than a week to go before the Iowa caucuses. And Gov. Rick Perry (R-TX) has chosen to fan the flames. First, by associating with the most unscrupulous of televangelists (which I wrote about a few months back). Now he has come out (pardon the expression) against an entirely predictable but still unwisely chosen target. Courtesy of Ginny Grimsley's News and Experts site comes this short piece from Shay Dawkins (thanks to Ginny for letting me and other bloggers use this column):
My comments:
While I have to say that I am not surprised, it is truly troubling that it has taken this long for the US to acquit itself of the issue of LGBT persons in the military. Worse, that "Don't Ask Don't Tell" continues to be a talking point, and it still continues to be debated after DADT was repealed -- long after all its allies in NATO, with the exception of Turkey, declared it's not an issue at all nor should it be and that not only are such persons welcome in the military but to discriminate against them will come under the same scrutiny as discrimination on the basis of race, religion or sex.
Here in Canada, for example, we lifted the ban in 1992, during the Mulroney administration. That's right, it was Mulroney, not Chrétien or Martin. And far as I can tell, Harper has no intention of making it an issue again. Perry is a paleolithic guy on this one: He'd turn the clock back to before DADT and send the "guilty" to a term in a military brig before being dishonourably discharged. Now, he also wants to ban abortions even in cases of rape or incest. And with nothing to offer women as an alternative either. Perry wants to bitch about unfunded mandates. Maybe someone should bitch to him about his being a "Christian" who only accepts fellow Christians who fit his definition of one.
What are America's top priorities? A sane person would say, jobs, strong families, and making America respected. Rick Perry seems to think America's priorities should be big business, letting televangelists continue to commit financial acts that would be considered tax evasion in the secular world, and making America a laughing stock. Nice choice Iowa has. No wonder why a loser like Newt Gingrich looks so much better by comparison. Yikes.
Gov. Perry’s Anti- Gay Christianity Is Not My ChristianityBy: Shay Dawkins
Texas Gov. Rick Perry’s anti-gay “Strong” TV advertisement has been getting a lot of air time in Iowa in the run up to the Jan. 3 Republican caucus. It’s also getting some surprising reaction among his fellow conservatives.
I, for one, am happy to see that his ad failed to win the endorsements of a couple of key anti-gay groups: the American Family Association and Family Leader. Because Perry’s Christianity is not my Christianity.
I’m a heterosexual raised in the Pentecostal and Baptist faiths deep in the Bible belt state of Alabama. I studied the Bible in search of the Scripture that commands Christians to judge homosexuals and I didn’t find it. Instead, I found just the opposite. For my book, The Good News: How Revealing Delusions in Christianity Will Bring Peace to All, (www.thegoodnewsbook.com), I also looked for the biblical basis for other “Christian” beliefs, including opposing abortion. I didn’t find it.
In the “Strong” ad, Perry says, “I’m not ashamed to admit that I’m a Christian but you don’t need to be in a pew every Sunday to know there’s something wrong in this country when gays can serve openly in the military.”
Really?
Why would it matter whether a soldier is homosexual or heterosexual? If he or she is ready, willing and able to defend us, our country and our freedoms – including Christians’ freedom to be Christian – isn’t that all that matters? Perry’s Christianity brands gays as evil. It seeks to turn “God-fearing” heterosexuals against their fellow man. That is not my Christianity. The true message of Jesus and the Christian Bible is to bring people comfort, not misery; promote unity, not division; and bring hope, not fear.
It’s not Jesus or the Bible that teaches Christians to be intolerant – it is other Christians. The Bible says that we should judge/condemn only people who act with the intent to hurt or harm other people (Romans 14: 13). It tells us to love our neighbors, welcome strangers, and even to love our enemies.
Jesus states that “his commandment is to love one another” (John 13: 34). The Bible goes as far as stating that “all the law of the world is fulfilled in one command: Love your neighbor as yourself” (Galatians 5: 14) and that “without love a person with everything has nothing” (1 Corinthians 13).
Perry likes to conclude his speaking engagements with “Here is what I want you to leave with: Somebody’s values are going to decide the issues of the day … somebody’s values are going to be installed. The question is going to be whose values? Is it going to be those of us of faith or somebody else’s values?”
He does not understand that his “religious beliefs/values” are based on other men’s beliefs and values; clergy often are taught what to believe in seminary. Perry’s “faith” is based on man-made, false religious doctrine -- “somebody else’s values,” as he likes to say. I’ve combed through the Scriptures and rather than finding support for Perry’s stand on homosexuality, I found a half-dozen verses that tell us homosexuality is not “sinful” for everyone.
No one should judge or condemn anyone else for being heterosexual or homosexual, atheist or believer, black or white, fat or skinny, attractive or unattractive. The Bible instructs us to be slow to judge others as “you will be judged by the same amount that you judge others” (Matthew 7: 2) and “to not make snap judgments of others” (John 7: 24).
Imagine a world where people judged and condemned only for how people treated others. I’m not sure if peace on Earth is possible, but I do know the world would be a much happier place if everyone lived by the Golden Rule, “treat others as you would like to be treated” or as Jesus stated, “Love your neighbor as yourself” (Matthew 22: 39).
About Shay Dawkins: Shay Dawkins is a Tuscaloosa, Ala., businessman who grew up in Baptist and Pentecostal churches. His observances about how Christianity can be divisive despite being based on one book led to his analysis of the Bible. He is the author of “The Good News: How Revealing Delusions in Christianity Will Bring Peace to All” (www.thegoodnewsbook.com).
My comments:
While I have to say that I am not surprised, it is truly troubling that it has taken this long for the US to acquit itself of the issue of LGBT persons in the military. Worse, that "Don't Ask Don't Tell" continues to be a talking point, and it still continues to be debated after DADT was repealed -- long after all its allies in NATO, with the exception of Turkey, declared it's not an issue at all nor should it be and that not only are such persons welcome in the military but to discriminate against them will come under the same scrutiny as discrimination on the basis of race, religion or sex.
Here in Canada, for example, we lifted the ban in 1992, during the Mulroney administration. That's right, it was Mulroney, not Chrétien or Martin. And far as I can tell, Harper has no intention of making it an issue again. Perry is a paleolithic guy on this one: He'd turn the clock back to before DADT and send the "guilty" to a term in a military brig before being dishonourably discharged. Now, he also wants to ban abortions even in cases of rape or incest. And with nothing to offer women as an alternative either. Perry wants to bitch about unfunded mandates. Maybe someone should bitch to him about his being a "Christian" who only accepts fellow Christians who fit his definition of one.
What are America's top priorities? A sane person would say, jobs, strong families, and making America respected. Rick Perry seems to think America's priorities should be big business, letting televangelists continue to commit financial acts that would be considered tax evasion in the secular world, and making America a laughing stock. Nice choice Iowa has. No wonder why a loser like Newt Gingrich looks so much better by comparison. Yikes.
Tuesday, 20 December, 2011
North Korea: Moving the doomsday clock closer to midnight
It's been a little over thirty six hours since North Korea revealed that Kim Jong Il died from an apparent heart attack on Saturday. It was well known that Kim was in ill health for years but his passing poses a huge risk for the West. Having dealt with Libya with mostly flying colours and disposing the world of Osama bin Laden, US President Obama now has to figure out how to deal with the new devil inside, whomever he might be -- and it is definitely a he; I can't imagine the military leadership of the PDRK ever taking orders from a woman. It is by no means clear Kim's youngest son Kim Yong Un, has taken over notwithstanding the state propaganda. (The country does have a prime minister but the post is as toothless as it was during the pre-Gorbachev USSR).
There's an old saying that danger presents both a crisis and an opportunity. This may be one of the very few chances we ever get to disarm the North and to make it a democracy. I have no doubt that one or more of three things will happen in the present uncertainty. One, the North will detonate another nuclear missile to prove it's a serious world player. Two, it will finally succeed in launching an unarmed three-stage rocket -- which means it can launch a payload, nuclear or not, at Alaska or Hawaii, making it not just America's business but all of its allies including Canada. Three, it will go all out and go for what it has long threatened, a land attack at the South.
There can be no question who will win -- the South -- but it would come at a terrible price. Easily, a million civilians would be "collateral damage" making Iraq II look like a picnic. Second, the huge sums of money needed to rebuild the North would cripple the South even with aid from the IMF and the World Bank both of which are just about tapped out with the crises in Europe and saving the rainy day money for the inevitable bailout of the United States.
This isn't like when East Germany was annexed by the West or South Yemen by the North (the former in both cases the communist regime). In both cases, the formerly socialist regimes had relatively well developed infrastructure and a well educated workforce; and both got a huge consolation prize when their respective capitals were ultimately chosen for the reunited country. Korea is a different beast -- even Mainland China concedes that reunification will eventually have to happen and it will be a Seoul regime rather than a Pyongyang one (if WikiLeaks is to be believed). Seems the only thing North and South can agree on is when reunification does happen the anglicized spelling of the country will be with a C instead of K (as in Corea).
The North has been rightly called the "hermit kingdom" because a) the people there have literally been starved to death, perhaps two million or more have died because of Mr Kim's zeal for the bomb; b) the North's people are on average four inches shorter than their much healthier Southern brethren; c) the supreme leadership is very much an elective monarchy.
I think that this could be THE issue that tests Obama's foreign policy credentials. He may have had major successes this year in foreign policy, but he also needs to avoid having a huge policy failure. This is one he can't afford to lose. Indeed the world can't. A few years back, the "Doomsday Clock" in Chicago had gone all the way back to seventeen minutes to midnight with all the disarmament agreements that stuck. Thanks mostly in part to the belligerence of three countries -- the US under Dubya in Iraq, an anti-Semitic maniac in Iran, and North Korea's politburo -- we're now at six minutes to doomsday in a proverbial sense.
I still believe we had a chance if the world had gone after Iran, not Iraq, first. But now, the first order of business is North Korea. I'm not exactly sure I like anticipating how the next few weeks are going to roll out especially with primary season in the States now upon us. Canada's role? Who knows -- we may be one of the few countries with direct ties with the North but even that's been on ice for quite some time, given the nature of the country.
With power comes responsibility. Especially when your country can make weapons grade material like we in Canada can. Not that we would ever make a bomb, but the more the number of rogue states that have it, the more legitimate countries will want one as a deterrent. If more of our allies want one then there will be pressure for us to have our own rather than "hosting" allies' missiles too. And that will mean open season for terrorists who will seek to attack any nuclear power plant to get the secret fuel to make a dirty bomb.
There's an old saying that danger presents both a crisis and an opportunity. This may be one of the very few chances we ever get to disarm the North and to make it a democracy. I have no doubt that one or more of three things will happen in the present uncertainty. One, the North will detonate another nuclear missile to prove it's a serious world player. Two, it will finally succeed in launching an unarmed three-stage rocket -- which means it can launch a payload, nuclear or not, at Alaska or Hawaii, making it not just America's business but all of its allies including Canada. Three, it will go all out and go for what it has long threatened, a land attack at the South.
There can be no question who will win -- the South -- but it would come at a terrible price. Easily, a million civilians would be "collateral damage" making Iraq II look like a picnic. Second, the huge sums of money needed to rebuild the North would cripple the South even with aid from the IMF and the World Bank both of which are just about tapped out with the crises in Europe and saving the rainy day money for the inevitable bailout of the United States.
This isn't like when East Germany was annexed by the West or South Yemen by the North (the former in both cases the communist regime). In both cases, the formerly socialist regimes had relatively well developed infrastructure and a well educated workforce; and both got a huge consolation prize when their respective capitals were ultimately chosen for the reunited country. Korea is a different beast -- even Mainland China concedes that reunification will eventually have to happen and it will be a Seoul regime rather than a Pyongyang one (if WikiLeaks is to be believed). Seems the only thing North and South can agree on is when reunification does happen the anglicized spelling of the country will be with a C instead of K (as in Corea).
The North has been rightly called the "hermit kingdom" because a) the people there have literally been starved to death, perhaps two million or more have died because of Mr Kim's zeal for the bomb; b) the North's people are on average four inches shorter than their much healthier Southern brethren; c) the supreme leadership is very much an elective monarchy.
I think that this could be THE issue that tests Obama's foreign policy credentials. He may have had major successes this year in foreign policy, but he also needs to avoid having a huge policy failure. This is one he can't afford to lose. Indeed the world can't. A few years back, the "Doomsday Clock" in Chicago had gone all the way back to seventeen minutes to midnight with all the disarmament agreements that stuck. Thanks mostly in part to the belligerence of three countries -- the US under Dubya in Iraq, an anti-Semitic maniac in Iran, and North Korea's politburo -- we're now at six minutes to doomsday in a proverbial sense.
I still believe we had a chance if the world had gone after Iran, not Iraq, first. But now, the first order of business is North Korea. I'm not exactly sure I like anticipating how the next few weeks are going to roll out especially with primary season in the States now upon us. Canada's role? Who knows -- we may be one of the few countries with direct ties with the North but even that's been on ice for quite some time, given the nature of the country.
With power comes responsibility. Especially when your country can make weapons grade material like we in Canada can. Not that we would ever make a bomb, but the more the number of rogue states that have it, the more legitimate countries will want one as a deterrent. If more of our allies want one then there will be pressure for us to have our own rather than "hosting" allies' missiles too. And that will mean open season for terrorists who will seek to attack any nuclear power plant to get the secret fuel to make a dirty bomb.
Thursday, 15 December, 2011
What's in YOUR drinking water? In Hamilton it could be Scotchgard ™
Several months ago, back in the spring of this year, Radio Canada ran an investigative report regarding the run-off of chemicals from John Munro International Airport at Mount Hope, the highest point in Hamilton. This was prompted after a lot of fish and turtles were turning up dead downstream in Chippewa Creek which supplies Lake Niapenco and onward to the Welland River. This water system is the drinking source of water for residents of the mostly rural Binbrook section of the city who haven't been hooked up to Lake Ontario's supply, but also for many rural residents in the Niagara Region.
What did the reporters find in the water? Something called Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid, or PFOS. PFOS was until a couple years ago the active ingredient in Scotchgard ™ and was also used in flame retardant foam. The kind you'd find in fire trucks. Radio Canada discovered through lab tests that levels of PFOS were twenty times the legal limit of 10 parts per billion. And what makes it worse, is that PFOS has a half life of five years. Meaning it persists for years, and the concentrations add up the more you drink it.
Two years ago, the 3M ™ company, when it recognized the problem, reformulated what comes in the cans and barrels with another chemical that has a half life of only one month -- meaning it breaks down much faster over time.
It's not just the fish that have been affected. In the States, there are PFOS excess levels in bald eagles, polar bears, minx and two species of the dolphin just to name a few. And public health officials have found kidney cancer clusters from exposure to excess levels of PFOS; and it affects all age, sex, racial and ethnic groups who are exposed, equally. Not to mention how it compromises the immune system.
The story was quickly picked up by the alternate media in town (View Magazine for instance) but it wasn't until this fall that mainstream outlets got on the story. Two days ago, the local city council said it should be the feds who should pay for the cleanup. This after it was learned that the provincial Environment department might slap the city with a cleanup order. The argument the city makes is that the airport fire training facility was used not just by Hamilton but by fire departments in other cities -- that Hamilton only makes up for 10% of the total.
Well, shouldn't it be the company that made the stuff -- 3M -- in the first place, that has to pay, at least a large portion of the damages? Maybe they didn't know what it was, at first. But if it was causing problems, why wasn't anything done then? It would not have been hard to recall the product. And it wasn't like 3M was the only company making flame and fabric retardants in those days -- efficacious substitutes were available.
I lived out in the country for about three years as a kid. My parents and I moved back to the city largely because of water quality issues -- even though ironically it meant the school I attended, the same school in fact, was actually now further away from me and I had to take a school bus. That formerly country area has now been cemented over for suburban housing. But barely 500 metres away, the country begins again (in part due to a hard urban boundary that is enforced). Rural folk have the same right to clean drinking water as those in the urban landscape. They shouldn't have to worry about what's in the water -- whether it's sewage run-off from a week ago, or persistent chemicals that stopped being used twenty years ago. I thought the rule was, the party that caused the problem is the one that should pay to fix it. That means 3M.
Someone once asked, what price progress? Indeed.
What did the reporters find in the water? Something called Perfluorooctanesulfonic acid, or PFOS. PFOS was until a couple years ago the active ingredient in Scotchgard ™ and was also used in flame retardant foam. The kind you'd find in fire trucks. Radio Canada discovered through lab tests that levels of PFOS were twenty times the legal limit of 10 parts per billion. And what makes it worse, is that PFOS has a half life of five years. Meaning it persists for years, and the concentrations add up the more you drink it.
Two years ago, the 3M ™ company, when it recognized the problem, reformulated what comes in the cans and barrels with another chemical that has a half life of only one month -- meaning it breaks down much faster over time.
It's not just the fish that have been affected. In the States, there are PFOS excess levels in bald eagles, polar bears, minx and two species of the dolphin just to name a few. And public health officials have found kidney cancer clusters from exposure to excess levels of PFOS; and it affects all age, sex, racial and ethnic groups who are exposed, equally. Not to mention how it compromises the immune system.
The story was quickly picked up by the alternate media in town (View Magazine for instance) but it wasn't until this fall that mainstream outlets got on the story. Two days ago, the local city council said it should be the feds who should pay for the cleanup. This after it was learned that the provincial Environment department might slap the city with a cleanup order. The argument the city makes is that the airport fire training facility was used not just by Hamilton but by fire departments in other cities -- that Hamilton only makes up for 10% of the total.
Well, shouldn't it be the company that made the stuff -- 3M -- in the first place, that has to pay, at least a large portion of the damages? Maybe they didn't know what it was, at first. But if it was causing problems, why wasn't anything done then? It would not have been hard to recall the product. And it wasn't like 3M was the only company making flame and fabric retardants in those days -- efficacious substitutes were available.
I lived out in the country for about three years as a kid. My parents and I moved back to the city largely because of water quality issues -- even though ironically it meant the school I attended, the same school in fact, was actually now further away from me and I had to take a school bus. That formerly country area has now been cemented over for suburban housing. But barely 500 metres away, the country begins again (in part due to a hard urban boundary that is enforced). Rural folk have the same right to clean drinking water as those in the urban landscape. They shouldn't have to worry about what's in the water -- whether it's sewage run-off from a week ago, or persistent chemicals that stopped being used twenty years ago. I thought the rule was, the party that caused the problem is the one that should pay to fix it. That means 3M.
Someone once asked, what price progress? Indeed.
The apple doesn't fall far from the tree (Justin edition)
I knew it was bound to happen sooner or later. And it did yesterday when Justin Trudeau, son of Pierre, called Environment Minister Peter Kent "you piece of shit." At least Justin apologized.
Of course there was no excuse for it -- but entirely understandable given that Kent was giving a patronizing answer to an NDP member when he was trying to explain why opposition members weren't invited in on the Canadian delegation for the Durban talks.
Frankly I don't think the elder Trudeau ever apologized for saying -- well, you know, "fuddle duddle," at least until years later when it was much too late to apologize.
I know it's coming close to Christmas when a lot of fuses need to be lit. But there's a time and place for it. Question Period isn't one of them -- even if it's the place the Exempt Media focuses on most.
Of course there was no excuse for it -- but entirely understandable given that Kent was giving a patronizing answer to an NDP member when he was trying to explain why opposition members weren't invited in on the Canadian delegation for the Durban talks.
Frankly I don't think the elder Trudeau ever apologized for saying -- well, you know, "fuddle duddle," at least until years later when it was much too late to apologize.
I know it's coming close to Christmas when a lot of fuses need to be lit. But there's a time and place for it. Question Period isn't one of them -- even if it's the place the Exempt Media focuses on most.
Wednesday, 14 December, 2011
Kyoto backlash
It's been over a week since my last post. Too much has been going on but I did want to talk about Peter Kent announcing Canada is pulling out of the Kyoto Protocol, or rather forcing the world to pull out of Canada so we don't get fucked with $14 billion in penalties. It's not too surprising the Conservatives doing this -- they said all along they would. And the worldwide reaction is entirely deserved and proves just how out of step the dogmatists on the right are with reality or with public opinion. But there are two things that are bothersome for me.
First is the messenger, Peter Kent, a former news anchor. Back in 1978, he had the courage to resign the anchor chair at CBC English when Pierre Trudeau was deliberately interfering in the newsroom by Trudeau ordering the network to cancel the live broadcast of a speech by René Levesque in favour of one from Monsieur Pirouette himself. The demotion Kent got -- Johannesburg, still reeling from the murder the previous year of Steven Biko and when people on this side of the planet were finally beginning to realize that segregation and state sponsored terrorism was alive and well. Later, he came back to co-found The Journal with Barbara Frum and Mary Lou Finlay. He also was distinguished in the media in other respects but he earned those credentials by having his own mind.
But now, Peter Kent is a total lackey for Stephen Harper. He has even admitted, long before he got the environment portfolio, that he he only uses language pre-approved by the PMO. My only conclusion from this is that he doesn't even try to convince Harper the times when he is patently wrong, even if it is behind closed doors. A country where the Cabinet takes its instructions directly from the head of government rather than it being a group of senior advisors that tries to make decisions by consensus, no longer has a Cabinet. It has instead a variation of a Central Committee. Communist minded states call theirs a Politburo. I don't know off hand what the term would be for a right wing government would be but I believe that is what we have here today in Canada.
I suppose the next thing is that the Weather Office, part of the Environment Department, will be ordered to stop issuing tornado or hurricane warnings, so as not to offend the "Christianites" who dominate the ruling party because the fact such storms are becoming more powerful because of global warming doesn't ... well, they just don't like facts, period. Even if the storm is coming.
But the second thing, and what is more worrying, is how this action has further made the point that Canada can no longer be trusted to be an "honest broker" in world affairs. That is to say, the sense that no matter where we stood with our allies (the US, the UK, Germany, Japan, etc.) we were also willing to bring often hostile sides together to some form of consensus, and in the process the often red hot tensions that this world often were cooled down before boiling over. In some capacity we still have this in the fact that we "protect" Israel's interests in Cuba (as the two countries still do not have direct ties).
I'm not saying the Liberals were entirely blameless in this. Actually, there should have been much more consultation with the provinces since natural resources and electrical production are, under Article 92A of the 1867 Constitution, the provinces' "province."
Nor am I saying the provinces should have had a veto (this is impossible for treaties anyway, and it would make the Balkanization of Canada even worse than it is in Belgium, where Dutch-speaking Flanders, French-speaking Wallonia, the small German-speaking community, and the city council in Brussels each have vetoes on changes to the EU structure.)
But Canada at the federal level, had they listened just a little more, could have set more realistic targets that could have been easily beaten and then exceeded. In fact we could have quite conceivably achieved the Kyoto goals without having ever committed to doing so.
There was precedent for this happening at around the same time during the nineties -- when we put ourselves in a much stronger financial position by setting worst case scenario targets for fiscal balances; which led to strong surpluses, a big reduction in debt to GDP and an end to income tax bracket creep. The provinces for the most part also benefited from better fiscal positions even after the shock 1995 poison pill budget that offloaded a lot of the cost for social programs to the provinces.
But Canada has in a fairly short period of time made itself look bad. We are going to have to be held to account in some way or another for the fallout from the tar sands, clear cutting and strip mining. Whether this is a penalty that Harper claims no longer has to be paid (I think it does, actually) or poorer relations even with democracies that share our values of basic human rights and free elections, this is unacceptable. Pollution does make its way around the planet. Don't forget that the fallout from Chernobyl, Ukraine was so widespread that every part of the permanently inhabitated planet experienced some trace levels of radioactive isotopes. With only one exception -- the Falkland Islands, according to the CIA.
What a comedown from the 1990s, when we led the world in banning CFCs and leaded gasoline, and pushing a convention to ban all land mines. When we pushed the US to adopt clean environment policies -- in the 1970s, about the only thing Trudeau was able to convince Nixon on. And on it goes.
I'm not going to say I'm ashamed to be a Canadian. Of course I'm proud to be one. But the definition of what it is to be Canadian has undergone a huge redefinition this week. And for that, I am embarrassed.
UPDATE (2:50 pm EST, 1950 GMT): Minor corrections and clarifications.
First is the messenger, Peter Kent, a former news anchor. Back in 1978, he had the courage to resign the anchor chair at CBC English when Pierre Trudeau was deliberately interfering in the newsroom by Trudeau ordering the network to cancel the live broadcast of a speech by René Levesque in favour of one from Monsieur Pirouette himself. The demotion Kent got -- Johannesburg, still reeling from the murder the previous year of Steven Biko and when people on this side of the planet were finally beginning to realize that segregation and state sponsored terrorism was alive and well. Later, he came back to co-found The Journal with Barbara Frum and Mary Lou Finlay. He also was distinguished in the media in other respects but he earned those credentials by having his own mind.
But now, Peter Kent is a total lackey for Stephen Harper. He has even admitted, long before he got the environment portfolio, that he he only uses language pre-approved by the PMO. My only conclusion from this is that he doesn't even try to convince Harper the times when he is patently wrong, even if it is behind closed doors. A country where the Cabinet takes its instructions directly from the head of government rather than it being a group of senior advisors that tries to make decisions by consensus, no longer has a Cabinet. It has instead a variation of a Central Committee. Communist minded states call theirs a Politburo. I don't know off hand what the term would be for a right wing government would be but I believe that is what we have here today in Canada.
I suppose the next thing is that the Weather Office, part of the Environment Department, will be ordered to stop issuing tornado or hurricane warnings, so as not to offend the "Christianites" who dominate the ruling party because the fact such storms are becoming more powerful because of global warming doesn't ... well, they just don't like facts, period. Even if the storm is coming.
But the second thing, and what is more worrying, is how this action has further made the point that Canada can no longer be trusted to be an "honest broker" in world affairs. That is to say, the sense that no matter where we stood with our allies (the US, the UK, Germany, Japan, etc.) we were also willing to bring often hostile sides together to some form of consensus, and in the process the often red hot tensions that this world often were cooled down before boiling over. In some capacity we still have this in the fact that we "protect" Israel's interests in Cuba (as the two countries still do not have direct ties).
I'm not saying the Liberals were entirely blameless in this. Actually, there should have been much more consultation with the provinces since natural resources and electrical production are, under Article 92A of the 1867 Constitution, the provinces' "province."
Nor am I saying the provinces should have had a veto (this is impossible for treaties anyway, and it would make the Balkanization of Canada even worse than it is in Belgium, where Dutch-speaking Flanders, French-speaking Wallonia, the small German-speaking community, and the city council in Brussels each have vetoes on changes to the EU structure.)
But Canada at the federal level, had they listened just a little more, could have set more realistic targets that could have been easily beaten and then exceeded. In fact we could have quite conceivably achieved the Kyoto goals without having ever committed to doing so.
There was precedent for this happening at around the same time during the nineties -- when we put ourselves in a much stronger financial position by setting worst case scenario targets for fiscal balances; which led to strong surpluses, a big reduction in debt to GDP and an end to income tax bracket creep. The provinces for the most part also benefited from better fiscal positions even after the shock 1995 poison pill budget that offloaded a lot of the cost for social programs to the provinces.
But Canada has in a fairly short period of time made itself look bad. We are going to have to be held to account in some way or another for the fallout from the tar sands, clear cutting and strip mining. Whether this is a penalty that Harper claims no longer has to be paid (I think it does, actually) or poorer relations even with democracies that share our values of basic human rights and free elections, this is unacceptable. Pollution does make its way around the planet. Don't forget that the fallout from Chernobyl, Ukraine was so widespread that every part of the permanently inhabitated planet experienced some trace levels of radioactive isotopes. With only one exception -- the Falkland Islands, according to the CIA.
What a comedown from the 1990s, when we led the world in banning CFCs and leaded gasoline, and pushing a convention to ban all land mines. When we pushed the US to adopt clean environment policies -- in the 1970s, about the only thing Trudeau was able to convince Nixon on. And on it goes.
I'm not going to say I'm ashamed to be a Canadian. Of course I'm proud to be one. But the definition of what it is to be Canadian has undergone a huge redefinition this week. And for that, I am embarrassed.
UPDATE (2:50 pm EST, 1950 GMT): Minor corrections and clarifications.
Tuesday, 6 December, 2011
Channeling the Mad Man of the Airwaves
No sooner did a "third party" manager come to take control of the financial affairs of Attawapiskat than he was told to get the hell out of Dodge. Chief Theresa Spence must have channeled Howard Beale when she said that her band of 2800 Cree were "not going to taking it no more." Surprised she didn't add, "We're as mad as hell." Because the events of the last few days have been as outrageous as what has happened -- or not happened rather -- over the years.
Of course it is perfectly reasonable for us to demand what happened with $80 million over the last few years. I for one would like to know that. But sending in a white "manager" in a grey suit is as insulting as when Britain kept sending Governors General to Canada a full 21 years after we became formally independent in 1931. The band is more than capable of hiring its own auditor and if there is funny business going on the band members can vote out the chief and the council and hire people who will do the job right.
Most places, if a new school is needed, it can go from blueprint to finished product in a year or less. Attawapiskat has waited eleven years, and counting (so the Liberals have a lot to answer for on this too). Most places that get flooded out are abandoned as the population is moved to higher ground. This place and others like it keep getting flooded out, and what happens is squat.
Of course, it also doesn't help that all of James and Hudson Bays are severed from the North American road network. This can be a problem not just for getting supplies in during an emergency but also people out.
There is a small hospital there but serious medical emergencies require MEDEVAC transport -- flying sometimes several hours to an available bed in a far away city. $1200 an hour -- to start. It's supposed to be covered by insurance but there is always that nasty co-payment which is a lot higher than for a land ambulance. ($125 or more) And the acute shortage of doctors is especially acute on tribal lands. The bonuses offered to have doctors work full time and on an extended stay basis just don't seem to be enough incentive -- and while we should be opening up opportunities for more aboriginal doctors many teens commit suicide before finishing high school.
And lastly, there is that piece of legislation called the Far North Act which was written and passed by the provincial legislature with very little consultation with the aboriginal and non-aboriginal people north of Algonquin Park. Our northern resources need to be better managed to ensure prosperity for people of all races, to make the North less dependent on the South while helping the South with balancing the books. But not at the expense of exploiting the good nature of miners and forestry workers as well as making a mockery of Treaty 9. It's interesting that this legislation managed to unite natives and non-natives, business and the labour movement but that didn't seem matter to Pointy Head. And as far as the feds go, as long as they have the veto power who cares what the little people think?
How much blame can be pinned on poor management of transfers by community leaders? Hard to say. But a presumption of guilt, that is a reverse onus, is contrary to our system of laws. I'd put my foot down too.
For a so called fresh start on the aboriginal file, both Harper and McGuinty have failed Canadians big time.
Of course it is perfectly reasonable for us to demand what happened with $80 million over the last few years. I for one would like to know that. But sending in a white "manager" in a grey suit is as insulting as when Britain kept sending Governors General to Canada a full 21 years after we became formally independent in 1931. The band is more than capable of hiring its own auditor and if there is funny business going on the band members can vote out the chief and the council and hire people who will do the job right.
Most places, if a new school is needed, it can go from blueprint to finished product in a year or less. Attawapiskat has waited eleven years, and counting (so the Liberals have a lot to answer for on this too). Most places that get flooded out are abandoned as the population is moved to higher ground. This place and others like it keep getting flooded out, and what happens is squat.
Of course, it also doesn't help that all of James and Hudson Bays are severed from the North American road network. This can be a problem not just for getting supplies in during an emergency but also people out.
There is a small hospital there but serious medical emergencies require MEDEVAC transport -- flying sometimes several hours to an available bed in a far away city. $1200 an hour -- to start. It's supposed to be covered by insurance but there is always that nasty co-payment which is a lot higher than for a land ambulance. ($125 or more) And the acute shortage of doctors is especially acute on tribal lands. The bonuses offered to have doctors work full time and on an extended stay basis just don't seem to be enough incentive -- and while we should be opening up opportunities for more aboriginal doctors many teens commit suicide before finishing high school.
And lastly, there is that piece of legislation called the Far North Act which was written and passed by the provincial legislature with very little consultation with the aboriginal and non-aboriginal people north of Algonquin Park. Our northern resources need to be better managed to ensure prosperity for people of all races, to make the North less dependent on the South while helping the South with balancing the books. But not at the expense of exploiting the good nature of miners and forestry workers as well as making a mockery of Treaty 9. It's interesting that this legislation managed to unite natives and non-natives, business and the labour movement but that didn't seem matter to Pointy Head. And as far as the feds go, as long as they have the veto power who cares what the little people think?
How much blame can be pinned on poor management of transfers by community leaders? Hard to say. But a presumption of guilt, that is a reverse onus, is contrary to our system of laws. I'd put my foot down too.
For a so called fresh start on the aboriginal file, both Harper and McGuinty have failed Canadians big time.
A pinhole light of hope
Despite the deliberate ballot stuffing and other dirty tricks that Vladimir Putin tried to pull in this week's elections to the Duma, Russia's Parliament, the "United Russia" party fell well way below the two-thirds majority needed to unilaterally change the country's constitution. In fact it couldn't even muster a simple majority. Maybe the people of that far-off land woke up and said that they wanted to have no part of Putin getting yet another six or even twelve years in office (the term for President was recently extended from four to six years).
There are protests on the streets of Moscow tonight despite an official ban. Maybe an ominous sign of things to come, or maybe (one hopes) the next step of the people getting their country back from the apparatchiks and the Mafia.
There are protests on the streets of Moscow tonight despite an official ban. Maybe an ominous sign of things to come, or maybe (one hopes) the next step of the people getting their country back from the apparatchiks and the Mafia.
Sunday, 4 December, 2011
The Cain identity
Yesterday's decision by Herman Cain to drop out of the GOP Presidential stakes (technically, suspending, a legal loophole that allows him to reallocate donations made to him to another candidate or a PAC) really wasn't surprising nor was the timing. But it was inevitable. If it was just one woman making sexual harassment complaints it may have raised some eyebrows. Two, three, four ... there was a problem. Then a fifth claiming to have had a consentual affair with Cain, game over. Pretty sad for a man who built an entire pizza chain (Godfather's ™) from the ground up, then was elected by his peers to run the restaurant lobby in DC.
Sexual harassment is, perhaps needless to say, a serious charge. If made falsely, the women should be charged with perjury. If true, Cain is lucky just to been able to write a cheque and make it "go away."
The comparisons to Clarence Thomas, however, are perplexing. That was about a man accused of harassing one woman, Anita Hill, while he was chair of -- of all things -- the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and right at the time when it was arguing in the courts that such harassment amounted to discrimination (which it was eventually successful at so persuading). Such bad talk at a government agency should have been flagged before Thomas was allowed to sit on any bench, let alone the Supreme Court of the United States.
Of course, judges don't get paid a lot compared to the huge responsibilities they carry, including rendering judgments that could send a person to jail or death row and forcing corporations into bankruptcy. But a businessman with that kind of influence, who had a great deal of respect from blacks as well as whites, to risk throwing it all away with remarks or conduct that was anything but cute ... would Americans want to trust that kind of man with a button?
It's not his denials, but the way he denied it. Frankly, paying off someone to drop a lawsuit, even if the payer is innocent, doesn't leave a good impression. He could have been a serious challenger to President Obama but he let it slip away by not regaining control of the discussion. With money comes power and, if not exercised properly, arrogance.
His exit probably means that America won't have a discussion about a national sales tax, the only major democracy that doesn't but almost certainly should.
Sexual harassment is, perhaps needless to say, a serious charge. If made falsely, the women should be charged with perjury. If true, Cain is lucky just to been able to write a cheque and make it "go away."
The comparisons to Clarence Thomas, however, are perplexing. That was about a man accused of harassing one woman, Anita Hill, while he was chair of -- of all things -- the Equal Employment Opportunity Commission, and right at the time when it was arguing in the courts that such harassment amounted to discrimination (which it was eventually successful at so persuading). Such bad talk at a government agency should have been flagged before Thomas was allowed to sit on any bench, let alone the Supreme Court of the United States.
Of course, judges don't get paid a lot compared to the huge responsibilities they carry, including rendering judgments that could send a person to jail or death row and forcing corporations into bankruptcy. But a businessman with that kind of influence, who had a great deal of respect from blacks as well as whites, to risk throwing it all away with remarks or conduct that was anything but cute ... would Americans want to trust that kind of man with a button?
It's not his denials, but the way he denied it. Frankly, paying off someone to drop a lawsuit, even if the payer is innocent, doesn't leave a good impression. He could have been a serious challenger to President Obama but he let it slip away by not regaining control of the discussion. With money comes power and, if not exercised properly, arrogance.
His exit probably means that America won't have a discussion about a national sales tax, the only major democracy that doesn't but almost certainly should.
Saturday, 3 December, 2011
Harper's "Office for Relgious Freedom": Another Newspeak front?
Dubya got into a lot of hot water in many circles with his so-called "faith based initiative" (which President Obama has actually continued and broadened to include people of faith who are LGBT) and now Harper appears to want to go down the same path with something called the "Office for Religious Freedom." Internal memos obtained by the CBC through a FOIA request indicate that Team Harper wants to sidestep the obvious question, whether "promoting religious freedom around the world" is just a way to masquerade a true intent to let Con-friendly denominations dictate the national agenda. Just like the Department of War became the Department of Defence and "Welfare" became Human Resources Development, this is potentially a new front in the game of Newspeak.
I absolutely agree that you can't have religious freedom without free speech and vice versa. But I also happen to believe that when one is elected to government he or she has a duty to the community at large and not just specific interests, to work for the liberty of all and not just for some. Specifically, to understand that the "Great Commission" does not mean refusing to take no for an answer.
I note that two lines were blacked out in the disclosure, regarding how the government chose who to consult with on how the Office should be set up. All that was left was a smarmy line about picking people dedicated to freedom of religion. Naturally, what was censored should leave one asking who they chose -- was it those who favour their own freedom of religion at the expense of others who don't have the same religion? You can't avoid the televangelists in late night or the weekends. The way most rail against Muslims is a concern. Most televangelists shamelessly support the Jewish cause when their own grandparents most likely supported the Holocaust (without explaining the change of heart), but some through weasel words show their contempt for the Chosen People. And yes, many also rail against Catholicism, in a country where a plurality, 42% or thereabout, are Catholics.
I have said before and I'll say again that while I accept the fact faith based groups are part of the delivery end of social services, that is because I and others who accept that fact do so because such groups make a clear distinction between service and proselytizing. Blurring that line violates the accepted separation of church and state. Harper is playing a dangerous game if he thinks he can start a war of words between religious groups based on religion. Wars have started over such fighting words. Just look at Yugoslavia.
Besides which, the Office isn't needed. We already have the "Rights and Democracy" bureau which while somewhat tainted over the years is serving this purpose among many others. Why waste money with duplication? I thought Harper was a provincial rights advocate; this seems to go against that kind of thinking. He was supposed to have been for openness but the censorship even at this level makes me ask what needs to be hid.
The Salvation Army, World Vision, the Kairos partnership -- those are great examples of faith based groups who serve the community at home and around the world, and who promote freedom of religion at the same time without rubbing our faces in it. The government should certainly promote that freedom as well, but they should follow the lead of the groups who have figured out where the line is drawn.
I absolutely agree that you can't have religious freedom without free speech and vice versa. But I also happen to believe that when one is elected to government he or she has a duty to the community at large and not just specific interests, to work for the liberty of all and not just for some. Specifically, to understand that the "Great Commission" does not mean refusing to take no for an answer.
I note that two lines were blacked out in the disclosure, regarding how the government chose who to consult with on how the Office should be set up. All that was left was a smarmy line about picking people dedicated to freedom of religion. Naturally, what was censored should leave one asking who they chose -- was it those who favour their own freedom of religion at the expense of others who don't have the same religion? You can't avoid the televangelists in late night or the weekends. The way most rail against Muslims is a concern. Most televangelists shamelessly support the Jewish cause when their own grandparents most likely supported the Holocaust (without explaining the change of heart), but some through weasel words show their contempt for the Chosen People. And yes, many also rail against Catholicism, in a country where a plurality, 42% or thereabout, are Catholics.
I have said before and I'll say again that while I accept the fact faith based groups are part of the delivery end of social services, that is because I and others who accept that fact do so because such groups make a clear distinction between service and proselytizing. Blurring that line violates the accepted separation of church and state. Harper is playing a dangerous game if he thinks he can start a war of words between religious groups based on religion. Wars have started over such fighting words. Just look at Yugoslavia.
Besides which, the Office isn't needed. We already have the "Rights and Democracy" bureau which while somewhat tainted over the years is serving this purpose among many others. Why waste money with duplication? I thought Harper was a provincial rights advocate; this seems to go against that kind of thinking. He was supposed to have been for openness but the censorship even at this level makes me ask what needs to be hid.
The Salvation Army, World Vision, the Kairos partnership -- those are great examples of faith based groups who serve the community at home and around the world, and who promote freedom of religion at the same time without rubbing our faces in it. The government should certainly promote that freedom as well, but they should follow the lead of the groups who have figured out where the line is drawn.
Wednesday, 30 November, 2011
Déjà vu 2011 style
If this is déjà vu all over again, well it is. Fearing another crisis like the one in 2008, during the US election no less, those who control the supply of money are again swinging into action. And once again it's making me ask about our complacency about these things in Canada.
In the last hour as I write this, the central banks of Canadam the US, the Eurozone, the UK, Switzerland and Japan are once again coordinating currency swaps to prevent runs on the euro and the greenback. The rate the central banks are charging each other will be Fed Funds plus 0.5% -- or just under 0.7%; as well swaps that were due to expire in August of next year have been extended until February 2013. It seems to have had its intended effect at least short term -- the Euro went up nearly a cent and a half in the last hour and short term bonds in the US have increased their yields to just over 2% for the first time in quite a while.
So far this year, 90 banks have failed in the United States. The rate has slowed down considerably from the peak of 157 for all of last year which is a good sign, but it's a constant reminder that while we may have a structrually much more sound banking system in Canada we're not entirely immune. A lot of our banks' capitalization is still denominated in greenbacks and euros as are future debt obligations. A huge devaluation or revaluation (one way or the other) could have huge effects on a bank's stability. The Superintendent of Financial Institutions has the right to seize a bank, trust or insurance company if it is teetering, but even short term effects while that bank is being flipped to a more stable one can cause a panic.
Yes deposit insurance is supposed to stop a run on the banks, but there are a lot of people who don't even know such a thing exists, and they could either go postal or drop dead from the shock of a failure. Even in the best case scenario for a failure, it would be a huge headache to change payment authorizations for expected deposits from entitlements and pay cheques as well as withdrawals for bill payments. You just can't write an old cheque on a new bank account even if it is the same physical plant; and far as I know, although there is competition for B2B cheques, there is only one company that makes personal cheques in Canada and it can take two weeks to get the new wallet book (hello, Competition Bureau???)
Any time a central bank prints more money, or even creates it virtually, it makes me ask if things will get worse before they get better. Somehow Canada this morning found it was able to extend the loans it gave to the US for a few more months -- a couple years after it found $30 billion out of nothing at all. Is something wrong with this picture? If we were Joe or Jane Blow, our asses would have been foreclosed ages ago. State immunity my ass. The is real money we're talking about, money that shouldn't even exist.
In the last hour as I write this, the central banks of Canadam the US, the Eurozone, the UK, Switzerland and Japan are once again coordinating currency swaps to prevent runs on the euro and the greenback. The rate the central banks are charging each other will be Fed Funds plus 0.5% -- or just under 0.7%; as well swaps that were due to expire in August of next year have been extended until February 2013. It seems to have had its intended effect at least short term -- the Euro went up nearly a cent and a half in the last hour and short term bonds in the US have increased their yields to just over 2% for the first time in quite a while.
So far this year, 90 banks have failed in the United States. The rate has slowed down considerably from the peak of 157 for all of last year which is a good sign, but it's a constant reminder that while we may have a structrually much more sound banking system in Canada we're not entirely immune. A lot of our banks' capitalization is still denominated in greenbacks and euros as are future debt obligations. A huge devaluation or revaluation (one way or the other) could have huge effects on a bank's stability. The Superintendent of Financial Institutions has the right to seize a bank, trust or insurance company if it is teetering, but even short term effects while that bank is being flipped to a more stable one can cause a panic.
Yes deposit insurance is supposed to stop a run on the banks, but there are a lot of people who don't even know such a thing exists, and they could either go postal or drop dead from the shock of a failure. Even in the best case scenario for a failure, it would be a huge headache to change payment authorizations for expected deposits from entitlements and pay cheques as well as withdrawals for bill payments. You just can't write an old cheque on a new bank account even if it is the same physical plant; and far as I know, although there is competition for B2B cheques, there is only one company that makes personal cheques in Canada and it can take two weeks to get the new wallet book (hello, Competition Bureau???)
Any time a central bank prints more money, or even creates it virtually, it makes me ask if things will get worse before they get better. Somehow Canada this morning found it was able to extend the loans it gave to the US for a few more months -- a couple years after it found $30 billion out of nothing at all. Is something wrong with this picture? If we were Joe or Jane Blow, our asses would have been foreclosed ages ago. State immunity my ass. The is real money we're talking about, money that shouldn't even exist.
Tuesday, 29 November, 2011
The Attawapiskat Outrage
It is simply inexcusable that people should have to live in third world conditions in Canada. Yet that is how people in many First Nations (FN) communities across Canada do live. And it gotten so bad in Attawapiskat FN, Ontario -- 694 km (432 miles) northeast of Thunder Bay, and which can only be reached by plane from places such as Timmins and Kapuskasing as well as Ottawa -- a reservation on about the same latitude as Red Deer, Alberta is so bad that even the Red Cross doesn't know what to do and has asked for help from other NGOs.
Bad enough that everything has to be shipped in which increases costs. (The Northern residents deduction, which reduces taxable income by about $3000 per person plus eligible travel costs, doesn't begin to cover the gap between what we pay for food in the South and those in the Great White North do.) Bad enough there is a huge unemployment rate there and despair to the level that nearly 40% of youth choose to end their own lives. The notion that any home could be uninsulated or could have no running potable water is outrageous and disgusting.
How can this be tolerated in a country of plenty, especially in a part of Ontario that is within a new "Northern ring of fire" with vast supplies of diamonds (clean, non-conflict diamonds), nickel, copper, palladium, platinum and possibly new sources of gold, silver and cobalt? As the original owners of the land, Aboriginals are entitled to at least a fair share of the royalties. Whatever the rate is, a fairer share would be a huge first step in and of itself to lifting people up there out of despair.
(The rate of the royalties which is as much as joke to begin with, isn't as bad as the fact that the royalties are going into general revenues rather than into a real sovereign wealth fund to compete with those in Norway and Mainland China, and the fact such a fund should continue to have inflows as long as the mines and forests haven't been totally exhausted -- but I digress, that's for an upcoming post.)
Instead, Pointy Head McGuinty creates "Five Year Plans" for Northern Ontario (yes, 5YPs, like Eva Perón did for Argentina, no wonder they still think she's a goddess -- as did Mao for Red China and Stalin for the USSR), and the feds shirk their responsibilities also especially with education. Still no plans for a permanent school rather than one in a moulding portable structure. Oh sure, they can say they have spent $80 million in the town over the last few years. If that's the case why is the community still $16 million in debt? If mining encampments can be built up rapidly and with much more humane living conditions a relative stone's throw away, then what is the problem?
And not to forget the media's role in their shirking of responsibility as well: The community like so many "up north" only has repeaters, or translators, of big city TV stations which rarely if ever cover issues of import to the First Nations, focusing only on events in the larger and more accessible towns. And the networks wanted to put these communities into everlasting darkness with the transition to digital earlier this year -- but were ordered by the regulators to give the "little people" a reprieve. I have to admit I'm surprised that Attawapiskat has high speed internet -- many other FNs still have only 56k dial up.
It's not just Attawapiskat. This is just the tip of the iceberg. There are reserves here in the South that are pretty bad -- Six Nations just south of Hamilton is one example -- but that is nowhere compared to this monstrosity. Even the still non-gentrified sections of South Central LA or Harlem, Manhattan are better than this. Seriously.
And I think this is the first true test of how much of a "compassionate conservative" Stephen Harper thinks that he is. Words are trite. Actions, however constituted, are the real truth.
Bad enough that everything has to be shipped in which increases costs. (The Northern residents deduction, which reduces taxable income by about $3000 per person plus eligible travel costs, doesn't begin to cover the gap between what we pay for food in the South and those in the Great White North do.) Bad enough there is a huge unemployment rate there and despair to the level that nearly 40% of youth choose to end their own lives. The notion that any home could be uninsulated or could have no running potable water is outrageous and disgusting.
How can this be tolerated in a country of plenty, especially in a part of Ontario that is within a new "Northern ring of fire" with vast supplies of diamonds (clean, non-conflict diamonds), nickel, copper, palladium, platinum and possibly new sources of gold, silver and cobalt? As the original owners of the land, Aboriginals are entitled to at least a fair share of the royalties. Whatever the rate is, a fairer share would be a huge first step in and of itself to lifting people up there out of despair.
(The rate of the royalties which is as much as joke to begin with, isn't as bad as the fact that the royalties are going into general revenues rather than into a real sovereign wealth fund to compete with those in Norway and Mainland China, and the fact such a fund should continue to have inflows as long as the mines and forests haven't been totally exhausted -- but I digress, that's for an upcoming post.)
Instead, Pointy Head McGuinty creates "Five Year Plans" for Northern Ontario (yes, 5YPs, like Eva Perón did for Argentina, no wonder they still think she's a goddess -- as did Mao for Red China and Stalin for the USSR), and the feds shirk their responsibilities also especially with education. Still no plans for a permanent school rather than one in a moulding portable structure. Oh sure, they can say they have spent $80 million in the town over the last few years. If that's the case why is the community still $16 million in debt? If mining encampments can be built up rapidly and with much more humane living conditions a relative stone's throw away, then what is the problem?
And not to forget the media's role in their shirking of responsibility as well: The community like so many "up north" only has repeaters, or translators, of big city TV stations which rarely if ever cover issues of import to the First Nations, focusing only on events in the larger and more accessible towns. And the networks wanted to put these communities into everlasting darkness with the transition to digital earlier this year -- but were ordered by the regulators to give the "little people" a reprieve. I have to admit I'm surprised that Attawapiskat has high speed internet -- many other FNs still have only 56k dial up.
It's not just Attawapiskat. This is just the tip of the iceberg. There are reserves here in the South that are pretty bad -- Six Nations just south of Hamilton is one example -- but that is nowhere compared to this monstrosity. Even the still non-gentrified sections of South Central LA or Harlem, Manhattan are better than this. Seriously.
And I think this is the first true test of how much of a "compassionate conservative" Stephen Harper thinks that he is. Words are trite. Actions, however constituted, are the real truth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)