Questioning the patriotism of those who oppose the Conservative Party of Canada is old hat for PMS. What is new is doing so not in Parliament, where he can be questioned, but on the road thousands of kilometres away, in front of our troops -- in effect, hiding behind the trousers and skirts of our men and women in uniform.
Asking questions is not unpatriotic. It's what democracy is all about. Perhaps Harper has taken one too many tutoring sessions from the GOP's Karl Rove, who has played this game against the Democrats since 1972 when he threw mud at George McGovern, even though the latter was a hero of World War II.
Let's be clear: No one has suggested that the allegations of Richard Colvin are absolutely, 100 percent the truth. All that has been said is that they should be investigated. No one has said all troops are guilty of war crimes. Just that it may be possible that war crimes may have happened and that it should be investigated.
A special prosecutor is necessary if civilians have been implicated, because of the obvious conflict of interest (since the Minister of Public Security has oversight over the RCMP). JAG is more than capable of handling complaints about people in uniform, but it too must be seen as operating without interference from the executive.
If Haper has the guts, he should say what he really thinks in the debating chamber -- not before a captive audience who could face court martial if they openly disagree with what he is insinuating. Make no mistake, STEVE, we are proud of our troops regardless of our political affiliation -- or theirs.
At the rate things are going, next we'll hear that Diane Finley or even Laureen Teskey has been named the new prez of the Canadian Red Cross. Good bye, political neutrality.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Monday, November 30, 2009
Sunday, November 29, 2009
CTV -- the UnCanadian Television Network
They're just about to start the Grey Cup in Calgary. But if you don't have cable or satellite, you can't get the game. It's only on TSN.
The finals of the CFL should be on the main CTV network. Since it's sweeps, they figure it's better not to piss off those who'd rather watch Desperate Housewives. Or even the Sunday night NFL game (which I think will be on TSN2).
If 1 out of 5 Canadians are denied the ability to even watch the game, then it proves that CTV is not patriotic and not Canadian.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
The finals of the CFL should be on the main CTV network. Since it's sweeps, they figure it's better not to piss off those who'd rather watch Desperate Housewives. Or even the Sunday night NFL game (which I think will be on TSN2).
If 1 out of 5 Canadians are denied the ability to even watch the game, then it proves that CTV is not patriotic and not Canadian.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Thursday, November 26, 2009
Dubai World first, Tar Sands next?
Remember the huge flack created a few years ago when the sovereign wealth fund of Dubai, one of the fiefdoms of the United Arab Emirates, had the inside edge on a contract for the management of some of America's largest ports? People of all political stripes were so outraged that their country would sell out to some "Middle Eastern sheikh" that the company in question, Dubai World, backed out -- even after a charm campaign about the revival of the once sleepy city that included a story that took up 2/3 of an episode of 60 Minutes. The area was actually expanding out into the sea with palm tree shaped islands, that sail shaped eight star hotel (the Burj Dubai) and a massive shopping mall that included the biggest bowling alley in the Middle East and even an indoor ski hill with snow generated by machine all day and night.
My, how times have changed ... today, many world markets were shaken up by the news that Dubai World has asked for a six month extension on an upcoming interest payment -- a whopping $3.5 billion. Reason: Like most places during the boom, Dubai grew too big and way too fast and it's finally, like the rest of us, facing reality. Its dream of becoming the next great financial centre, after London, New York City and Hong Kong was, like the desert surrounding it, dust in the wind. And with the US markets closed today, one can only imagine the huge sell-off that will happen tomorrow during the biggest shopping day of the year -- if the company defaults, major banks in North America and Europe could be on the hook for about $40 billion in bad loans.
Hard to believe this is the same Dubai that advertised not that long ago in both the G&M and the NP for jobs working as oil technicians and accountants, for payrates in the six figures; even higher than what's being offered for some jobs in the Alberta Tar Sands. The benefit package included a six week vacation back home, fully paid by the company, each and every year in the five year contract. You can imagine how many people wanted to be the guy -- or girl -- in Dubai.
There are lessons here for us. The boom is bound to end at some point in Western Canada and off the East Coast. Not just the volatility in the price of oil but just the unrealistic cost of living is driving many away. These are tough times, but we need to find a way to diversify and make our locales a place that welcomes all kinds of business with long term growth. Otherwise, like countries overly dependent on just a minimum number of resources (and non-renewable ones at that) we may be shooting ourselves in the foot.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
My, how times have changed ... today, many world markets were shaken up by the news that Dubai World has asked for a six month extension on an upcoming interest payment -- a whopping $3.5 billion. Reason: Like most places during the boom, Dubai grew too big and way too fast and it's finally, like the rest of us, facing reality. Its dream of becoming the next great financial centre, after London, New York City and Hong Kong was, like the desert surrounding it, dust in the wind. And with the US markets closed today, one can only imagine the huge sell-off that will happen tomorrow during the biggest shopping day of the year -- if the company defaults, major banks in North America and Europe could be on the hook for about $40 billion in bad loans.
Hard to believe this is the same Dubai that advertised not that long ago in both the G&M and the NP for jobs working as oil technicians and accountants, for payrates in the six figures; even higher than what's being offered for some jobs in the Alberta Tar Sands. The benefit package included a six week vacation back home, fully paid by the company, each and every year in the five year contract. You can imagine how many people wanted to be the guy -- or girl -- in Dubai.
There are lessons here for us. The boom is bound to end at some point in Western Canada and off the East Coast. Not just the volatility in the price of oil but just the unrealistic cost of living is driving many away. These are tough times, but we need to find a way to diversify and make our locales a place that welcomes all kinds of business with long term growth. Otherwise, like countries overly dependent on just a minimum number of resources (and non-renewable ones at that) we may be shooting ourselves in the foot.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Wednesday, November 25, 2009
Two big decisions for Obama
President Obama may take his time making his mind up, maybe a little too much, but when he does it up it's well thought out and reasoned based on advice from a variety of sources; not just a narrow group of people who have a predetermined answer.
On two issues, he now wants to make a huge move forward. First, Obama announced he wants the US to cut its greenhouse gas levels by 17% of 2005 levels by 2020 and 83% by 2050, and will make that the basis of his country's proposals for the Copenhagen meetings coming up. He'll also demand that developing countries do their part as well, something which was missing from Kyoto. It's less than the 25 to 30% most experts feel is needed to make a real impact but it is a real target, not the reduction in "intensity" that the current Canadian government feels compelled to follow.
Second, he has decided what to do about Afghanistan and will commit, in a speech at West Point next week, to increase his country's troop commitment of 68,000 by about another 30,000 in a "surge" similar to a belated strategy used by Dubya in the latter part of his administration but will also make clear that Afghanistan has to meet certain goals by specific dates and that the Western troop commitment is not an open-ended one. Many of the troops would be sent to Kandahar which will no doubt be a relief to our Canadian soldiers who are stretched to the limit.
A surge is unfortunately needed; and I have been consistent in my belief that the war in Afghanistan was the important one, and the battle in Iraq unnecessary (as it indirectly provoked a civil war) as the troops who were and are still in Iraq could have been in Afghanistan and secured the country. Imagine the difference if 200,000 US military were in Afghanistan from the very beginning. It certainly would have set an example for all the other NATO countries, the majority of which got put off all together on any kind of deployment after Bush and Blair pushed it too far on Iraq.
The sad thing is that it will also give legitimacy to a president (Hamid Karzai) who by most accepted accounts was re-elected via fraud. There are also no assurances that Pakistan will do its part which is a problem both for Afghanistan as well as India.
Much needs to be done in the region -- not just neutralizing the Taliban and other paramilitary groups as well as the al Qaeda network but also coming up with a final resolution to the issue of Kashmir. Further to the east, the long standing border dispute between India and Bangladesh, especially over the convoluted Cooch-Behar area with its dozens of enclaves, also has to be resolved as just one of the roughly 200 patches could be used as a base to start a regional terrorist war.
Obama still has a lot of international goodwill which puts him further ahead of his predecessor; but the world's patience will wear short and thin if he doesn't act fast and the troops he sends actually does something to start a chain reaction of peace in that part of the Asia-Pacific region, which is so desperately needed.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
On two issues, he now wants to make a huge move forward. First, Obama announced he wants the US to cut its greenhouse gas levels by 17% of 2005 levels by 2020 and 83% by 2050, and will make that the basis of his country's proposals for the Copenhagen meetings coming up. He'll also demand that developing countries do their part as well, something which was missing from Kyoto. It's less than the 25 to 30% most experts feel is needed to make a real impact but it is a real target, not the reduction in "intensity" that the current Canadian government feels compelled to follow.
Second, he has decided what to do about Afghanistan and will commit, in a speech at West Point next week, to increase his country's troop commitment of 68,000 by about another 30,000 in a "surge" similar to a belated strategy used by Dubya in the latter part of his administration but will also make clear that Afghanistan has to meet certain goals by specific dates and that the Western troop commitment is not an open-ended one. Many of the troops would be sent to Kandahar which will no doubt be a relief to our Canadian soldiers who are stretched to the limit.
A surge is unfortunately needed; and I have been consistent in my belief that the war in Afghanistan was the important one, and the battle in Iraq unnecessary (as it indirectly provoked a civil war) as the troops who were and are still in Iraq could have been in Afghanistan and secured the country. Imagine the difference if 200,000 US military were in Afghanistan from the very beginning. It certainly would have set an example for all the other NATO countries, the majority of which got put off all together on any kind of deployment after Bush and Blair pushed it too far on Iraq.
The sad thing is that it will also give legitimacy to a president (Hamid Karzai) who by most accepted accounts was re-elected via fraud. There are also no assurances that Pakistan will do its part which is a problem both for Afghanistan as well as India.
Much needs to be done in the region -- not just neutralizing the Taliban and other paramilitary groups as well as the al Qaeda network but also coming up with a final resolution to the issue of Kashmir. Further to the east, the long standing border dispute between India and Bangladesh, especially over the convoluted Cooch-Behar area with its dozens of enclaves, also has to be resolved as just one of the roughly 200 patches could be used as a base to start a regional terrorist war.
Obama still has a lot of international goodwill which puts him further ahead of his predecessor; but the world's patience will wear short and thin if he doesn't act fast and the troops he sends actually does something to start a chain reaction of peace in that part of the Asia-Pacific region, which is so desperately needed.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Tuesday, November 24, 2009
No to broadcasters' blackmail and cab-sat greed
Enough is enough.
At last we know the real reason why the TV broadcasters want higher carriage fees: They want to block access to prime time US television by forcing cable and satellite companies to black out signals if the Canadian network that has rights to the program airs the same episode within seven days. This policy, best described as domestic exclusivity, goes way beyond the current annoyance of "simultaneous substitution" or "simsub," actually a reality on both sides of the border -- in fact, domex is a form of legalized censorship. It makes the blocking of US newscasts during controversial trials because of publication bans look like small potatoes.
The networks have also confirmed they are indeed completely pulling the plug on analogue signals in many smaller communities -- like Thunder Bay, Swift Current and Prince George, just to name a few so-called "minor" markets. This could leave tens of thousands in the dark. And they want to push back the switch to DTV where it does exist to 2013, which means a delay in access to new bandwidth and with increased competition lower prices for internet and mobile devices.
What makes it all the more peculiar is that they only want to stiff us with fee for carriage if we get cable or satellite. Those who get signals over the air -- for now -- don't have to pay at all. This is quite unlike most places in Europe where everyone is required to have a license (but in return, the number of channels available in digital for free, including all networks both state and commercial, is substantially higher than in North America; even a videotext newswire service with real time weather updates is available on screen in most places, not at all here.)
To be fair, cable and satellite companies are also full of crap. They make huge profits, in fact are guaranteed profits thanks to that little known hidden fee called the "pass through portion," and we don't get all that much in return. They can definitely contribute more into the production fund without impacting on profits; but the governments federal and provincial also need to increase the production tax credits.
I could support higher carriage fees if they actually went into Canadian programming, that we Canadians actually liked and wanted to watch. But at this price? No, thank you -- and the CRTC should see the threat to black out US signals for what it is: Blackmail. If I was Judge Konrad von Finkenstein, I'd tell the networks to F-off.
When was the last time there was a nightly newscast in Kenora or in Chibougamau, after all? Once a week summary, if lucky.
One other thing: Now that digital is widely available, we need to go to a pure a la carte system where we pay for what we want on a per episode basis. This eliminates channel surfing, lowers our bills and ensures a steady stream of revenue for everyone. And we should be able to choose if we want to watch it on a Canadian or US channel, especially for the Super Bowl with all the nifty commercials we are not permitted by law to see here.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
At last we know the real reason why the TV broadcasters want higher carriage fees: They want to block access to prime time US television by forcing cable and satellite companies to black out signals if the Canadian network that has rights to the program airs the same episode within seven days. This policy, best described as domestic exclusivity, goes way beyond the current annoyance of "simultaneous substitution" or "simsub," actually a reality on both sides of the border -- in fact, domex is a form of legalized censorship. It makes the blocking of US newscasts during controversial trials because of publication bans look like small potatoes.
The networks have also confirmed they are indeed completely pulling the plug on analogue signals in many smaller communities -- like Thunder Bay, Swift Current and Prince George, just to name a few so-called "minor" markets. This could leave tens of thousands in the dark. And they want to push back the switch to DTV where it does exist to 2013, which means a delay in access to new bandwidth and with increased competition lower prices for internet and mobile devices.
What makes it all the more peculiar is that they only want to stiff us with fee for carriage if we get cable or satellite. Those who get signals over the air -- for now -- don't have to pay at all. This is quite unlike most places in Europe where everyone is required to have a license (but in return, the number of channels available in digital for free, including all networks both state and commercial, is substantially higher than in North America; even a videotext newswire service with real time weather updates is available on screen in most places, not at all here.)
To be fair, cable and satellite companies are also full of crap. They make huge profits, in fact are guaranteed profits thanks to that little known hidden fee called the "pass through portion," and we don't get all that much in return. They can definitely contribute more into the production fund without impacting on profits; but the governments federal and provincial also need to increase the production tax credits.
I could support higher carriage fees if they actually went into Canadian programming, that we Canadians actually liked and wanted to watch. But at this price? No, thank you -- and the CRTC should see the threat to black out US signals for what it is: Blackmail. If I was Judge Konrad von Finkenstein, I'd tell the networks to F-off.
When was the last time there was a nightly newscast in Kenora or in Chibougamau, after all? Once a week summary, if lucky.
One other thing: Now that digital is widely available, we need to go to a pure a la carte system where we pay for what we want on a per episode basis. This eliminates channel surfing, lowers our bills and ensures a steady stream of revenue for everyone. And we should be able to choose if we want to watch it on a Canadian or US channel, especially for the Super Bowl with all the nifty commercials we are not permitted by law to see here.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Monday, November 23, 2009
Maybe we should just fire the lot
I am truly troubled by the further revelations today about what was going on in Afghanistan regarding the transfer of detainees to the Afghan government and the lack of cooperation or notification with the Red Cross, and that it is possible that senior officials in the previous Liberal government may have known about what was going on as well as the present Conservative government. Since the other opposition leaders have security clearances, it stands to reason they have known something as well but have been (for obvious reasons) constrained from doing so until now.
At this rate there are a lot of questions to be answered. But simply brushing it aside by saying most Canadians don't care or that this is the "insider story of the week" just doesn't cut it. Canadians want answers. If the military mission was to create an environment that would have respect for human rights as most people understand the principle, then knowingly contributing to torture is a sure fine way to do that.
Someone asked me the other day, do I think people in the Liberal party ought to resign? At this point I am almost tempted to say -- maybe we need a new and clean slate from all parties. Fire all 308 MPs and 105 Senators, ban them and all their predecessors from ever running again; and start with a new freshman class. I don't know what the result would be but at least we'd get a majority, regardless of affiliation, who have absolutely no tolerance for this crap.
But as far as today's news about the lack of cooperation with the Red Cross, which is itself a war crime: We can't hide behind the old standby that "this is a matter of national security, so we can't talk about it." If we don't say this is not what Canada is about, then we're actually risking our national security and inviting a terrorist attack on our soil. Not to mention, there is no point in donating to the Red Cross if their hands are going to be tied by meddling officials, which we expect from Burma and Zimbabwe but not from Canada.
We don't need a parliamentary inquiry or a "Royal Commission." We need a special prosecutor and we need one now.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
At this rate there are a lot of questions to be answered. But simply brushing it aside by saying most Canadians don't care or that this is the "insider story of the week" just doesn't cut it. Canadians want answers. If the military mission was to create an environment that would have respect for human rights as most people understand the principle, then knowingly contributing to torture is a sure fine way to do that.
Someone asked me the other day, do I think people in the Liberal party ought to resign? At this point I am almost tempted to say -- maybe we need a new and clean slate from all parties. Fire all 308 MPs and 105 Senators, ban them and all their predecessors from ever running again; and start with a new freshman class. I don't know what the result would be but at least we'd get a majority, regardless of affiliation, who have absolutely no tolerance for this crap.
But as far as today's news about the lack of cooperation with the Red Cross, which is itself a war crime: We can't hide behind the old standby that "this is a matter of national security, so we can't talk about it." If we don't say this is not what Canada is about, then we're actually risking our national security and inviting a terrorist attack on our soil. Not to mention, there is no point in donating to the Red Cross if their hands are going to be tied by meddling officials, which we expect from Burma and Zimbabwe but not from Canada.
We don't need a parliamentary inquiry or a "Royal Commission." We need a special prosecutor and we need one now.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Friday, November 20, 2009
EU: The Next Generation
After what was thought to be a potentially crisis meeting for the current rotating chair of the EU Council Presidency, Sweden's PM Frederik Reinfeldt, the 27 heads of government came very quickly to agreement on who's going to run the massive EU bureaucracy under the new Lisbon rules. The new European President is the present Prime Minister of Belgium, Herman van Rompuy; and in a bit of a shock, the Foreign Minister of the EU will be a British peer, Baroness Catherine Ashton.
It's somewhat of a relief that the PMs didn't choose Tony Blair. Although extremely fluent in French, one of the working languages at the Commission, he has a lot of personal and political baggage. Besides having little credibility left after the sexed-up Downing Street Papers, it would seem rather inappropriate to have someone running the EU who was from a country that is presently outside both the Schengen open border zone as well as the Euro. Besides which, his relationship with the Queen wasn't exactly cordial even at the best of times; imagine having to get heck from her as well as 26 other monarchs and presidents.
The big concern of the new leadership will be trying to get the eurocracy down to a more reasonable size and to put a stop to some of the boneheaded regulations that come out of Brussels and court rulings out of Strasbourg and Luxembourg City; as well as a Parliament that has to rotate between all three cities for no apparent reason other than to make the state railways and public transit companies rich in the pockets.
I don't think we're anywhere near the "United States of Europe" that many fear, but Rompuy and Ashton will have to act quickly to put their feet forward to be taken seriously. Still, for those who haven't been paying attention to Fortress Europe, there is no question this juggernaut is about to get a whole lot more influence. There's already more Euros in circulation than US dollars and it's just a matter of time before the common currency becomes the reserve currency of choice among most nations -- as it already has with Canada.
And many may not know what hit them until it's actually the EU -- not China -- that holds most of America's staggering debt. Sweden knows what it was like a few years ago when interest rates hit 500%. It'd be very interesting to see how America would react if they faced those terms, and the nuclear missiles of the UK and France were aimed not at Russia but the States.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
It's somewhat of a relief that the PMs didn't choose Tony Blair. Although extremely fluent in French, one of the working languages at the Commission, he has a lot of personal and political baggage. Besides having little credibility left after the sexed-up Downing Street Papers, it would seem rather inappropriate to have someone running the EU who was from a country that is presently outside both the Schengen open border zone as well as the Euro. Besides which, his relationship with the Queen wasn't exactly cordial even at the best of times; imagine having to get heck from her as well as 26 other monarchs and presidents.
The big concern of the new leadership will be trying to get the eurocracy down to a more reasonable size and to put a stop to some of the boneheaded regulations that come out of Brussels and court rulings out of Strasbourg and Luxembourg City; as well as a Parliament that has to rotate between all three cities for no apparent reason other than to make the state railways and public transit companies rich in the pockets.
I don't think we're anywhere near the "United States of Europe" that many fear, but Rompuy and Ashton will have to act quickly to put their feet forward to be taken seriously. Still, for those who haven't been paying attention to Fortress Europe, there is no question this juggernaut is about to get a whole lot more influence. There's already more Euros in circulation than US dollars and it's just a matter of time before the common currency becomes the reserve currency of choice among most nations -- as it already has with Canada.
And many may not know what hit them until it's actually the EU -- not China -- that holds most of America's staggering debt. Sweden knows what it was like a few years ago when interest rates hit 500%. It'd be very interesting to see how America would react if they faced those terms, and the nuclear missiles of the UK and France were aimed not at Russia but the States.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Thursday, November 19, 2009
Ten percenters hit new now
By now, we're all used to the so-called "ten per center" fliers we get in the mail, thanks to the virtually unlimited double-ended franking privileges, meaning one can send and receive mail free of charge, the Governor General and all Senators and Members of Parliament have. (The privilege is also held by the Sovereign, the Clerks of the Commons and the Senate, Parliament's Librarian and his or her deputy, the ethics officers and the other "officers of Parliament" -- including the Information and Privacy Commissioners, the Auditor General and the Chief Electoral Officer.)
The Liberals and the NDP are actually no less guilty than the Conservatives -- I regularly get fliers from all three federalist parties in the mail from out of town MPs. It's more of an annoyance than anything and they usually just end up in the recycling bin without even being read. They are also increasingly partisan and in many cases, outright misleading or take quotes from "enemies" out of context.
(They are called "ten per centers" because, besides the four general mailings per year to the homes in one's own district -- although there are many more, to be certain -- MPs are permitted to sent out letters or fliers, equal to ten percent of the households in the district they represent, to homes and apartments in other districts and there appears to be no limit to how many times this can be done. For example, if you have 50,000 homes in your district, say in downtown Toronto, you can send 5,000 fliers to homes in, say, a district in rural Nova Scotia.)
Many have called to change the rules, including banning mailings outside one's home district other than for correspondence from actual letters. But after yesterday's torture bombshell, the latest fliers being sent out accusing the Liberals of anti-Semitism sets a real low for the ruling Conservative Party. In essence the pamphlet in question praises Mr. Harper for boycotting the "anti-Semitic" Durban conference while pointing out that Michael Ignatieff once accused Israel of war crimes (but neglected to mention that Ignatieff later retracted the remarks).
On the second point, a war crime is a war crime. I have always and will always support the State of Israel and its right to self-defence, but Israel gets no special exemptions from international law simply because six million Jewish people were slaughtered during World War II. Not only that, it clearly states in the Mosaic law that one is to have the same law for citizens as for foreigners; therefore it could be suggested all countries are guilty of this sin. "The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." (Leviticus 19:34, NIV).
On the first point, by being absent, one actually is complicit with any lies (real or imagined) that might be stated. If Harper imagines himself to be the latter day Daniel then he should jump in the pit and face the lions in the den and call them out.
I share Scott Tribe's concern that the Cons timed the release and mailing quite deliberately, to distract attention from yesterday's damning testimony. If Harper thinks we're that stupid or forgetful, or that we have short attention spans, he may be in for a shock. When the death camps were liberated by Canada and our allies, it was by soldiers and other armed personnel of all political stripes, all persuasions and all religions. We've seen the pattern of atrocities repeated time and time again since then and the vast majority of us simply do not stand for it.
A lot of us have very, very long memories; and, for those among us who are Christian, we will not stand idly by and watch as our Jewish brothers and sisters are dragged through the muck, not the least of which is MP Irwin Cotler. We will also not stand and be silent about innocent people, including Christians, being bombed out of their homes under the principle of "collective guilt." If this is how $10 million of the Parliamentary budget (really, our money) is being spent every year, then it's time for the Board of Internal Economy (the "Board of Directors" for the House, which currently has a majority of opposition members) to put an end to the paid partisan b.s. that comes from all parties, once and for all. After all, if I sent a letter like that using the free mail to my MP or a Senator, I could be potentially charged with libel or promoting hate. But because a Parliamentarian does it (and on my and everyone else's dime), it's protected by Parliamentary privilege. That is unacceptable.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
The Liberals and the NDP are actually no less guilty than the Conservatives -- I regularly get fliers from all three federalist parties in the mail from out of town MPs. It's more of an annoyance than anything and they usually just end up in the recycling bin without even being read. They are also increasingly partisan and in many cases, outright misleading or take quotes from "enemies" out of context.
(They are called "ten per centers" because, besides the four general mailings per year to the homes in one's own district -- although there are many more, to be certain -- MPs are permitted to sent out letters or fliers, equal to ten percent of the households in the district they represent, to homes and apartments in other districts and there appears to be no limit to how many times this can be done. For example, if you have 50,000 homes in your district, say in downtown Toronto, you can send 5,000 fliers to homes in, say, a district in rural Nova Scotia.)
Many have called to change the rules, including banning mailings outside one's home district other than for correspondence from actual letters. But after yesterday's torture bombshell, the latest fliers being sent out accusing the Liberals of anti-Semitism sets a real low for the ruling Conservative Party. In essence the pamphlet in question praises Mr. Harper for boycotting the "anti-Semitic" Durban conference while pointing out that Michael Ignatieff once accused Israel of war crimes (but neglected to mention that Ignatieff later retracted the remarks).
On the second point, a war crime is a war crime. I have always and will always support the State of Israel and its right to self-defence, but Israel gets no special exemptions from international law simply because six million Jewish people were slaughtered during World War II. Not only that, it clearly states in the Mosaic law that one is to have the same law for citizens as for foreigners; therefore it could be suggested all countries are guilty of this sin. "The alien living with you must be treated as one of your native-born. Love him as yourself, for you were aliens in Egypt. I am the LORD your God." (Leviticus 19:34, NIV).
On the first point, by being absent, one actually is complicit with any lies (real or imagined) that might be stated. If Harper imagines himself to be the latter day Daniel then he should jump in the pit and face the lions in the den and call them out.
I share Scott Tribe's concern that the Cons timed the release and mailing quite deliberately, to distract attention from yesterday's damning testimony. If Harper thinks we're that stupid or forgetful, or that we have short attention spans, he may be in for a shock. When the death camps were liberated by Canada and our allies, it was by soldiers and other armed personnel of all political stripes, all persuasions and all religions. We've seen the pattern of atrocities repeated time and time again since then and the vast majority of us simply do not stand for it.
A lot of us have very, very long memories; and, for those among us who are Christian, we will not stand idly by and watch as our Jewish brothers and sisters are dragged through the muck, not the least of which is MP Irwin Cotler. We will also not stand and be silent about innocent people, including Christians, being bombed out of their homes under the principle of "collective guilt." If this is how $10 million of the Parliamentary budget (really, our money) is being spent every year, then it's time for the Board of Internal Economy (the "Board of Directors" for the House, which currently has a majority of opposition members) to put an end to the paid partisan b.s. that comes from all parties, once and for all. After all, if I sent a letter like that using the free mail to my MP or a Senator, I could be potentially charged with libel or promoting hate. But because a Parliamentarian does it (and on my and everyone else's dime), it's protected by Parliamentary privilege. That is unacceptable.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Wednesday, November 18, 2009
Torture, Canadian style (?)
If what former diplomat Richard Colvin told a House of Commons committee today is true, than Canada may be guilty of even worse crimes of war than many of the personnel serving in the armed forces of our allies as well as the political leaderships of all at the time the crimes took place. And to make it worse, those who were tortured after our forces turned them over to the Afghan government weren't even "high value" targets, those actually responsible for terrorist acts or in the leadership of the Taliban or Al Qaeda.
Ignorance of what was going on is no excuse, and telling a diplomat to tone down his or her memorandums or to just shut the hell up amounts to, in my opinion, complicity in the crimes. Not to mention the Red Cross -- the ultimate neutral arbiter -- also being told to mind its own business. Hearing the accounts on the radio tonight, I almost threw up. I didn't actually, out of courtesy for the people I was carpooling with, but I might have if I was alone.
What did Harper and MacKay know, and when did they know it? They owe Canadians an answer -- and they owe us the truth. Those responsible for such reprehensible actions should face courts martial in the case of the armed forces, or civilian trials in the case of the politicians.
I do have to ask, though, why didn't Mr. Colvin raise the questions while federal ministers were touring Afghanistan? Someone could have put a stop to this. In fact, it never should have been allowed to happen. Then again it's hard to see how our complaining would have helped much since we forsake our "honest broker" role in diplomacy quite some time ago.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Ignorance of what was going on is no excuse, and telling a diplomat to tone down his or her memorandums or to just shut the hell up amounts to, in my opinion, complicity in the crimes. Not to mention the Red Cross -- the ultimate neutral arbiter -- also being told to mind its own business. Hearing the accounts on the radio tonight, I almost threw up. I didn't actually, out of courtesy for the people I was carpooling with, but I might have if I was alone.
What did Harper and MacKay know, and when did they know it? They owe Canadians an answer -- and they owe us the truth. Those responsible for such reprehensible actions should face courts martial in the case of the armed forces, or civilian trials in the case of the politicians.
I do have to ask, though, why didn't Mr. Colvin raise the questions while federal ministers were touring Afghanistan? Someone could have put a stop to this. In fact, it never should have been allowed to happen. Then again it's hard to see how our complaining would have helped much since we forsake our "honest broker" role in diplomacy quite some time ago.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Tuesday, November 17, 2009
Boondoggle, Caesar's ™ style
Truly unbelievable: To get the new and expanded Caesar's Palace ™ Windsor off the grid (because Windsor and area simply didn't have enough power to light up the hotel / concert / casino complex), the Ontario Lottery and Gaming Corporation decided to build a "clean energy" co-generation plant on site. The Caesar's project was supposed to cost $40 million; it's now run up to at least $81 million but may actually be worth zero zip nada on paper because no one knows how much excess power would be created to pump back into the grid so it could pay for itself. And the worst part: It still hasn't generated a single watt of power.
Meanwhile, the designer of the power plant and the OLG are suing each other because of claims the province reneged on the deal to buy power in the case of the former, and lack of timely delivery for the latter.
You'd think with a name with the caché of Caesar's, and with several former auto plants in Windsor now idle permanently, there would be a top notch facility with plenty of power to spare. But the nearest power facilities in Lambton and Bruce are pumping out as much as they can -- to the Greater Toronto Area; meanwhile the juice from Michigan is sold out of state at top dollar.
For a Premier who promised accountability and major improvements in health and education, partly funded by the revenues from gaming facilities across the province (the casinos, slots at racetracks and the horse races themselves), we the taxpayers have gotten one hell of a snow job from Dalton McGuinty. Sure there's a recession going on and Ontario's casinos collectively lost money last year for the first time, but that's no excuse for overspending on a clean energy project with nothing to show for it.
Why couldn't they have done what they did up at Casino Rama near Orillia? They built a backup gas generation plant, which came in handy during the big blackout in 2003; in fact they were the only gaming facility in Southern Ontario that was still running. It doesn't cost that much to build a purpose-driven gas plant.
This is yet another thing Dalton McGuinty has to answer for. This is beyond embarrassing. Little wonder people would want to go to the casinos in Detroit -- and not just because one can bet on a single game there which is still illegal in Canada (a three game parlay minimum is required).
And if they can't be trusted to build an in-house plant at a casino, how can they be trusted to build a windmill farm, or a nuclear power plant, at or below the contracted or stated price? When pigs can actually fly, then I'll believe it's possible to keep a promise when it comes to power.
At this point one couldn't blame Harrah's if they decide to strip the OLG of the right to use the Caesar's name. Who would want to be associated with a bs project like this knowing there's money for nothing? That's what's supposed to happen to those who patronize the facilities, not those who built it -- in this case, us the taxpayers.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Meanwhile, the designer of the power plant and the OLG are suing each other because of claims the province reneged on the deal to buy power in the case of the former, and lack of timely delivery for the latter.
You'd think with a name with the caché of Caesar's, and with several former auto plants in Windsor now idle permanently, there would be a top notch facility with plenty of power to spare. But the nearest power facilities in Lambton and Bruce are pumping out as much as they can -- to the Greater Toronto Area; meanwhile the juice from Michigan is sold out of state at top dollar.
For a Premier who promised accountability and major improvements in health and education, partly funded by the revenues from gaming facilities across the province (the casinos, slots at racetracks and the horse races themselves), we the taxpayers have gotten one hell of a snow job from Dalton McGuinty. Sure there's a recession going on and Ontario's casinos collectively lost money last year for the first time, but that's no excuse for overspending on a clean energy project with nothing to show for it.
Why couldn't they have done what they did up at Casino Rama near Orillia? They built a backup gas generation plant, which came in handy during the big blackout in 2003; in fact they were the only gaming facility in Southern Ontario that was still running. It doesn't cost that much to build a purpose-driven gas plant.
This is yet another thing Dalton McGuinty has to answer for. This is beyond embarrassing. Little wonder people would want to go to the casinos in Detroit -- and not just because one can bet on a single game there which is still illegal in Canada (a three game parlay minimum is required).
And if they can't be trusted to build an in-house plant at a casino, how can they be trusted to build a windmill farm, or a nuclear power plant, at or below the contracted or stated price? When pigs can actually fly, then I'll believe it's possible to keep a promise when it comes to power.
At this point one couldn't blame Harrah's if they decide to strip the OLG of the right to use the Caesar's name. Who would want to be associated with a bs project like this knowing there's money for nothing? That's what's supposed to happen to those who patronize the facilities, not those who built it -- in this case, us the taxpayers.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Monday, November 16, 2009
Zambian "porn" editor acquitted
Back in August, I wrote about the crazy story of a newspaper editor in Zambia who was charged with pornography because she took photos of a woman who was forced to deliver a breech birth in a parking lot after two hospitals turned her away for a lack of nurses caused by a labour dispute. The baby later died from suffocation. Many felt that the arrest was politically motivated as the editor -- Chansa Kabwela -- has been an outspoken critic in her newspaper about the incumbent and (allegedly corrupt) president of the country, Rupiah Banda; even though the photos were never published.
Today, a court in Lusaka ruled that there was nothing to suggest the photos were anywhere from being "obscene" and duly acquitted Kabwela.
For a continent largely unaccustomed to the idea of a free press, this is without doubt a huge victory -- not just for journalistic integrity, but also for the common sense idea that a woman has the right to give birth safely. How anyone could have possibly viewed photographs of child birth as being "porn" is beyond comprehension, but that kind of idiocy exists even on our shores and it needs to be challenged if women are ever going to truly be considered the equals of men not just in law but in fact.
Put it this way: If the roles were reversed and men could give birth, would a woman pursue such silly charges? I would hope not.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Today, a court in Lusaka ruled that there was nothing to suggest the photos were anywhere from being "obscene" and duly acquitted Kabwela.
For a continent largely unaccustomed to the idea of a free press, this is without doubt a huge victory -- not just for journalistic integrity, but also for the common sense idea that a woman has the right to give birth safely. How anyone could have possibly viewed photographs of child birth as being "porn" is beyond comprehension, but that kind of idiocy exists even on our shores and it needs to be challenged if women are ever going to truly be considered the equals of men not just in law but in fact.
Put it this way: If the roles were reversed and men could give birth, would a woman pursue such silly charges? I would hope not.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Friday, November 13, 2009
Military contractors get free pass when raping?
You would think by now that the message has gotten through to people: Rape is a crime, anyplace and anytime. It apparently hasn't reached the ears of some US Senators.
A few weeks ago, ex-comedian Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) put forward a bill that would prevent the US Department of Defense from signing contracts with private companies that require their employees to resolve sexual harrassment and / or assault via private binding arbitration rather than through the courts. In effect, the situation as it currently stands gives service companies -- I'll let you guess which ones -- immunity from prosecution, and the Franken amendment if it becomes law would end that immunity. The amendment passed in principle, as well as it should -- the vote was 68 to 30. But on the way there, 30 Senators, all Republicans, voted against it.
In many states, as well as in most of Canada, a restaurant or bar can be held liable if they were aware someone had too much to drink then hit the road and caused an accident under the influence. Furthermore if it was one of their employees that had one too many, they'd be fired on the spot as well as facing criminal charges. Most companies nowadays have strict sexual harrassment policies knowing full well that they could be held liable if they create a "hostile work environment" that allows such discrimination to take place.
Why should it not be any different with contractors on the battlefield? Should they not be held to the same standards as those who wear the uniform and could face a court martial if they committed similar acts?
As it turns out, President Obama's Defense Department is trying to get the amendment killed as it goes to conference for reconciliation and a final vote -- they say it would disqualify too many current and potential contractors. Tough. Taxpayer money should not be subsidizing criminal acts and those who do commit such acts should face justice, both monetary and criminal. It's that simple.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
A few weeks ago, ex-comedian Sen. Al Franken (D-MN) put forward a bill that would prevent the US Department of Defense from signing contracts with private companies that require their employees to resolve sexual harrassment and / or assault via private binding arbitration rather than through the courts. In effect, the situation as it currently stands gives service companies -- I'll let you guess which ones -- immunity from prosecution, and the Franken amendment if it becomes law would end that immunity. The amendment passed in principle, as well as it should -- the vote was 68 to 30. But on the way there, 30 Senators, all Republicans, voted against it.
In many states, as well as in most of Canada, a restaurant or bar can be held liable if they were aware someone had too much to drink then hit the road and caused an accident under the influence. Furthermore if it was one of their employees that had one too many, they'd be fired on the spot as well as facing criminal charges. Most companies nowadays have strict sexual harrassment policies knowing full well that they could be held liable if they create a "hostile work environment" that allows such discrimination to take place.
Why should it not be any different with contractors on the battlefield? Should they not be held to the same standards as those who wear the uniform and could face a court martial if they committed similar acts?
As it turns out, President Obama's Defense Department is trying to get the amendment killed as it goes to conference for reconciliation and a final vote -- they say it would disqualify too many current and potential contractors. Tough. Taxpayer money should not be subsidizing criminal acts and those who do commit such acts should face justice, both monetary and criminal. It's that simple.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Thursday, November 12, 2009
Can't terrorist groups come up with better names?
There's ETA (Basque Freedom and Homeland) ... the Tamil "Tigers" ... and the Moro Islamic Liberation Front, a separatist group in the Phillipines. Yes ... MILF.
Maybe that's why many people don't take the threat seriously. With a name like that ... who would?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Maybe that's why many people don't take the threat seriously. With a name like that ... who would?
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Wednesday, November 11, 2009
Last dance for Dobbs at CNN
I don't think anyone saw this one coming, Lou Dobbs asked for and was released from his contract two years before it expires ... then again, Lou Dobbs was getting increasingly belligerent over the last six months. Not that he wasn't already but he may have finally worn out the patience of even the most tolerant editors at CNN.
He concluded tonight's show, his last, with "I'll be seeing you on the radio ..." à la Charles Osgood. Don't count on me tuning in.
It's almost certain he's going to settle in at Fox News any time now; proving just much of a comedy channel FNC is.
Indeed, he is the last of the original CNN anchors. Maybe they need to bring back one of the other originals -- that station is dead meat.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
He concluded tonight's show, his last, with "I'll be seeing you on the radio ..." à la Charles Osgood. Don't count on me tuning in.
It's almost certain he's going to settle in at Fox News any time now; proving just much of a comedy channel FNC is.
Indeed, he is the last of the original CNN anchors. Maybe they need to bring back one of the other originals -- that station is dead meat.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Blackout in South America
Just weeks after Rio de Janiero won the 2016 Summer Olympics and as it gears up for perhaps as equally big an extragavanza, hosting the 2014 Men's World Cup of Soccer, a huge security concern has come up. Last night, a blackout plunged 60 million residents of Brazil and Paraguay into darkness for over two hours.
Why did this happen? No one seems to know for sure. Officially, sabotage is being denied at this time and the blame is instead placed on an "atmospheric event." The events have pointed critics to a huge flaw that nearly did in the Northeast of North America in the summer of 2003 -- too much interconnectivity causing a chain reaction blackout.
But if a 60 Minutes story the other night about how easy it is to hack into critical infrastructure is any indication, it may not be a good sign. It's happened before in Rio and many point a finger for those past events directly at Mainland China which, while it was unstatated, cannot tolerate any possible economic rivals and democratically elected ones at that. Or perhaps organized crime who can operate virtually anywhere on the planet.
Or it could be al Qaeda or another tech saavy terrorist group. And we know trojan horses have already been downloaded into central computers by stealth.
It doesn't make me feel all that comfortable about the security of Canada's electrical grid and our chemical and other raw materials plants. Or how easy it is to disconnect some power plants that may need to go offline in a hurry without causing damage to other plants or infrastructure at the end-user points. Not only that, if it's easy to hack into civilian systems, what leap of logic would it take to go from there to hacking into -- say, drones that can be flown by remote control, guided missles, entire cargo planes or destroyer ships.
And God forbid if a terrorist ever cracked the official nuclear launch codes.
I don't want to necessarily know what's being done -- that of course gives the hackers the heads up. Just that something is being done and intrusion attempts are caught and prosecuted.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Why did this happen? No one seems to know for sure. Officially, sabotage is being denied at this time and the blame is instead placed on an "atmospheric event." The events have pointed critics to a huge flaw that nearly did in the Northeast of North America in the summer of 2003 -- too much interconnectivity causing a chain reaction blackout.
But if a 60 Minutes story the other night about how easy it is to hack into critical infrastructure is any indication, it may not be a good sign. It's happened before in Rio and many point a finger for those past events directly at Mainland China which, while it was unstatated, cannot tolerate any possible economic rivals and democratically elected ones at that. Or perhaps organized crime who can operate virtually anywhere on the planet.
Or it could be al Qaeda or another tech saavy terrorist group. And we know trojan horses have already been downloaded into central computers by stealth.
It doesn't make me feel all that comfortable about the security of Canada's electrical grid and our chemical and other raw materials plants. Or how easy it is to disconnect some power plants that may need to go offline in a hurry without causing damage to other plants or infrastructure at the end-user points. Not only that, if it's easy to hack into civilian systems, what leap of logic would it take to go from there to hacking into -- say, drones that can be flown by remote control, guided missles, entire cargo planes or destroyer ships.
And God forbid if a terrorist ever cracked the official nuclear launch codes.
I don't want to necessarily know what's being done -- that of course gives the hackers the heads up. Just that something is being done and intrusion attempts are caught and prosecuted.
Vote for this post at Progressive Bloggers.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)