Tony's Viewpoint

RCMP Security Checks on Bernier raised no alarms

2008-06-18T06:12:00.015-04:00

Once again the Opposition has drawn a blank in its smear campaign against the Conservative government. Former foreign affairs minister Maxime Bernier had cleared both RCMP and CSIS security checks just weeks before his resignation.

Former foreign affairs minister Maxime Bernier cleared a full background check by the RCMP and CSIS just weeks before the explosive allegations of missing documents led to his resignation from cabinet, the Prime Minister's national security adviser, Margaret Bloodworth, told a House of Commons committee yesterday.

But the Opposition are such sore losers. It looks like they will not be letting go of this issue anytime soon. They are now suggesting that the government should have ignored the security clearance given by the RCMP and CSIS and investigate based on allegations of Mr Bernier's connection with 'organized crime' Note, there has not been a shred of evidence produced to support these allegations. All we have had so far coming from the opposition benches is unsubstantiated gossip and useless chatter.

But opposition MPs said they were left incredulous at Ms. Bloodworth's suggestion there was no need to look into the matter further when the allegations surfaced in May, because of the positive background check in April.

"I would expect that if there was a significant concern about ministers' connection with organized crime, that would come out of a criminal or security [background] check," she explained.

The Opposition were calling for an RCMP investigation of Bernier when the issue first arose. Now they are saying that the RCMP and CSIS security clearance of Bernier was not enough. It seems that they always seem to find some way of moving the goalpost and changing the issues when things do not go their way.

Most likely nothing more than what we already know will be coming out of this HOC committee. It will just demonstrate the lack or priorities shown by Opposition MPs, who should be getting on with more prevalent issues, such as gas prices and other matters affecting our countries. But then again, why should we be surprised at this development? During the Liberal leadership debate, Opposition leader, Stephane Dion made the following statement:

Do you think it is easy to make priorities?

Stay tuned,

Tony

Victoria Day Barbecue Recipes

2008-05-19T11:32:00.007-04:00

This Victoria Day weekend's weather was pretty brutal, especially yesterday when it rained buckets, canceling my plans for a volleyball game with some friends at the Beaches. It looks like today will be different and we will be getting a reprieve. The sun has come out, making it the perfect day for a barbecue. I do have company coming over and I want to do things a bit different and try some new recipes.

Here is where I need some help. Can any of you barbecuing enthusiasts post your favorite barbecuing recipes? I am planning on doing chicken, pork, steak, salmon, potatoes and corn on the cob.

Your suggestions and barbecuing tips will be most welcome.

Regards,

Tony

Deputy leader Michael Ignatieff rubs some Liberals the wrong way

2008-05-17T08:18:00.005-04:00

I came across an interesting article by John Ivison in the National Post concerning Liberal deputy leader, Michael Ignatieff. Ever since he lost the leadership contest to Stephane Dion in the 2006 Liberal leadership convention, his stock as a leader in waiting has steadily declined, even among those who supported his leadership bid 2 years ago.

Ignatieff rubs some Liberals wrong way (National Post)

In the event that party leader Stephane Dion loses an election, there seems to be growing skepticism that Mr. Ignatieff should be the man to replace him -- even among MPs who supported him at the leadership convention in Montreal two years ago.

The apparent disenchantment with Mr. Ignatieff on the part of a number of MPs I spoke with, coincides with the arrival in the Liberal caucus of Bob Rae -- and it is perhaps no coincidence that the stock of the deputy leader is falling as that of the former Ontario premier is rising.

"It comes down to basic political judgment and understanding," said one MP. "With Rae you're dealing with someone who does know politics. There is a depth to him that allows him to interact more naturally with caucus [than Mr. Ignatieff]," he said.

The Branda Martin Saga Continues

2008-05-10T23:11:00.014-04:00

Unfortunately it looks like this Brenda Martin saga will continue. I had thought that the news story would have come to a merciful conclusion once she was released on parole, but I was wrong. It seems as if there is a vested interest by certain members of the MSM to keep her story alive and milk every ounce out of it, even though it lost its legs ages ago.

In one of the interviews, CTV Newsnet journalist, Paula Todd asked Brenda a very loaded question, almost as if she was egging her on to sue the federal government.

Paula Todd: "So have you ruled out any sort of legal action against the Federal Government?"

Brenda Martin: "...I never would say that I’ve ruled out anything in the future. Everything changes day to day.."

h/t Blue Like You - Brenda isn’t done with us yet (link)

It is laughable that she will even think of suing the Federal government, especially since they were responsible for paying her fine, expediting her transfer from Mexico to Canada and flying her home aboard a government jet at considerable expense to Canadian taxpayers. She has been in Canada for more than a week and she has yet to even say a simple thank you to the Canadian government.

Just to recap, the predicament that Brenda Martin found herself in, while in Mexico was of her own doing. Nobody forced her to leave the safety of Canada to live illegally in Mexico. Nobody forced her to become involved with a con man and a fraud artist. Nobody forced her to accept large deposits of money that was not hers in her bank account and to transfer it into other bank accounts on behalf of her ex-employer.

If any other person had accepted ill-gotten gains into their own bank account and transferred it to other accounts on behalf of a con man involved in a scheme, it would have been called money laundering. But since, according to her supporters and the MSM, Ms Martin is purer than snow and she did not know what she was doing, there is no way in the world that she could ever be guilty of such a thing.

She was not a baby or a teenager when she went to Mexico, she was a grown woman and she knew what she was doing.

It is amazing how the MSM absolves her of any responsibility in the decisions that she made and somehow try to pin this on Prime Minister Stephen Harper. The partisan manner in which they have covered this story in order to embarrass the Tories makes me want to barf.

Liberal Double Standards on National Security

2008-05-10T19:23:00.009-04:00

The one thing that never ceases to amaze me about people from the other side of the political spectrum is the consistent hypocrisy and double-standards that always seem to emanate from their politicians and their allies in the MSM. This past week, after failing to find an effective issue to use against the Tories in the House of commons, they have sunk to a new low by smearing Foreign Affairs Minister, Maxime Bernier over his relationship with ex-girlfriend, Julie Couillard.

It seems that the famous quote by the late Liberal Prime Minister, Pierre Trudeau, "The state has no place in the bedrooms of the nation" no longer applies. The Liberals and the Bloc in their zeal to attack the Tories are hiding under the guise of "National Security." This is despite the fact that Julie Couillard has no criminal record, has never been charged with a crime and is not a person of interest to the police. Prime Minister Harper was perfectly justified calling Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion and Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe "gossipy old busybodies" for their attack on Bernier’s personal life.

If national security is such a big concern among members of the opposition parties, then why did Bloc Québécois Leader Gilles Duceppe and Liberal MP Denis Coderre participate in a rally and march in Montreal, where the flag of Hezbollah, a known terrorist group and a group on Canada's terrorist watch list was openly being waved to the cheers of supporters?

If national security is such a big concern among members of the opposition parties, then why did they vote against extending the anti-terrorism provision? What was remarkable about this vote was that it was initially approved by former Liberal Leader, Bill Graham, but rejected less than 3 months later by new Liberal Leader, Stephane Dion, who whipped reluctant members of his caucus into voting against it despite an emotional plea by Canadian families of victims killed in the 9/11 terror attacks.

If national security is such a big concern among members of the opposition parties, then why are they advocating for the Canadian government to intervene on behalf of Omar Khadr, a person who was captured in Afghanistan while fighting alongside the Taliban and al-Qaeda and currently on trial for the murder of an American medic, to be returned to Canada?

It is really despicable that they are advocating for a person who was fighting alongside a terrorist group responsible for the deaths of 82 Canadian troops and 1 diplomat in Afghanistan.

To the opposition, national security is only an issue when it suits their purposes.

Commenter, jad on the Blue Like You blog post "Brenda granted parole" summed up the hypocrisy of the Liberals position perfectly:

Quite the double standard here. Brenda, in spite of being arrested, charged and convicted by (OK) the Mexican government, and admitting herself that she worked for a con man, and received money from him, is apparently as innocent as the day she was born.

Julie Couillard, who was involved with biker gangs and Hell’s Angels ten years ago and has no record, has never been charged, and is not a “person of interest” to the Montreal police, is nevertheless somehow and unfit person to associate with.

Just a thought..

Will there be another evacuation request from Canadians living in Lebanon?

2008-05-08T19:46:00.008-04:00

It has been almost 2 years since the war between Israeli troops and Hezbollah guerillas in Southern Lebanon. At the height of the conflict, many people were criticizing the Federal Conservative government for its slow response in evacuating Canadian citizens, many of whom had lived in that country for more than 10 years.

Despite the criticism, constant danger and the logistical difficulties, the Canadian government came through and evacuated, 15000 citizens from Lebanon, at its own expense. This did not stop a large percentage of these evacuees returning to Lebanon within 6 months, after the conflict ended. Many of them did not even bother to express gratitude to the Canadian government, and instead gave them the brunt of their criticism. To them, Canada seemed to be merely a country of convenience. They held Canadian passports, but their hearts were elsewhere. The only time they seemed to remember Canada was when war engulfed their country. In the good times, Canada was most likely just a passing thought.

Now just 2 years later, there is another conflict brewing on the streets of Beirut. There are open gun battles raging in some neighbourhoods. This time, it is between Hezbollah guerillas and Lebanese troops.

In his televised speech, Nasrallah offered harsh words for the government, blaming it for declaring war by banning Hezbollah's telecommunications system.

"We believe the war has started, and we believe that we have the right to defend ourselves," the Hezbollah leader said. "We will cut the hand that will reach out to the weapons of the resistance, no matter if it comes from the inside or the outside."

I am wondering how long it will be before we once again hear the predictable cries of those people who will once again demand that the Canadian government evacuate these people.

Stay tuned,

Tony

Brenda Martin back in Canada

2008-05-02T06:36:00.009-04:00

The plane carrying Brenda Martin landed at the Region of Waterloo International Airport in Breslau, Ontario around 6 p.m. yesterday. She is now in the custody of officials from the Correctional Service of Canada, as she was immediately taken to the Grand Valley Institution for Women in Kitchener.

Martin's Mexican lawyer Guillermo Cruz Rico said Martin could be eligible for full parole since she spent two years in prison before being found guilty last week of knowingly accepting illicit funds and being sentenced to five years. But, he added, that decision rests with Canada's National Parole Board.

"The Correctional Service of Canada is going to produce a recommendation to the parole board and it is the parole board who is in charge of deciding if Brenda has to serve time here in Canada or not," Cruz Rico said yesterday.

I am glad that her ordeal is over and I am hoping that she and her supporters will display some gratitude to the Canadian government and the Canadian consulate in Mexico for the assistance they gave her in expediting her return to Canada.

What I could not understand is this quote from defense lawyer, Eddie Greenspan, as the decision to give parole to prisoners is the function of Corrections Canada and not the federal government.

"If the government intends to somehow allow this case to get caught up in bureaucratic red tape, then I will become involved,"

According to Mélisa Leclerc, Director of Communications Office of the Minister of Public Safety

"Accelerated parole review permits offenders to apply for release after serving one-sixth of their sentence. Non-violent offenders who have not previously served a federal sentence (two years or more) are eligible"

So since she has already served 2 years in a Mexican prison, I don't see anything that would cause a lengthly delay in parole being granted to Ms Martin.

Stay tuned,

Tony

Liberal hypocrisy displayed in the House of Commons

2008-05-01T07:56:00.006-04:00

Yesterday in the House of Commons, the Liberals once again tried to smear the Conservatives over its dispute with an Elections Canada ruling on its 2006 Federal Election campaign-advertising returns. The Conservatives have maintained all along that the transfer of funds from the national to local campaigns is perfectly legal and has been done by all federal parties, but only the Conservatives have been singled out. Its funny how the Liberals insist on accusing the Conservatives of cheating in the 2006 Federal Election, when they did the exact same thing.

What was interesting was that it was revealed that the Liberal party transferred $1.5 million from its national to its local campaign and the local campaigns transferred back $1.3 million dollars back to the Liberal Party. The Liberals did not deny that this happened, but they insisted on smearing the Conservatives on doing the exact same thing. Meanwhile Elections Canada selectively overlooked the conduct of the Liberal Party, but only focuses on the Conservative Party for the same thing? I wonder why?

Conservative MP, Pierre Poilievre pointed out these inconsistencies in the Liberal position and even puts Liberal pit bull, Dominic LeBlanc, on the spot. Everyday Mr. LeBlanc gets beaten at his own game of trying to smear the Tories, but he keeps on coming back for more.

Below is the yesterday's exchange between Jennings and Poilievre and LeBlanc and Poilievre.

Hon. Marlene Jennings (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce-Lachine, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, when did the Prime Minister find out about the existence of the Conservative election advertising scheme? Did he approve it?

Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, the member for Beauséjour across the way, along with the New Brunswick Liberals, joined in an advertising transfer scheme in the 2006 election, organized by the national party.

A copy of the cheque provided to Elections Canada from the local official agent is made out not to the newspapers in which the ad ran, but rather to the Liberal Party of Canada. The ads in content were national except for a small tag line.

This is the method of in and out that we see on the Liberal side. When did that member know this went on?

Hon. Marlene Jennings (Notre-Dame-de-Grâce-Lachine, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister did not answer the question, so I will ask it again.

When did the Prime Minister find out about the existence of the Conservative election advertising scheme, and did he approve it?

Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, the advertisement said that the member for Beauséjour and his campaign had locally paid for it. In fact, none of his returns showed that payment had been made. Either it was false advertising and he did not actually pay for the ad that he claimed he had, or he failed to report some of his election expenses to Elections Canada.

When did the Liberal Party know about these very strange in and out transactions in the New Brunswick Liberal Party?

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc (Beauséjour, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, let us try it again. When did the Prime Minister know about the Conservative election advertising scheme and did he approve it?

Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, CPC):
Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister and this entire party have known for many years that it is perfectly legal for parties to transfer money from the national to the local. In fact, we know the Liberal Party did just that, to the tune of $1.5 million. Interestingly, those local campaigns then transferred back about $1.3 million to the national Liberal Party.

The member is not willing to explain any of his personal behaviour. Could he tell us more about those million dollar transfers between local and national Liberals?

Hon. Dominic LeBlanc (Beauséjour, Lib.):
Mr. Speaker, eight times we have given the Prime Minister the opportunity to answer a simple question. Let me jog his memory.

The former Conservative candidate in Berthier-Maskinongé, Ann Julie Fortier, said she confronted him personally before the last election, saying that Conservative organizers tried to force her to pass off $28,000 of national expenses as their own. Is this why the Prime Minister will not answer the simple question?

Mr. Pierre Poilievre (Parliamentary Secretary to the President of the Treasury Board, CPC):
How disappointing, Mr. Speaker. The member has been asked four times to explain his very unusual financial transactions from the last election, during which a group of New Brunswick Liberals got together, organized by the national party, paid for out of the account of the national party, with no interaction between those local candidates and the newspaper in which the advertisement ran. After all that, he did not even report on his election return that he had picked up those expenses.

When will he explain to Canadians his failure to come clean?

Fellow blogger, Climbing out of the dark, has a youtube link to another house of commons discussion between LeBlanc and Poilievre in his post:

"LeBlanc Knocked out by Pierre" (link)

Ontario legislature expected to pass bill ordering TTC strikers back to work this evening

2008-04-27T11:56:00.015-04:00

The Ontario legislature are meeting today in a rare Sunday session in order to pass legislation mandating striking TTC employees back to work immediately.

The opposition NDP and Progressive Conservatives parties have indicated that they will support the legislation, thus ensuring its quick passage and royal accent by the end of today.

Conservative Leader John Tory called the strike "outrageous."

NDP Leader Howard Hampton said the legislation being proposed is similar to a bill used to end the 2002 garbage strike in Toronto.

"This is legislation we voted for before,' Hampton said Saturday. "It's fair, it's balanced and we can support it again."

The back to work order will:

Call for the strike to end immediately after Royal Assent is given

Impose fines of $2,000 per day on individuals and $25,000 per day for the union or employer if they ignore the back to work order and remain on strike.

Refer outstanding issues to a mediator or arbitrator

So it looks like the TTC service will be back in operation for tomorrow morning's rush hour commute.

Although I disagree with Ontario Premier, Dalton McGuinty on many issues, he deserves commendation for his quick response and effective leadership on this issue.

Update:

TTC strike officially over as Ont. passes legislation

TTC Strike In Toronto - Unbelievable!!

2008-04-26T03:59:00.010-04:00

After being offered a contract that guarantees that their drivers will be the highest paid in the GTA, they reject it? Not only have their members rejected the generous contract negotiated by their union bosses, they have also broken a major commitment they made with the public.

The union by last night announcing a strike beginning at 12:01 am this morning, broke an agreement that they made with the public to give at least 48 hours notice in the event of a strike. Unbelievable! Especially when they have people manning ticket booths making $25 an hour.

I think this time they have gone beyond what is reasonable and it will not get them much sympathy from the public. Especially since their action will inconvenience approximately 1.4 million transit users a day.

One of the things that irk me as a Torontonian is the contempt that exists for car drivers by the municipality. They are always asking people to get out of their cars and take public transit, but instead of improving it by making it more reliable and convenient for the public to use it, they make it more difficult for the car drivers by increasing parking fees, restricting parking, imposing new taxes, etc. If the TTC had the infrastructure that would allow people to reliably get to where they needed to go within a reasonable time frame, a lot more people would use it.

Unless there is a major improvement in the reliability and the service offered by the Toronto Transit Comission, the acronym, TTC, to me will mean "take the car"

More Liberal arrogance and hypocrisy

2008-04-22T19:59:00.011-04:00

As I pointed out in a previous post there seems to be a lot of hypocrisy among members of the Liberal and NDP parties who are condemning the Conservative Party for doing exactly what they did in previous elections with campaign advertising. Some were even asking out loud whether the election advertising money in dispute, the $1.2 million bought the 2006 federal elections for the Conservative party.

I have not seen such arrogance displayed. It's as if the Sponsorship Scandal, former Liberal Prime Minister, Paul Martin's woeful campaign performance, the "Beer and Popcorn gaffe" and the "Soldiers in our streets, with guns" advertisement never happened and had no effect on the outcome. Canadians were tired of 13 years of Liberal rule and wanted change, but of course you will never hear those words coming out of a progressive's mouth.

I came across an interesting comment in the Climbing out of the dark blog by commenter, Ardvark. He asked a question, which I think should be examined, as its implications are much bigger and more far reaching than the dispute over the interpretation of the Elections Canada rules on campaign advertising, which is presently engulfing the Conservative Party and Elections Canada.

The Liberal Party of Canada was never investigated by Elections Canada for all that money that went into numerous* Quebec ridings?

Is this true?

We know that $40 million of Canadian taxpayers money is still missing more than 3 years after the Sponsorship Scandal broke out. We know that some of that money made it into Quebec ridings, while some of money was placed into envelopes and distributed among members of the Liberal party hierarchy.

Up to now, we have not been able to find out which ridings the money went into and how much money went into each riding. We still have not be able to find out whether some of that money helped elect some Liberal MPs and helped change the outcome of previous Federal elections that the Liberals won. More than 3 years later the missing $40 million still has not been returned to the Canadian taxpayers.

You would think given the serious implications there would have been at least some kind of investigation by Elections Canada. But I am not holding my breath, as Progressive parties have more than often received the benefit of a doubt and a lot less scrutiny than the Conservatives.

Elections Canada still have not been able to explain the inconsistency in its campaign advertising rulings, in which candidates from *all* political parties did the same exact thing, but only the Conservatives were found to have broken the Election rules, while the NDP and Liberals were given a free pass. They still have not been able to explain why they traveled 4 hours from Ottawa to Toronto to get the search warrant signed by a Liberal appointed judge when there were many available just a few blocks away in Ottawa. They have not been able to explain who leaked news of the raid on the Conservative party's headquarters so that the CBC and Liberal party cameras were conveniently on site and recording the whole event as it unfolded, even though the search warrant was still sealed.

I really do hope that this case goes to court so that we will be able to learn on what basis the rulings by Elections Canada have been made and whether they have been applied in a fair and consistent manner across the board to members of all political parties. Hopefully this case makes it way into the court system sooner rather than later. I have a feeling though that even if the Conservative party is vindicated, the opposition and its friends in the MSM will still find a way to put a negative spin on it. Stay tuned.

Tony

Natives begin blockade in Desoronto,Ontario - déjà vu Caledonia?

2008-04-21T09:09:00.004-04:00

Aboriginal protestors began occupying a construction site owned by Nibourg Developments and blocaded the main street through Desoronto, Ontario while the police stood idly by.

Emile Nibourg, an employee with the company, said that a work crew arrived at the site to finish clearing brush from the property when a group of Mohawks arrived to claim the land as their own. The work crew were then ejected and left the property escorted by police.

When will the OPP start enforcing the law? Have we become so politically correct as a country that we now have different standards of law enforcement for natives when compared to other ethnic groups? The only reason why these thugs continue to unlawfully occupy property and intimidate its inhabitants is because they know that the Provincial government is ineffective and the police force does not have the balls to challenge them.

Hopefully they will prove us all wrong by enforcing the law and preventing another Caledonia from occurring, but I am not holding my breath on that occurring.

Tony

Liberal hypocrisy over the Elections Canada Campaign Advertising Issue

2008-04-19T15:34:00.008-04:00

Sometimes it is very difficult to believe the hypocrisy coming from the Liberal party and members of the MSM over the 2006 Federal Election campaign advertising expenses dispute between Elections Canada and the Conservative Party.

In previous federal elections, all 3 federal parties have had candidates who accepted money from them, gave it back and then claimed a rebate on it from Elections Canada. While Elections Canada has accepted the election campaign submissions from the Liberals and the NDP, it has rejected the submissions from Conservative Party candidates. Because of this issue, the Conservative party has taken Elections Canada to court because of inconsistencies in its rulings.

The Liberals party has for the better part of this week, been accusing the Conservatives of everything from having a personal vendetta against Elections Canada to not respecting it and trying to undermine an independent institution, because they have refused to accept its ruling.

What the Liberals have failed to mention is that they have had disputes with Elections Canada in the past and even challenged them in court over it.

Just 2 months ago, former Liberal leadership candidate, Bob Rae successfully challenged an Elections Canada decision in court because they had ruled that it would be illegal for the Liberal party to reimburse the $50,000 deposit that he paid to the party as a requirement to enter the leadership race.

Even though the Liberal party had taken Elections Canada to court, there was no RCMP raid on the Liberal party’s headquarters.

Only 2 month later, just one day before the court proceedings between the Conservative party and Elections Canada is set to begin, there is a televised RCMP raid on the party’s Ottawa headquarters in front of conveniently placed TV cameras from the MSM and also from the Liberal Party headquarters. A raid was conducted, even though the Conservative party had promptly complied with and provided all documents that were requested by Elections Canada. Something just does not add up. Why were both federal political parties treated differently by Elections Canada?

Below is an exchange between Conservative house leader, Peter Van Loan and Liberal MP, Ralph Goodale in the HOC over this issue.

(You tube link - HOC -Peter Van Loan/Ralph Goodale) - Climbing Out Of the Dark blog:

Peter Van Loan:

Mr. Speaker, we share the same curiosity, because as we said, we provided every document that Elections Canada has sought with regard to our dispute, on ahh… how the elections spending should be interpreted. And you know what? Elections Canada does make unduly rigid interpretations. I know that because the guy that this member from Wascana supported for the leadership, the member for Toronto Centre now, actually took Elections Canada to court too on an interpretation. Guess what? He won and he is $50,000 richer as a result and so is his party leader and so is his deputy leader from Lakeshore.

Ralph Goodale:

Mr. Speaker, this Prime Minister has a personal vendetta against Elections Canada. Back in 2001, he called Elections Canada “jackasses.” His words, not mine. Time and again,

Peter Van Loan:

Apparently, that member should look to his left, look to his right because every single one of those front benchers who ran for the leadership of his party other than him, who never ran for the leadership of his party in the end. Every single one of them benefited from the fact that they said that Elections Canada doesn’t know how to interpret the law. That they took Elections Canada to court. I guess that they don’t respect that institution either. And you know what? They won because guess what? Elections Canada makes mistakes sometimes.

(You tube link - HOC - Peter Van Loan/Marlene Jennings) - Climbing Out Of the Dark blog:

Latest Liberal arrest puts a damper on its plans to bring down the Federal Government

2008-04-19T05:35:00.005-04:00

The arrest of, Benoit Corbeil, former director-general of the Quebec wing of the federal Liberal Party, in connection with the Sponsorship scandal on Friday, has put a serious dent in the Liberal Party’s plans of forcing a spring election. Especially after the RCMP hinted that more arrests may be imminent.

Corbeil's charmed life as the go-to guy in Quebec began to unravel in 2005 when his fellow Liberals began ratting him out before the Gomery commission investigating federal Liberal campaign financing.

Corbeil was fingered as the man through whom the Liberals funnelled thousands of dollars in secret cash contributions from 1995 to 2001. The funds were kicked back to the party from federal contractors working a sponsorship project designed to polish the federal government's image in Quebec.

For the Liberal party, this arrest could not have occurred at a worst time, especially at the end of what had been a difficult week for the Tories. Many Liberals had believed that their party’s fortunes were on the rise and were eagerly anticipating the prospect of defeating the Conservative government and forcing a federal election in June. On Tuesday, members of the RCMP seized several items from the Conservative party's head office in Ottawa after Elections Canada had obtained a search warrant in connection with a dispute over advertising spending limits during the 2006 general election

Liberals, particularly those in Quebec, do not want an election campaign that might feature fresh headlines from that scandal.

Privately, some Liberal MPs seemed crestfallen at the news.

"Now what?" said one Ontario Liberal MP.

Both the NDP and Bloc Quebecois now believe that a federal election is unlikely until at least the fall.

"I think if this was forest fire season, the hazard just went way down for an election this spring. The Liberals' balloon just got burst once again," said NDP MP, Pat Martin.

My feeling is that the Liberals will back down from forcing a spring election, especially with the Sponsorship scandal coming back in the news, just when the Liberals thought that it was behind them. The Liberals know that in an election campaign, this issue would seriously hurt their chances of gaining additional seats, especially in Quebec, where under Dion, they have failed to make inroads in terms of popular support. Not having a spring election could also work positively for the Conservative government, as it will give them an opportunity to get more of its legislation through the HOC and senate. Stay tuned.

Tony

When we become the elected government, we will...I think I have heard that before

2008-04-10T09:14:00.002-04:00

Liberal opposition leader, Stephane Dion has signaled that the immigration reform bill and other measures introduced by the Tories, that the Liberals do not agree with, will most likely be overturned by an elected Liberal government.

Dion explained that when the Liberals boycott confidence votes to avoid an election, they're signaling which Tory policies they would like to overturn when they become the government.

It reminds me of when former Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien, when he was the opposition leader, saying that an elected Liberal government would roll back the GST. Of course it never happened during the 13 years that the Liberals were in power.

Memo to Dion: If you disagree with government policies, it is your duty as the opposition to vote against it. Isn't that the purpose of the opposition?

John Ivison from the National Post in the article titled, The mind says no, the body says yes, eloquently expresses this point:

It prompts the question if not now, then when? And over what? The Grits may be waiting for the economy to sour, in order to present Mr. Dion as the saviour. Yesterday, the Liberal leader said, "Time is our ally, so why not wait...?" But that's optimism bordering on delusion. Does anyone really think the nation is going to turn to the bookish, untested Liberal leader in its hour of economic crisis? Even his colleagues have their doubts about his husbandry skills.

Mr Dion at some point needs to stand up for something he believes in. Under his leadership, the Liberal party has degenerated into a party that no longer has any principles worth defending.

The Merritt, BC murders are yet another failure in Canada's justice system

2008-04-08T04:06:00.006-04:00

Allan Dwayne Schoenborn, the 40 year-old prime suspect in the murder of his three children in Merritt BC, was arrested three times in the days leading up to their murders, but each time, our justice system released him. Previously both he and Darcie Clarke, the mother of his three children lived in Vancouver, but last fall Ms Clarke moved to Merritt to start a new life and get a fresh start away from the turmoil and abuse that had previously engulfed her family.

This did not stop Mr Schoenborn from following her. He arrived in Merritt, BC just one week before the murders, despite a court order baring him from contact with Ms Clarke. In that week, he was arrested 3 times.

Schoenborn's initial contact with the Merritt RCMP came when he was arrested for driving while under disqualification because of an earlier impaired- driving conviction.

In another incident, police officers encountered Schoenborn when he was intoxicated in a public place.

Then, on Thursday, police were called by the principal of Schoenborn's daughter's school, Diamond Vale elementary.

Schoenborn had allegedly threatened a student and the principal.

The police sought to keep Schoenborn in custody after the school incident, arguing that he was a flight risk who had a history of failing to appear in court. A provincial court judge ordered him released - against the recommendation of the police.

Just 2 days after Mr. Schoenborn's release from police custody, Ms Clarke arrived home and made the gruesome discovery of the bodies of her 3 children. After I read the story, the first question that came to my mind was why did the BC Provincial judge not take the recommendation of the police seriously? Why did the BC provincial judge feel it was ok to release this man against the recommendation of the police, despite his violent past and previous convictions?

This incident is yet another cloud hanging over our justice system. What I find most appalling is that we Canadians continue to tolerate a lax justice system that is controlled by judges who seem to care more about the rights of criminals than ordinary law-abiding citizens. Any attempt to toughen or reform our laws or criminal penalties is met by howls and cries of protest from the usual bleeding heart groups.

The pain of losing a child is tremendous, but what makes it even worst is knowing that they would still be alive had the justice system done its job. My heart really goes out to Ms Clarke, as she is going to need a lot of support to get through what must be her worst nightmare. For me, I really do hope that the day will come when Canadian judges are held accountable for their actions, because there does not seem to be any accountability among a lot of them.

Why Can’t the MSM and Opposition Parties Accept MP Tom Lukiwski's Apology?

2008-04-05T15:08:00.016-04:00

I have been following the Tom Lukiwski story over the past couple of days and I applaud him for publicly apologizing for those derogatory comments he made against gays 16 years ago. While I believe that his comments were hurtful, I think it is time for the MSM and the HOC to accept his apology and move on.

The thing that I find distasteful is the attempt by the MSM and those on the left of the political spectrum to bash the Conservative Party as being homophobic bigots, while giving a free pass to the Liberals and NDP.

Take the following examples of comments made by MPs from other political parties
---------------------------------------------------------------------
"Homosexuality is statistically abnormal, it's physically abnormal and it's morally immoral." Liberal MP Tom Wappel - 2006
--------------------------------------------------------------------
"It's sort of corny, but a constituent phoned up and said, 'God created Adam and Eve, not Adam and Steve.’ "If it's two adults, where do we stop? What about a grandma that wants to marry her grandson or an uncle that wants to marry his niece? Where do you stop?" - Liberal MP Roy Cullen - 2005
---------------------------------------------------------------------
NDP's Tommy Douglas's Opinion on Homosexuality (link to video)

"And if we ever needed in this country to adopt a new attitude towards homosexuality, this is the time. Instead of treating it as a crime and driving it underground, we ought to recognize it for what it is. It is a mental illness. It is a psychiatric condition, which ought to be treated sympathetically. Which ought to be treated by psychiatric s and social workers"

- NDP’s Tommy Douglas - recognized of one of the greatest Canadians
---------------------------------------------------------------------
As a student, Telegdi often raised quite a stir with his emotionally charged attempts to raise student interest in issues such as housing and enumeration. His statements published in the then-student newspaper the chevron were often controversial and have contributed to Telegdi's Feds legacy.

"Students are niggers because they want to be niggers," he told the chevron in the December 6, 1974 issue, after a low student voter turnout in that year's municipal election. (University of Waterloo's Imprint Newspaper)

- Liberal MP Andrew Telegdi, while he was a student at the University of Waterloo- December 6th, 1974
---------------------------------------------------------------------
My point here is not to slag political parties over comments that some of their members made years ago, but to point out that members of “ALL” political parties are guilty of politically insensitive or hurtful comments. I don’t understand why the Liberals and NDP are always given a free pass whenever this happens, but somehow the MSM and special interests groups only choose to paint the Conservative Party as bigots.

Some Liberals, NDP and their supporters in the MSM are arguing that Mr Tom Lukiwski was 40, when the video was made 16 years ago and by that time, his beliefs are set, so he cannot change. It is one of the most ridiculous arguments that I have heard. People's attitudes and beliefs change all the time and age is no restriction.

If people's beliefs are set at 40 and cannot change, no matter the circumstances, then why did the Liberals accept former NDP Premier Bob Rae, as a leadership candidate? Did they believe that his views on economic policies that deverstated Ontario in the 1990's when he was Premier had not changed, even though he was 47 when he was finally voted out as Premier? I don't think so.

What about NDP's former MP Svend Robinson who was 53 when he stepped down after admitting to stealing a ring for his lover? Did the NDP think that his views regarding stealing had not changed when they allowed him to run again as one of their candidates in the 2006 federal election?

If we don’t accept Tom Lukiwski’s apology for a comment he made 16 years ago, then how far are we prepared to go back when it comes to past comments made by our MP's? Are we going to go into every MP’s closet and drag up every politically incorrect comment or off-color joke that he or she ever made and use it against their party? I really hope not. What I, and most Canadians are interested in is good governance, fiscal responsibility, sound policies and good judgement by the government, and adequate representation by our members of parliament. Not what a MP said 16 years at a private party after he had one too many.

Kyoto Koolaid

2008-04-04T04:57:00.020-04:00

I have never been able to understand the “obsession with the Kyoto protocol” from those on the left of the political spectrum. They paint it as the most logical and effective way for the world to reduce its greenhouse gasses, thus combating global warming, but as soon as you start challenging their arguments, you are treated as an uneducated and mis-informed individual and almost immediately get accused of being "in the pocket of the oil companies" "not caring for the environment" and referred to as a "global warming denier"

I came across a post in the Conservative Hipsters blog titled, Rethinking Kyoto, in which he noted the pollution on a visit to China and when he questioned the effectiveness of the Kyoto protocol without involving China, a commenter gave the following response:

...You also misunderstand Kyoto. It was never intended to fix global warming, merely to get the developed industrialized world committed to taking the first concrete steps to curbing emissions. This has to begin somewhere, surely you can grasp that....

Well, if it is not intended to fix global warming, then we should all forget about implementing the protocol then, since it will be very costly to our economy, right? Shouldn't the first concrete steps to curbing emissions involve "all" of the major polluters?

Recently I bumped into a friend who is an ardent supporter of the Kyoto protocol and a member of one of the other opposition parties. I asked him point blank, “Why do you support the Kyoto protocol?” He gave me the usual speal about the world reducing greenhouse gasses, rising sea levels, flooding and how much of the world was not going to be habitable in 50 years.

It was pretty much the same hysteria expressed in Al Gore's documentary, An Inconvenient Truth. But unfortunately for Mr. Gore, while he is urging Americans and others to conserve and to save the world, he and others like him are not practising what they preach. His household is consuming more than 20 times the electricity consumed by an average American household.

When other prominent Kyoto activists are pressed on why they are not personally trying to reduce their own carbon footprints, many of them give the excuse of purchasing carbon offset, which in effect allows them to continue their way of life without making any sacrifices for what they supposedly believe in. Many of these activists "talk green", but their lifestyles and behaviour are anything but green, as observed in the article by Steven Milloy below.

The Greenest Hypocrites Of 2007

This is what I am getting to. Not everyone is required to make the necessary sacrifices, only the select few, who can buy their way out of implementing any meaningful changes, which is why the Kyoto protocol will never work.

I then asked my friend, if the global warming was such a big problem and would affect the world in the way he described, why then would the Kyoto protocol place binding targets on only 35 of the 129 countries that signed the agreement and exclude major CO2 emitters such as India, China, Russia, etc.

I advised him that the CO2 emissions produced by those excluded countries would easily surpass the CO2 emissions reductions of countries like Canada and the EU if they were to achieve their targets, so in effect would negate billions of dollars in expenses and taxes that the tax payers of the industrialized countries would have to pay to achieve these targets. I asked him that of global warming was such a big problem as described, then why not have binding targets on “all of the major CO2 emitters, including China and India”

He about lost it at that point and started saying that the industrialized countries were the ones who created the problem and that they should fix it. He said that countries like China and India should be given the same opportunity to develop their economy as those countries in the west.

So now he has abandoned the most logical principle of solving a "worldwide problem". If this problem affects the whole world, then "all the countries of the world" need to take steps to resolve it. When we had world war 2 in the 1930's and 1940's, countries who agreed to participate with the allies were not given exemptions from supplying troops.

I then asked him how prepared was he and his family to make the sacrifices necessary for Canada to go 6% below the 1990 emission level? When I advised him that if Canada got rid of its entire manufacturing sector, got rid of air traffic, took all the cars off the road, it still would not be able to achieve its target he really got agitated and started talking about how Canada could achieve its target by buying carbon credits and developing new technologies.

I then pointed out to him that under the present Kyoto protocol, worldwide CO2 emissions would increase, rather than decrease and the carbon credit system would only facilitate money being paid to third world countries, which would have no incentive to reduce their emissions. I advised him that any reduction in manufacturing and economic activity in Canada and the industrialized world would be replaced by manufacturing and economic activity in China and other developing countries, thus negating any positive effect. So in effect, Kyoto was just a scheme designed to transfer wealth from richer countries to poorer countries.

You definitely see where this argument was going. In the beginning it was about how the world was in danger and how the world needed to reduce its CO2 emissions, but as soon as you question the mechanisms of the Kyoto protocol in achieving this, you start getting ridiculous arguments.

It was obvious to me that the protocol in its present form would not work and would cause unnecessary hardships on the citizens of our country if implemented. For that observation, I was accused of supporting the “oil companies” by not going along with his line of thinking. And that seems to be the problem with a lot of supporters of the Kyoto protocol. They have just not thought it through.

The Other Side To The Brenda Martin Story

2008-03-22T11:53:00.021-04:00

When I first heard about the Brenda Martin story in the MSM, I was initially sympathetic towards her case, but the more I dug into the case and the more I researched, I found that there was a second side to this story. Brenda Martin no longer seemed to be a hapless victim, who was unknowingly ignorant of her employer, Alyn Richard Waage’s activities, as she led all of us to believe.

Below is an interesting link from a 2003 article by Charles Rusnel in the Edmonton Journal.

http://www.thewantednovel.com/edjournal.html

In my post to the Blue like You blog, I noted the following quote from a person going by the pseudo name of “Sandy Smith.” Note, she was a cook and worked for Mr. Waage at the same time Brenda Martin worked for him, she even left at the same time that Brenda Martin left, so it is highly probable that the source was infact Brenda Martin.

"It looked like a friggin parking lot outside that house most days," said Sandy Smith, who asked that her real name not be used. She still lives in Vallarta and fears the Mexican federal police. The Toronto native worked as Waage's chef and lived in Castillo Cristina for 10 months beginning in July 2000.

If the person being interviewed was Brenda Martin, and she was truly fearful of the Mexican federal police in 2003, why did she choose to remain in Mexico until her arrest in 2006?

Why was she living illegally in Mexico for 10 years without a visa or work permit?

Why did she disregard the advise of the Canadian consulate, once she was arrested and choose a lawyer who was not on their list of recommended lawyers? According to the Mexican government, her legal antics, including a constitutional challenge and her changing of her legal representation several times contributed to a delay in the beginning her trial.

"Brenda Kim Martin has chosen to change legal teams for her defence on several occasions," reads the statement on the embassy's Web site. "Consequently, she has been successively represented by different legal teams -- a decision taken by Ms. Martin that has significantly contributed to the delay in her trial."

Mexico blames delays on Brenda Martin

Why did she continue to associate herself with and correspond with her former boss, Alyn Waage after he was arrested and jailed in California?

Why did Brenda Martin deposit money that was not her's (Alyn Waage's) in her own bank account and deposit money on behalf of Alyn Waage into other bank accounts? This does not sound like duties she would perform if she was just his "chef"

If Brenda Martin is suicidal and just want to get home to Canada as fast as possible, why is she bashing the Conservative government, by calling the visit by Conservative MPs Jason Kenney and Rick Norlock a "photo-op" when they and its diplomatic staff have been working behind the scenes with the Mexican government trying to assist her?

If Brenda Martin is desperate to return to Canada why is she saying that if she is convicted and has the option of serving her jail sentence in Canada that she will not leave Mexico?

"I told him that if I get sentenced to 15 years and I have to serve half my time in prison in Canada I will stay here and kill myself -- that's it. I am not going back to Canada to go to prison," Ms. Martin said.

In the SDA blog, commenter ET asks an interesting series of questions that have so far been overlooked by the MSM

How is it that it's blogs that are coming up with the facts and information, while the MSM is devoting itself only to emotional hysteria totally bereft of facts or instead, creating a fictional scenario? That includes the self-defined and self-esteemed 'informative sites' of Duffy and Newman..and the news of CTV and CBC.

There are many questions:

Why would Brenda Martin be afraid of the Mexican police if she had nothing to do with the scam? If she was concerned, then why didn't she leave Mexico?

Or, was it that she could make more, without a work visa (no taxes) and cheap living costs and easy lifestyle in Mexico (and the weather)?

So, he handed 26,000 to her as settlement for firing her. There are several stories to what happened next.
One, that she re-invested 10,000 of it into his scam company unknown to him. Why?
Two, that he told her to 'take her commission' and forward the rest to a different account.
Laundering.

Why, when she was arrested, didn't she just claim that she was a hired worker in his staff and didn't participate in his scam - Instead, she focused on the arrest process itself; that she didn't have a translator. Small point, but, she's been living there ten years; does she have no knowledge of Spanish?

It is indeed possible that she wasn't part of the scam. It still seems strange that she invested 10,000 of that 26,000 in his company.

Why is the left demanding that the Canadian government apologize to Obama?

2008-03-08T17:32:00.012-05:00

Over the last couple of days, my colleagues on the left have gotten into a fit over US Democratic Presidential candidate, Barak Obama being exposed for his inconsistent position on NAFTA. Instead of insisting on Obama to clarify his position, since it will affect trade and jobs with our biggest trading partner, they have gone after the Harper government

"Will he now apologize to this House, the American people, and Senator Obama, and will he fire his chief of staff?" NDP Leader Jack Layton asked during the daily question period.

The one thing that I don't get is that Obama was the one who got caught speaking from both sides of his mouth on the NAFTA issue and was justifiably exposed for doing so. He was caught telling the American people that he would seek to re-negotiate NAFTA, while at the same time an Obama aide told Canadian officials that he wasn't serious.

So I am trying to understand the reasoning of those on the left who want the Prime Minister to apologize to Obama and the American people. Are they saying that a serious inconsistency in the position of the frontrunner of the Democratic Presidential candidates on the NAFTA agreement, which will affect all of us, should not be exposed? On what basis does Canada owe Obama an apology? Maybe Obama and his campaign team should be the ones who need to apologize to the American people for being less than forthright with them, since whatever decision his government makes on NAFTA, if he becomes President, will have as much of an impact on American jobs and companies, as it will on Canada.

Karlheinz Schreiber loses latest bid to remain in Canada

2008-03-07T05:12:00.009-05:00

Karlheinz Schreiber has lost his latest bid to remain in Canada. The Supreme Court of Canada has refused to review earlier judicial verdicts that cleared the way for his extradition to Germany to face bribery and tax evasion charges.

Despite this ruling from Canada’s highest court and countless lower court rulings, Schreiber gets to remain in Canada until he testifies in the Mulroney-Schreiber public inquiry. Since this latest ruling, Schreiber's lawyer, Mr. Greenspan has attempted to get the Federal Justice Minister to delay the extradition indefinitely, but to his credit, he has refused to do so.

Earlier this week, Nicholson sent a letter to Greenspan rejecting any claim that he had the authority to delay extradition indefinitely.

But the minister agreed that Schreiber could remain in Canada until he testifies at the public inquiry promised by Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

In a statement issued Thursday, Nicholson said the course he's adopted will ensure "the public interest is served as Canadians will have the benefit of hearing Mr. Schreiber's testimony on Canadian soil."

In his previous testimonies before the Airbus Inquiry and the HOC Ethics Committee, Schreiber contradicted himself on numerous occasions. So much so that he has lost creditability even among many Liberals.

In my view, nothing more will be gained from having Schreiber remain in Canada for more testimony. Since the testimony that he has given up to now has been full of contradictions and his words cannot be trusted, I don’t see the benefit of any further testimony from Schreiber during a future public inquiry. It will just be another "he said", "he said" affair between himself and former Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney.

Schreiber has been allowed to manipulate the Canadian courts for 8 years, even though he lost every ruling against his extradition. To make matters worst, he has also managed to manipulate the HOC into freeing him from jail. It’s time to say enough is enough and immediately put him on a plane back to Germany

Legislation to end CWB Barley Monopoly to be Introduced In Parliament on Monday

2008-03-02T19:52:00.005-05:00

Tomorrow, Federal Conservative Agriculture Minister Gerry Ritz will introduce legislation to amend the Canadian Wheat Board Act to allow Prairie barley producers to choose whether they sell their barley on their own or through the wheat board.

I hope that this bill passes because for too long many farmers have been being systematically shortchanged by the CWB not paying them a fair price for their product. The CWB have never been able to give a satisfactory explanation to farmers in British Columbia, Alberta and Saskatchewan as to why there is such a difference between barley prices that they are forced to accept from the CWB and barley prices on the open market. Some are complaining that they can get between $4.00 and $4.50 a bushel on the open market, while the CWB is only paying $3.00.

These farmers are assuming all the risks in the growing and harvesting of their own crops, so it is hard to see why should they not have the same right as barley farmers in the other Canadian provinces to sell their own products to whoever they want. Is it wrong for the Prairie barley producers to be allowed to seek maximum returns for the risks that they absorb and the hard labour that they must do in order to produce a successful harvest?

Is will be interesting to see whether the government makes this bill a confidence motion. The Federal Liberals and the NDP have for a long time opposed amending the Canadian Wheat Board Act to allow the Prairie barley farmers to have the choice of selling their products on the open market. Is it because they are so determined to maintain a bureaucracy that is bent on practicing 19th century economics in the 21st century to the detriment of the farmers that they are supposed to serve? If this bill becomes a confidence motion are the Liberals willing to fight an election over this issue? Stay tuned.

Tony

National Post ordered to surrender 'Shawinigate' documents

2008-03-01T22:06:00.007-05:00

Thanks to the Ontario Court of Appeal, the RCMP will finally be able to conduct a full investigation of the Shawinigate affair.

On Friday, the Ontario Court of Appeal overturned an earlier decision by Ontario Superior Court Justice, Mary Lou Benotto, that quashed a RCMP search warrant against the National Post and reporter, Andrew McIntosh. In 2001, Mr. McIntosh was sent a 1997 loan document from the Business Development Bank of Canada.

In 2004, the Shawinigate investigation by the RCMP was stalled because Ontario Superior Court Justice Mary Lou Benotto quashed the search warrant and assistance order on the grounds it would break McIntosh's pledge to protect his source. The reson she gave was that it would violate the media's "constitutionally entrenched right'' to gather and disseminate information.

"In this case, the eroding of the ability of the press to perform its role in society cannot be outweighed by the Crown's investigation,'' Benotto ruled.

The three-judge Appeals Court panel disagreed.

Enforcing the law must at times outweigh the need to protect an anonymous source, Ontario's highest court said Friday as it ordered the National Post to surrender documents at the heart of conflict-of-interest allegations against former prime minister Jean Chretien.

Paper ordered to surrender 'Shawinigate' documents (CTV link)

Fidel Castro steps down as President of Cuba

2008-02-19T03:17:00.007-05:00

Fidel Castro has resigned as President of Cuba after ruling the country for 49 years. He has not been seen in public since temporarily handing over power to his brother Raul Castro in July 2006 after undergoing intestinal surgery.

It will be interesting to see how this development will affect both the political situation in that country, including democratic reforms, and future relations with its biggest arch rival, the United States.

Stephane Dion apologizes to prime minister's aide...well sort of

2008-02-01T14:08:00.000-05:00

Liberal opposition leader, Stephane Dion was forced to backtrack on a previous statement that he had made against Prime Minister Stephen Harper's spokesman, Dimitri Soudas. Earlier, he had suggested that the prime minister's spokesman was a party to extortion in August 2006.

This was in response to reports that the official intervened behind closed doors on behalf of a Montreal developer in a dispute with the Public Works Department.

"That means that there was an attempt to extort taxpayers funds to benefit a party supporter and therefore change the decision process and (they say) it's not important because it didn't succeed. I think the prime minister has a lot to explain."

A lawyer for Dimitri Soudas says he was defamed by Dion and insisted on a public apology no later than next Wednesday in a letter sent to the opposition leader.

"Your allegation that Mr. Soudas was party to extortion . . . is patently false,'' said the letter to Dion from the Lang Michener firm.

"At no time did our client act illegally or use an official position or powers to obtain property, funds, or patronage.

"Your defamatory statement was calculated to maliciously disparage our client as a person and as a public official, and is actionable as such.''

After question period on Thursday, Dion said: "Yesterday I used an inappropriate word: `extortion' attempt. I apologize for that, and that was not the appropriate word.

Ooops, I don't think that this is the first time that Dion has put his foot in his mouth.

Dion will never be a friend of the Canadian military

2008-01-19T10:07:00.000-05:00

I came across an interesting article, Dion will never be a pal of soldiers, by Peter Worthington in the Toronto Sun. The main premise is that the CAF would be reduced to its previous depleted strength with their role and capabilities severely limited, as it was during the Trudeau years, if Dion was to become Prime Minister.

In his press conference on leaving Afghanistan, Dion seemed to think our role should consist of turning soldiers into social workers -- no more seek and destroy stuff our troops have been doing so effectively.

Instead he wants our troops building schools, enhancing women's rights, digging wells for fresh water, training and assisting local communities. Silly ass. What escapes Dion's limited comprehension is that our troops have been doing all this social work stuff from day one, as well as kicking butt of the Taliban.

By his actions since becoming leader of the opposition, Dion has not helped to overcome this perception. In his news conferences and statements in parliament, he is almost always very critical of the military.

Dion and members of his caucus had a field day last Spring defending the words of murderous Taliban thugs, who would not have a second thought about killing women and children, when they were making allegations of torture and mistreatment, as instructed in their training manuals. Other members of the Liberal caucus did their best to smear our military, by trying to make them appear as incompetent violators of human rights in Afghanistan, when all they were doing was fulfilling an agreement involving prisoner transfer that was made while the previous Liberal party was in power.

In a May 27, 2005 letter from Graham to Martin, the former prime minister was told that Canada planned to negotiate an agreement with the Afghan government that would spell out "explicit undertakings" on how the detainees would be treated.

The same day as the letter, Graham "authorized the Canadian Forces to seek arrangements with relevant authorities on the transfer of detainees," according to a Defence Department briefing note.

The other thing that Dion and his Liberal caucus does not seem to be able to understand is that our military needs good equipment and military hardware to be able to carry out its duties effectively, wherever they are deployed. For many years under previous governments, they were forced to operate using sub-standard equipment, which was badly in need of being replaced. A good example of this are the sea king helicopters, which are over 40 years old and require several hours of maintenance for every hour they are in the air.

When Prime Minister Harper announced increased spending for the military to upgrade its equipment, including replacing the ageing sea king helicopters, Dion and members of his caucus were all over him, condemning him and his party for doing what was desperately needed for many years.

... the Opposition is accusing Harper of an American-style defence buildup that seems "more attuned to offensive warfare" than peacekeeping.

"We have a prime minister who has George W. Bush as American Idol," Liberal Leader Stephane Dion said.

Then there is the lack of appreciation for the CAF. You almost never hear Dion utter words of support for our military. It’s mind boggling, especially since many of them are risking their lives everyday in hostile environments and are serving our country honourably.

The problem with Dion is that he never seems to be able to think things through before opening his mouth to make ridiculous statements. He does not seem to have a firm grasp on world affairs, as was evidently displayed by his gaffe on Pakistan.

He needs to realize that he is the leader of the Opposition and not a university professor anymore. In university, one can make all kind of wild theories and hold utopian world views, as they will never be required to implement it. In the real world things are different. It is a very rough place people full of people who would not give a second thought about destroying our way of life.

Dion also needs to realize that in order to have development in Afghanistan's Kandahar region, including construction of new schools, digging wells and other infrastructure, security is required. Security is needed because this work is being done in Taliban territory and our soldiers and other aid workers would be sitting ducks without a strong military on the ground to thwart any Taliban attack and to proactively remove any pending Taliban threat to the community. That is why we need to ensure that our military is strong, has the necessary equipment and our full support when we deploy them in hostile territories.

Jack Layton - Prime Minister Harper's Economic Policies are Hurting the Middle class

2008-01-13T23:45:00.000-05:00

NDP leader, Jack Layton never seems to quit amazing me with his ill-informed statements. At the NDP leaders summit meeting, he accused Prime Minister Stephen Harper of mismanaging the economy by cutting taxes and allowing market forces to prevail without government intervention. He also said that the Prime Minister’s economic policies are hurting the middle class.

OTTAWA - Prime Minister Stephen Harper is mismanaging the economy and hurting middle-class Canadians, New Democratic Party Leader Jack Layton charged Sunday as his party began its first ever summit meeting of NDP leaders from across the country.

Speaking to reporters, Layton gave a glimpse of what could very well be a key plank in the NDP's platform heading into the next election, painting his party as better stewards of the economy than the Conservatives who tend to favour letting market forces prevail with little government intervention.

One thing that seems to becoming very clear is that the NDP does not believe that leaving more money in people’s pockets instead of the government coffers is a good thing. They want Canada to follow the policy of overtaxing its population to pay for new government programs that would supposedly help the marginalized in our society. In most cases, the new tax money never reaches these people, but just ends up in the government coffers to fund a new bureaucracy.

"We believe that Mr. Harper has been reckless in the way that he has approached financial matters."

For example, the Conservatives bring in tax cuts that help industries already doing well such as banks and oil companies, allowing them to make even greater profits, Layton argued. Meanwhile, high oil prices are fuelling the high dollar which is hitting other industries such as manufacturing, forestry and agriculture.

Nor is it about to get better, Layton predicted.

The NDP seems to believe it is a bad thing when there are industries in the Canadian economy that are doing well. To them an industry that is making too much profit is a bad thing. What is also quite surprising is that the NDP is talking about how Harper’s policies are hurting manufacturing, forestry and agriculture. But if we examine some of the central planks in the NDP’s policy; they will have an even more devastating effect on these industries.

The NDP wants the government to implement the Kyoto accord and carbon taxes immediately to reduce CO2 emissions. The effect of this would immediately have an effect on gas prices and industry through increased costs at a much higher rate than presently exists.

The NDP complains about the middle class being squeezed by the Harper government, but the NDP’s policy of higher taxation and immediately implementing the Kyoto accord will result in industry being forced to charge higher prices for its products, which will only serve to further squeeze the poor and middle class that are trying to make ends meet. It will also mean less manufacturing jobs and more layoffs, especially if the cost of goods and raw materials increase as a result of higher taxes and being forced to immediately comply with the Kyoto accord.

The other thing that the NDP fails to admit is that higher taxation, which they favour, and government interference in the market in a majority of cases hurts more than it helps. It causes capital flight and investor uncertainty, which in the end results in less money being invested in our country and less jobs for our citizens. It is these socialist policies that have sunk the economies of several countries in the third world.

"Now we're seeing the members of Parliament being blackmailed by Mr. Harper saying that the only way there will be any assistance to the laid off workers is if we vote confidence in the Harper government and their approach to all things."

It quite amazing that Mr. Layton, who forced former Liberal Prime Minister, Paul Martin’s hand in supporting billions of dollars increased spending on government programs and canceling corporate taxes as his price for supporting the 2005 federal budget is now accusing the Conservatives of blackmail, when they link $1-billion in economic assistance to the passage of their next budget.

Mr. Layton can afford to make these statements because his party right now does not have a reasonable chance of forming the government in the near future, so he will never have to be accountable for them.

Dion Finally Makes an Appearance in Afghanistan with Igniatieff

2008-01-13T08:47:00.000-05:00

Opposition leader Stephane Dion has finally made the trip to Afghanistan, along with Liberal MP, Michael Igniatieff, after promising to do so for many months. According to them, they are on a fact finding mission to set long term goals for Canada’s mission in Afghanistan. This is after they have already decided that the Liberal party’s position is to end Canada’s mission to Afghanistan in 2009.

Dion meets with Karzai in Afghanistan (Natioanl Post)

The thing I find the most disingenuous is the acknowledgement from Mr. Dion that Afghan President Karzai appreciates all the work and support that Canadian troops have given his country, while speaking to reporters in Kabul.

"The president has been very thankful for everything Canadians are doing," Mr. Dion said, during his first trip to Afghanistan as Liberal leader. "Obviously, all our interlocutors would like Canada to be more involved in everything."

In parliament or in his many press conferences, Mr Dion never once seem to be able to express this acknowledgement. Instead it has been focused on the alleged mistreatment of Taliban detainees and being critical of the agreement covering the monitoring of prisoners handed over to the Afghan government by Canadian troops.

What I find interesting is the following:

Although Mr. Ignatieff previously had been a vocal proponent of Canada's military role in Kandahar -- to the point of voting in 2006 to extend the mission by two years - - he echoed the Liberal party line: Canadian soldiers would be able to use force to protect themselves and construction projects undertaken by Canada in Afghanistan, but they would no longer be able to go on the offensive against insurgents.

"If you are under attack you can defend yourself," Mr. Dion said.

Mr. Ignatieff added: "We understand you can't do development without the security."

Mr Dion and Mr. Igniatieff do not seem to see to understand the situation in Kandahar province very well. It is the region in Afghanistan where the Taliban are most active and without these periodic offenses against them, the Taliban would be able to mass their insurgents without any fear of being attacked and threaten even more towns and villages and Canadian troops in coordinated attacks.

In other words, the Canadian soldiers would become sitting ducks, waiting for the next Taliban attack instead of taking the proactive approach of removing the Taliban threat before it is able to attack them. This would mean that even less construction projects will be able to be implemented without being disrupted by Taliban insurgents.

Because of the effectiveness of the Canadian troops and other NATO allies in such offenses, the Taliban have been largely reduced to “hit and run” attacks. If you look at most of the causalities among Canadian troops, it is not from military offences, but from roadside bombings. If we do allow the Taliban insurgents to freely roam around Kandahar without the fear of being challenged, the casualities among NATO allies will not go down, but will most certainly increase.

Hopefully good sense will prevail during the next parliamentary vote on the Afghan mission, but with the NDP and Bloc already opposed, the chances of this happening looks pretty bleak.

Obama opens double-digit lead over Clinton just 2 days ahead of the New Hampshire primary

2008-01-06T22:59:00.000-05:00

During the last couple of days, I have been watching the US Presidential race for the Republican and Democrat nominees. The Democrat race has been a very interesting one and I have often found myself being glued to the TV, while closely following the latest events in what has become a very captivating race for the presidential nomination.

In the beginning New York Senator Hillary Clinton was the frontrunner and one to beat, and was significantly ahead of Illinois Senator, Barack Obama and former North Carolina Senator, John Edwards. But now the tables have turned. Senator Obama has not only won the Iowa caucus, but has now surged ahead of Senator Clinton in popularity in New Hampshire, with only 2 days to go before the New Hampshire primary.

Current poll numbers:

Democrats - Barack Obama 39%, Hillary Clinton 29%, John Edwards 16%.
This is interesting because just a few days ago both Obama and Clinton were tied at 33%

Republicans – John McCain 32%, Mitt Romney 26%, Mike Huckabee 14%

The other thing that is also interesting is the electability issue among Democrat Presidential candidates. In December 45% thought that Clinton had the best chance of beating the GOP nominee. Now barely a few weeks later, the polls has changed with 42% thinking that Obama has the best chance of beating the GOP nominee, compared to 31% for Clinton.

Clearly the Clinton camp needs to rethink their campaign strategy. She does not seem to be able to connect with the average American voter and that is hurting her. Many think that she often talks above her constituents and gives an aura of her superiority to everyone else. They cannot seem to relate to her.

Obama on the other hand is able to connect with the average constituents with his message of hope that is resonating with younger voters and other demographics as well. He also emphasizes the hard work and obstacles that he overcame that has allowed him to rise from very humble beginnings to being elected as a Senator for Illinois. Many of his constituents can relate to that and see him as one of their own. This has allowed him to surge to the top. It will be interesting to see how these candidates end up once the race is finished.

Another Tory Election Promise fulfilled: PM kicks off final GST cut at electronics store

2008-01-01T20:24:00.000-05:00

Yesterday Prime Minister, Stephen Harper and Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty announced the reduction of the goods and service tax (GST) from six percent to five percent at an electronics store in Mississauga.

This was the same store where Harper, in 2005, while leader of the Opposition had promised Canadians that a Conservative government would reduce the GST from its then rate of seven percent to five percent by 2011. Today this reduction comes into effect, more than 3 years ahead of schedule.

Article from CTV: PM kicks off final GST cut at electronics store

What really irks me is the people who have been openly dismissive of this tax reduction.

Many critics and economists say that the GST cut is bad economics, and less effective than other tax cut options. Others believe the cut will disproportionately benefit wealthy people who make more expensive purchases.

When the GST was first introduced, many of these same critics were complaining about how much of a burden this tax would be on the poor. Well if this tax is a burden on the poor, then it would follow that a reduction of the same tax would be a relief on the poor, right? So how is this bad economics? How is having more money left in my pocket to save or spend on things I need bad economics? It is amazing how those critics of the government reverse their position to suit their needs!

What is really funny is that the same Liberal party that vowed to abolish this tax when they came into office never followed through on that promise and now have the gall to criticize the Conservative government for reducing the same tax. It does not make any sense.

What we need is more good government and sound economic policies from the Conservative government. Hopefully they will be given a mandate in the next federal elections to do just that.

Happy New Year everyone and best wishes for 2008!

Regards,

Tony

Benazir Bhutto blames Musharraf in pre-death email but did she follow security precautions?

2007-12-29T15:05:00.000-05:00

After reading the article, Bhutto blames Musharraf in pre-death email, on the ctv news website, I am a bit confused. Apparently former Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto, said in an email to Washington lobbyist, Mark Siegel that if she was assassinated, that Musharraf should be held complicit in her death due to his refusal to meet safety requests she had made.

Below are some excerpts from that article:

Siegel said she had been stopped from taking private cars with tinted windows and had not received radio jammers or four police escorts -- as she had requested.

On Newsnet, Siegel read the email, saying, "There is no way what is happening -- in terms of stopping me from taking private cars or using tinted window, or giving jammers or four police mobiles to cover all sides -- could happen without (Musharraf)."

Siegel said her request for four police escorts -- one on each side of her vehicle -- could have saved her life

Having more than four police escorts did not save assassinated US President John F. Kennedy's life on November 22, 1963 in Dallas, Texas or prevent former US President, Ronald Reagan, from being shot and wounded on March 30th, 1981. And you can bet they had the best security detail possible.

In terms of protecting someone, there is only so much that can be done in the best of circumstances against a determined assassin, and Bhutto has dozens of very experienced bodyguards, so I am not sure if Siegel's statement about the police escorts is a fair one.

But, after looking back on a previous article, 2 blasts strike crowd celebrating Bhutto's return, on the MSNBC website, it seems to indicate that Benazir Bhutto deliberately refused to take precautions and advise by security officers dating back to the first assassination attempt in October.

Below are some excerpts from that article:

An estimated 20,000 security officers had been deployed to protect Bhutto and her cavalcade of motorized rickshaws, colorful buses, cars and motorcycles in the streets of Pakistan's largest city.

Authorities had urged Bhutto to use a helicopter to reduce the risk of attack amid threats from extremists sympathetic to the Taliban and al-Qaida, but she brushed off the concerns.

"I am not scared. I am thinking of my mission," she had told reporters on the plane from Dubai. "This is a movement for democracy because we are under threat from extremists and militants."

Last month, Bhutto told CNN she realized she was a target. Islamic militants, she said, "don't believe in women governing nations, so they will try to plot against me, but these are risks that must be taken. I'm prepared to take them."

Bhutto refuses to use protective cubicle
Leaving the airport, Bhutto refused to use a bulletproof glass cubicle that had been built atop the truck taking her to the tomb of Pakistan's founding father, Mohammed Ali Jinnah, to give a speech. She squeezed between other party officials along a railing at the front.

What surprised me the most was that moments before she was assassinated, she stood with her head exposed in the sun-roof of her vehicle as it moved slowly through the crowds estimated in the thousands. Why did her security detail allow her to do this, knowing the threats and the previous assassination attempt on her life?

I am not assigning any blame for Bhutto's death, as whichever group is responsible committed a morally reprehensible act clearly designed to destabilize Pakistan and throw it into chaos barely 2 weeks before parliamentary elections. But I also think that one should not jump to conclusions and blame Pakistani President Musharraf before taking into account all the facts surrounding Bhutto’s assassination.

It is clear for one thing that the Taliban and al-Qaeda wanted her dead because she was a secular woman who had close ties to the United States administration that was involved in overthrowing the Taliban regime. They also viewed Pakistan’s involvement in the “war against terror” as an assault against Islam and Bhutto had vowed to continue this co-operation if elected as Prime Minister.

Did the Tories do us a favour by reducing the GST, or was it just opportunistic politics?

2007-12-28T07:13:00.001-05:00

I came across an interesting article in the Edmonton Sun, written by Lorrie Goldstein and Rob Granatstein that discussed the reduction of the GST to 5%, effective Jan 1st 2008. In the article, Lorrie makes arguments in support of the GST cut, while Rob opposes it, using the same arguments put forward by the Liberals and the NDP.

It makes me wonder why those on the left of the political spectrum are so vehemously opposed to tax cuts. Everyone benefits from tax cuts, both rich and poor. Whenever a tax reduction is made, we get to keep more of our money and that extra money in our hands helps to drive our economy creating more jobs and opportunities for everyone.

This exchange between Lorrie and Rob intrigued me the most:

Granatstein: What ordinary Canadians know is they have to spend money to get any benefit out of the GST cut. And it helps the rich more than the poor. The more you spend, the more pennies you save. A GST cut doesn't help me pay my mortgage, doesn't help me put anything into my dismal RRSP, it doesn't let me decide where I want to spend it. And resale homes are GST exempt. So I guess that's out, too.

Goldstein: You also have to earn money to get any benefit from an income tax cut. What's your point? Whenever provincial and federal governments cut income tax rates, people who are opposed make exactly your argument -- that the cuts amount to only a few dollars a week. Fact is, most of them don't believe in making one tax cut over another cut, they just don't believe in any tax cuts. I do. I believe people know how to spend their own money better than government.

Did the Tories do us a favour by reducing the GST, or was it just opportunistic politics? (Edmonton Sun)

Former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto assassinated

2007-12-27T09:32:00.000-05:00

Former Pakistani Prime Minister, Benazir Bhutto was assassinated today after attending a rally in the city of Rawalpindi. This could not have happened at a worst time, as it is bound to have a destabilizing effect on that country. Especially since it has played a key role in the Afghan war against the Taliban. What will be interesting to see is the effect that this development will have on the Afghan mission.

Former Pakistani Prime Minister Benazir Bhutto assassinated

Merry Christmas!

2007-12-25T16:49:00.000-05:00

To everyone, I just want to take the opportunity to wish you all a Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year. I hope you all have a wonderful time with your families and friends and best wishes for 2008!

I would also like to wish all of our troops serving abroad a Merry Christmas as well and thank all of them for serving our country with great dignity and for the personal sacrifices that many have made. Many of us appreciate your efforts abroad to make life better for the people in those countries that you are serving in.

To everyone, have a safe, peaceful and joyous holiday.

Regards,

Tony

Is Schreiber Lying To Us?

2007-12-06T22:23:00.000-05:00

It looks like Karlheinz Schreiber once again has changed his story. This time, it happened within a span of just 2 days. I am at a loss to see why are we wasting taxpayers’ money on his appearance before the ethics committee if he cannot keep his story streight for 2 days.

On Tuesday, Schreiber testified that former Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney did not receive any money in connection with the Airbus affair. He was actually laughing off suggestions of Mr. Mulroney’s involvement in the Airbus affair.

CTV link: Mulroney didn't receive Airbus kickbacks: Schreiber

Karlheinz Schreiber told a parliamentary ethics committee on Tuesday that former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney did not receive any money in connection with the Airbus affair.

He said that allegations of Mulroney's involvement in securing an Air Canada contract for the purchase of planes from the European company were laughable.

Today, just 2 days after saying that former Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney did not receive any airbus money, Schreiber has changed his story. Today Schreiber testified that Mulroney’s former adviser, Fred Doucet, told him to transfer some proceeds from the sale of Airbus jets to Air Canada into a bank account for former Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney. Mr. Doucet has denied this.

CTV link: Schreiber testimony ties Mulroney to Airbus deal

Karlheinz Schreiber testified today that he was told to transfer some proceeds from the sale of Airbus jets to Air Canada into a bank account for former Prime Minister Brian Mulroney.
...
"(I said) 'Why the hell would one send money to a lawyer in Geneva for Mr. Mulroney? What for?'" said Schreiber. "Now came this unbelievable answer, he said: 'For Airbus.'"

My question for Mr. Schreiber would be if what you are telling us today is true, then why did you say that Mr. Mulroney was not involved in the Airbus affair on Tuesday? It just does not add up. What I also found disturbing is that only a few MSM outlets are questioning Schreiber's latest statement. Many were content with taking Schreiber's word and reporting his latest revelation a major political bombshell.

If the testimony about Schreiber being told to transfer money from the Airbus sale to Mulroney’s account were true, then it would indicate that Schreiber lied to the ethics committee on Tuesday when he said that allegations of Mulroney’s involvement in securing an Air Canada contract for the purchase of planes were laughable.

Even today, Schreiber said that he was so desperate to stay in Canada that he would sign anything or say anything. This happened when he was questioned about inconsistencies in what he wrote in a letter in May or June of 2006 and what he said in his testimony.

What I found funny was that Schreiber admitted to being a judge in Germany, but he was afraid to go back there to face tax evasion charges, as, according to him, they regularly violated human rights. This is coming from a person who did not find anything wrong with the same judicial system when he was a judge. The constant theme I kept on hearing was about how bad Schreiber wanted to stay in Canada. I did not hear anything about him wanting Canadians to know the truth. Even in the letter that he sent, it sounded like an attempt by him to blackmail others in his quest to stay in Canada.

Well, Schreiber takes the stand again next Tuesday, as well as, representatives from GCI (the Ottawa lobying firm) and Mulroney may be called to testify next Thursday from 9am to 1pm. It will be interesting to hear what Mulroney has to say. What was interesting was that some Liberals actually were against having Mr. Mulroney testify. I wonder what might they be afraid of? Only time will tell.

Stephane Dion – Liberals Ready For A Spring Election

2007-12-01T19:22:00.000-05:00

Less than a month ago, Liberal Opposition leader Stephane Dion said that his party did not want an election and neither did most Canadians and was accusing the governing Conservatives of trying to engineer one. Today Mr. Dion has completely changed his tune and is now saying that the Liberal party are ready to face the Conservatives in a spring election.

Dion says Liberals ready for a spring election

"2008 will be another ball game," he said. "You cannot keep alive forever a government who wants to die."

He said Liberal MPs have been forced to abstain from key confidence votes, allowing the Conservatives to push through key legislation, because Canadians were opposed to the idea of a third election in three years.

Now, he said, Canadians have had enough of Prime Minister Stephen Harper and are ready for a change.

Really! If Canadians were really ready for a change, you would see it in the poll results, right?

The reality is that the popular opinion polls have not moved in favour of the Liberals. In fact, the Conservatives have maintained the same level of support that they had when the defeated the governing Liberal party, and at the same time, support for the Liberals have not increased.

I am not sure on what basis Dion's party will be ready for a spring election. Lets look at the reality their party has to deal with:

Political donations to the Liberal party are lagging and are far below the Conservatives. In addition, the Liberal finances are in bad shape, as they still millions of dollars in debt.
The Liberals are still where they were in terms of popular support when they lost the 2006 Federal elections to the Tories. They have not been able to increase their numbers.
Stephane Dion still has an image problem among Canadians and lags far behind Prime Minister, Stephen Harper and even NDP leader Jack Layton in terms of personal popularity.
Approximately 20% of the Liberal caucus has either resigned or indicated that they will not be running in the next federal election. This is hardly a good sign of a party ready to fight an election.
The Liberals under Dion’s leadership have failed to give their party the renewal that it needed to distance itself from its past problems. Dion has been mostly vague in the direction that he wants to take the party and this has resulted in many Canadians not being able to say what either he or his party stands for.

It will be interesting to see how the Liberals will run an effective election campaign against the Conservatives with Dion at the helm. If Dion conducts his election campaign in the same way in which he has performed as Liberal opposition leader, the Conservatives will be cruising to victory once again.

Rex Murphy Commentary on Prime Minister Harper’s Position on a Post-Kyoto Agreement

2007-12-01T14:45:00.000-05:00

On last night's edition of CBC's, The National, Rex Murphy's commentry articulated Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s position on a post Kyoto agreement. It was one of his best commentaries and it added a lot of creditability to Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s argument that the Canadian government will not enter into "binding agreements" that deal with climate change, unless those agreements are binding on all the world's CO2 emitters, major and minor.

In the blog, Dispatch From The Socialist Gulag in a post titled, “Rex Murphy on Canada's global warming position” there is a link to last night’s commentary on CBC that should be required viewing for those on either side of the Kyoto debate.

Below is an excerpt from the Rex Murphy's commentry on CBC's, The National last night:

If global warming is the imminent and catastrophic peril to the earth that everyone from the IPCC to David Suzuki to Al Gore and every socially-conscious celebrity on the planet have been telling us it is, then there can be no serious argument for Canada to make mandatory commitments, while exempting the giant emitters of the world such as China and India. This is like plugging a leak while ignoring a flood.
...

Everyone has a vague, soft wish to "do the right thing" for the planet - and at the level of gesture - green light bulbs, more intense recycling, hybrid SUVs, everyone more or less feels good about going along.

But what the participants at Bali will be looking for from Canada, Europe, the US, the industrialized world, are precisely those hard targets and commitments that Mr. Harper, very logically, unless equivalent cuts are made for all, has said make no sense. Cuts that would impose real restrictions on the Canadian economy, slow growth - this will not be painless regardless of what enthusiasts say - perhaps start a real conflict in this country over the oil sands - while giving a pass to much larger countries producing much greater emissions.

Are we really going to do that - while two of the largest economies of the 21st century make the leap into unregulated, unprecedented growth?

That's a two-tier solution to global warming, and unless I misread our recent history, Canadians are not fond of two-tier solutions.

Schreiber refuses to testify before the HOC Ethics Committee

2007-11-29T12:07:00.000-05:00

Karlheinz Schreiber appeared before the HOC ethics committee this morning and refused to testify.

From the G&M: I won't testify now: Schreiber

In an opening statement before the Commons ethics committee, Mr. Schreiber said he is “unwilling at this time to testify” until he knows how long the stay on his extradition will be.

“Until the court hearing in Toronto tomorrow [regarding] the length of the stay, I am unwilling at this time to testify,” he said, referring to a motion that will be heard Friday by Ontario's Court of Appeal.

I had a chance to listen to exerpts from his testimony and I could not believe the arrogance of Mr. Schreiber. He would not even answer whether or not he had paid any money to anyone. It is the basis of his allegation that he filed less than a month ago. Surely he could have even admit this by saying ‘yes’ or ‘no’

Ccommittee chair Paul Szabo, also indicated that he will provide Mr. Schreiber with an advance list of questions that the committee intends to ask him. What is he thinking? He clearly is being played here and it does not even look like he realize it.

The opposition members of the HOC are once again allowing themselves to be played. Mr. Schreiber’s interest is not in shedding any light on his business dealings with former Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney. The only interest he has is to remain in Canada and avoid extradition to face fraud and tax-evasion charges. The Conservative government should do us all a favour and extradite Mr. Schreiber back to Germany ASAP.

If Schreiber Refuses to Speak before the Ethics Committee tomorrow -Deport him

2007-11-28T13:18:00.000-05:00

So it seems that Karlheinz Schreiber is once again up to his old tricks. His lawyer, Edward Greenspan has said that Schreiber is unlikely to cooperate before the HOC ethics committee, where he is scheduled to appear tomorrow.

It is amazing how far the opposition is willing to bend to accommodate his demands. Schreiber has once again managed to manipulate the HOC, Supreme Court and the ethics committee and is doing an effective job of making them look like fools. In any other country with an ounce of self-respect, Schreiber would have been deported long ago.

I think that its time that someone with a backbone gives him an ultimatum to either "put up or shut up". If Schreiber refuses to talk tomorrow, he should be considered as having given up his right to testify and should immediately be put on a plane to Germany to face fraud, bribery and tax evasion charges.

Karlheinz Schreiber the master manipulator

2007-11-24T09:34:00.000-05:00

Karlheinz Schreiber seems to be trying his best to manipulate our government, the justice system, the Supreme Court and the House of Commons at the same time, and sadly it looks like he is succeeding.

First, with just weeks away from being extradited to Germany, he changed his sworn testimony that he gave during the famous Airbus inquiry. Previously he denied giving money to former Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney while he was in office, but then changes his story to say that the Former Prime Minister received money just days before demitting office.

Last week, he said that he would not testify if he were extradited to Germany. This is after he had previously said that the motive of his latest allegations were not to extend his stay in Canada, but to ensure that Canadians knew the truth about his business dealings with former Prime Minister Mulroney.

On Thursday, he asked for a get out of jail free card, so that he could go to his home in Ottawa for a few nights for the purposes of searching for some papers.

Yesterday, he sent a rambling press release saying that he is willing to appear before the HOC ethics committee, but first he wants some answers from Federal Justice Minister, Rob Nicholson.

I’ve got to give it to this fellow. He is a master manipulator and is trying to extract all kinds of demands in exchange of his testimony. My hope is that the Canadian people will not be fooled by the about face in his testimony and see him for what he is. “A manipulator to the highest degree”.

Karlheinz Schreiber to testify before the HOC ethics committee

2007-11-22T14:18:00.000-05:00

A motion before the HOC ethics committee to study the so-called Mulroney-Schreiber affair and to request Mr. Schreiber to testify "without delay" passed easily today with the support of the three opposition parties.

Schreiber to testify before committee

So it looks like Karlheinz Schreiber could be called before the HOC parliamentary committee as early as next week.

It will be interesting to hear what Schreiber will have to say. How will he explain the inconsistencies in his previously sworn statements? How will he handle himself under cross-examination? Stay tuned for next week.

Ontario Premier McGuinty’s latest tantrum

2007-11-21T06:55:00.000-05:00

Ontario Premier Dalton McGuinty recently has been making a lot of noise regarding the number of new ridings allocated to Ontario if the new Federal government bill to increase the number of ridings in the HOC is passed. This criticism drew a strong rebuke from government house leader, Peter Van Loan.

As it stands now, there are 308 Federal ridings and the new bill would add 22 more to increase the number of seats to 330.

According to this bill the new seats will be distributed as follows

10 in Ontario
7 in British Columbia
5 in Alberta

What Mr. McGuinty conveniently failed to mention was that he did not have a problem with the number of new Federal ridings allocated to Ontario in 2004, when former Liberal Prime Minister, Paul Martin, was in power. This new bill received royal assent on March 11th, 2004.

Lets look at the number of new seats that were allocated in that bill that increased the number of Federal ridings in Canada from 301 to 308.

3 in Ontario
2 in British Columbia
2 in Alberta

Was Mr. McGuinty Premier of Ontario back then? Yes. Did he protest the number of seats allocated to Ontario to Paul Martin’s Liberal government back then? I don’t think so. And it was a worst deal for Ontario compared to the number of seats they are getting right now. So if he did not have a problem with a worst deal for Ontario when his Federal Liberal cousins were in power, but now has a problem when Ontario gets a better deal with the Tories in power, you just have to wonder what his motives are.

Former Liberal Prime Minister Jean Chretien says inquiries are not the best solution

2007-11-18T23:00:00.000-05:00

Former Prime Minister Jean Chretien suggested to reporters that a public inquiry may not be the best way to get to the bottom of the Mulroney-Schreiber affair.

Hmmm, an interesting perspective coming from a former Liberal Prime Minister

"It's not the best way to solve problems," Chretien told reporters, in his first media appearance since undergoing heart bypass surgery last month. "We have police for these things. But there will be an inquiry, so we will live with an inquiry."

Meanwhile, the Liberals are not content with the fact that the Prime Minister, have called the public inquiry that they have been demanding for. The Liberals are interfering in the inquiry, at a time when it should be totally free of political interference.

Stephane Dion sends letter to David Johnston

My contention is that it is totally ridiculous for Mr. Dion to be demanding that Mr. Johnston includes the PMO as part of the inquiry. The Mulronry/Schreiber issue happened almost 15 years ago the PMO did not have anything to do with the alleged Mulroney/Schreiber payment.

If the Liberals insist on widening the net of this inquiry, maybe it will expand enough to also include the dealings that members of the caucuses of last two Liberal Prime Ministers, Chretien and Martin had with Schreiber.

Maybe there may be some good for the Conservatives in having this inquiry go forward, as expressed by comments by Real Conservative and Joanne in the Joanne's Journey blog.

1. Way to put distance between the new CPC and the old PC party.
2. Way for Harper to show that he has no 'hidden agenda.'
3. Way for conservatives to link this to LPC, easy to do.
4. Way for CPC to show that LPC is not interested in current events.
5. Way for Harper to show that his natural leadership instinct is alive and well.
6. Way for the government to continue to get legislation through Parliament that was promised to Canadians long ago eg. getting tough on crime bills, etc." (Since the Liberals most likely will not pull the plug on this minority government while the inquiry goes on)

Why Karlheinz Schreiber should be extradited back to Germany

2007-11-17T05:15:00.000-05:00

For once I am in agreement with CTV newsperson, Craig Oliver. Karlheinz Schreiber is a liar, manipulator and a blackmailer and should be sent back to Germany.

I was leaning towards allowing him to stay and testify until he threatened the federal government that he would not talk if extradited. Craig Oliver summed it up beautifully on yesterdays MDL and made a very convincing argument why he should be extradited back to Germany.

Schreiber latest threat tells me that he is not interested in Canadian justice and is only interested in saving his own skin. What we are dealing with a highly manipulative person who has had years to come forward with this information when he was not under any extradition threat and waits until he is literally 2 weeks away from being extradited to Germany before he gives this information in a sworn affidavit in court.

The other issue is that Mr. Schreiber has changed his story at least 3 times. His first story was that he did not pay former Prime Minister, Brian Mulroney. His second story was that he arranged to pay Brian Mulroney, but this happened after the former Prime Minister had left office and was a private citizen. Mr. Schreiber’s latest story is that he made a deal with Mr. Mulroney while he was still Prime Minister.

Mr. Schreiber clearly has some creditability problems. His dealings has not only tainted Canada, and left a nasty stench in our political system, but also have impacted German politics as well. He is largely responsible for the downfall of former German Chancellor, Helmut Kohl and former German opposition leader Wolfgang Schaeuble.

What is interesting is that Liberal human rights critic Irwin Cotler, who is now arguing for Schreiber to be allowed to stay in Canada, ordered Schreiber deported just 3 years ago in 2004 when Colter was the Liberal Minister of Justice. The Liberals and NDP, who have always accused the Conservatives of trying to manipulate the judiciary, are now demanding that the Conservative government do just that. By giving in to Liberal and NDP demands, we risk erroding the independence of our judiciary.

From the looks of this, an inquiry would just be a he/said he/said affair. It would boil down to choosing between a liar and an arrogant former Prime Minister. The Liberals consistently say, “They want the truth” The only problem is that the person who they are relying on for it is a liar, who has changed his story at least 3 times. How can they be sure that they are getting the truth from a person that only 3 years ago they saw as a cancer and sought to deport themselves?

My guess is that the Liberals are using this issue as a means of getting some political mileage, to the detriment of the Conservatives. My warning to them is to “Be careful what you wish for” as several Liberals have also been close confidants of Mr. Schreiber and they may end up getting egg on their faces.

In my view, nothing good can come out of this. If Schreiber were allowed to stay, the government would essentially be doing two critical things that I oppose as a Canadian citizen. Interfering in our judicial system, which is supposed to be free from government interference, and giving in to blackmail. This would send a nasty precedence in our political system. No government should allow itself to be blackmailed this way.

I say send Schreiber back to Germany. If Schreiber really wants to testify he will. If not, then it would just confirm that he was really not interested in Canadian justice, but only in saving his skin.

The Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives Criticizes Canada’s Tax System

2007-11-08T10:21:00.000-05:00

The Canadian Centre for policy alternatives, an Ottawa think tank, has put out a report that accuses the Canadian tax system of failing the basic test of fairness. They are using the fact that the top 1% of income earners is paying a lower percentage of their income compared to those at the bottom of the income scale to justify their argument.

Those very rich Canadians paid 30.5 per cent of their income in federal, provincial and municipal taxes in 2005, as opposed to the 30.7 per cent for those with incomes under $13,523, the lowest 10 per cent of family earnings.

That's a big difference from 1990, when the top 1 per cent of earners paid 34.2 per cent of their incomes in taxes, as opposed to 25.5 per cent for families in the bottom 10 per cent.

"The tax system has gotten less progressive," said the group's senior economist Marc Lee.

What Mr. Lee fails to point out is the following:

The top 1% of income earners pays far more into the tax system and receives much fewer benefits when compared to lower income earners.
The top 1% of income earners often risks their capital for investments that create jobs for many of us, so a lower tax rate for them means more investments and jobs for our economy.
The business and companies that are formed by the top 1% of income earners provide the government with much needed funds for many programs that benefit lower income earners. Higher taxes mean less investment and less money in the long run going into the government coffers to fund these programs.
Lower tax rates are one of the key factors that attract capital and investment by those with the means to invest.

The fact that the Canadian Centre for policy alternatives is also blind to is that increasing the tax on the rich hardly works. In most cases, it gets passed down as increased cost to lower income earners, thus defeating the purpose. It also discourages further investment, which translates to lost economic opportunities, fewer jobs, etc.

The lowering the tax rate for top income earners from 34.2 percent to 25.5 percent ended up benefiting most of us. Not just the rich, as alluded to by the Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives. It enabled the federal and provincial governments to collect more money than it would have if the tax rate had remained the same. This was due to increased investment, in terms of more businesses and companies expanding and more people being employed.

Mario Dumont tables surprise no-confidence motion

2007-11-07T12:43:00.000-05:00

Quebec opposition leader, Mario Dumont presented a surprise non-confidence motion that if approved, would send Quebecers to the polls on Dec 17th. It is unlikely to pass though, as the the Parti Québécois stated yesterday that it has no plans to support it.

Mr. Dumont sent his opponents scrambling and briefly set off a political drama after presenting a motion to defeat the government over its defence of the province's school boards, which the ADQ says should be abolished. Mr. Dumont has also criticized the Liberals on the economy, health care and government inaction.

Dumont tables surprise no-confidence motion

The nervous Liberals were relieved to hear the PQ House Leader reject the need for an election.

"You can't drag the people into an election just because you are unhappy with the government's response to your demands," Mr. Gendron said.

The no-confidence motion, the first to be tabled against Mr. Charest's government since the March 26 election, will be debated and voted on next Tuesday.

Loonie climbs above $1.10

2007-11-07T03:36:00.000-05:00

In just over a month the Canadian dollar has moved from 98 US cents to $1.10 US on Wednesday, sparking record trading in the overseas market.

Among the factors contributing to the steep rise in the loonie are record oil prices, approaching $97 a barrel, competitive interest rates, a stable economy that encourages investment and a steep decline in the value of the US dollar.

While this news is good for cross border consumers, it is causing a lot of concern for manufacturers and exporters. Many of them have been advocating for an interest rate cut to stem the rise in the Canadian dollar, but their hopes were dashed on Tuesday afternoon after Bank of Canada Senior Deputy Governor Paul Jenkins indicated that there will not be a cut in interest rates.

Some analysts are suggesting that the Canadian dollar is overvalued by as much as 10% and are predicting a sharp decline over the next year.

“It's overvalued,” said Rebecca Patterson, global currency strategist at JP Morgan in New York. She's advising her clients that the loonie will slide over the next year.
...
A Bank of Canada-based model that uses interest rate differentials and commodity prices to determine fair value shows the currency is 10 per cent overvalued, said David Powell, currency strategist at Idea Global in New York.

“The Canadian dollar is well overvalued by most conventional measures,” he said. About two-fifths of the U.S. dollar's decline against the Canadian currency is due to general U.S.-dollar weakness, he estimated.

Despite this, it looks like it will be a good season for consumers. Many retailers, such as Sears have already lowered prices, and some car dealerships are also following through in an effort to stem the tide of cross border shoppers. Many have also started giving consumers the benefit of the 1% GST cut, even though it will not take place until January 1st.

For travellers going abroad, the benefit of the strong Canadian dollar will be enormous. Itravel2000, Canada's largers independent online travel retailer, is reporting a significant rise in Canadian bookings to southern destinations such as Mexico and the Dominican Republic. Many US retailers in border towns and cities are also reporting a significant increase in Canadian customers and are already offering special promotions to lure their business.

Premier McGuinty Shuffles Cabinet To Thwart Potential Successors

2007-11-04T08:16:00.000-05:00

The recent cabinet shuffle by Ontario Premier, Dalton McGuinty was to thwart potential successors jockeying to succeed him as Premier, according to the article, Premier makes an offer his ministers can't refuse by Robert Benzie in the Toronto Star.

He sums it up quite perfectly with this quote

There can be only one boss in this family, only one premier.

In this latest shuffle, four ministers were dropped from his cabinet, ten backbenchers were promoted, and four out of the seven people with aspirations for his job were given less significant assignments after McGuinty conferred with his advisors.

Like the calculating Michael Corleone in The Godfather trilogy, McGuinty emphasized his manoeuvring was not personal, but strictly business.

"You just gotta make a judgment call. ... In order to do that, I had to take some people out," he said.

It will be interesting to see how this issue plays out in Ontario. Especially since Mr. McGuinty has indicated that he intends to make another run as Premier in the Ontario Provincial Election in 2011.

Federal Finance Minister Announces GST and Personal Income Tax Cuts

2007-10-30T17:39:00.000-04:00

Federal Finance Minister, Jim Flaherty announced several tax cuts today.

They include:

A reduction in the GST from 6% to 5%, effective January 1st, 2008.
An increase in the basic personal amount exemption to $9,600 from $8,929, retroactive to Jan. 1, 2007;
Two years later, on Jan. 1, 2009, the basic personal amount exemption will be increased to $10,100;
Reducing small business income tax to 11 per cent by 2008 and $10 billion in federal debt relief
The lowest personal income tax rate moves to 15 per cent from 15.5 per cent, effective Jan. 1 2007, undoing a change made in the first Conservative budget.

As usual, the NDP and the Bloc have announced that they will vote against this mini-budget, when it comes to a vote in parliament tomorrow. It is sure to pass though, as the Liberals have indicated that they will not vote against it.

Overall, I have to say kudos to the Conservative government for this mini-budget. It is coming at the right time and will benefit most Canadians.

Omar Khadr's mother wants Canada to defend her son's rights

2007-10-29T03:11:00.000-04:00

Mrs. Maha Khadr, wife of the late Al-Qaeda financer, Ahmed Khadr is now asking for the Canadian government to defend her son, Omar Khadr.

This is the same person who along with her daughter Zaynab openly spat on and rejected Canada and the west, accusing them of being full of teen drug addicts and homosexuals. Not only did she say this, but she also said that she would be happy to see her children die as martyrs, just as her husband did.

In Mrs. Khadr’s mind Canada was not good enough for her and her family to live in, so they voluntarily left the safety and prosperity of our country and society to live among, collaborate with and openly support Al-Qaeda in Taliban ruled Afghanistan. Now that she and her family has suffered the consequences of their actions, they come running back to Canada and expect our government to advocate for her son release? Especially after he is accused of murdering a US medic?

It is not the first time Mrs. Khadr has advocated for someone in her family. In January 1996, she advocated to former Prime Minister, Jean Chretien for the release of her husband Ahmed from a Pakistani prison, where he was being held on terrorism charges. Mr. Chretien obliged and her husband was released within weeks, but that decision came back to haunt Mr. Chretien’s government when Mr Khadr was later killed in a gun battle with Pakistani troops.

It is probably best that Omar Khadr remains where he is in Guantamo Bay, where he is currently being held instead of being brought back to Canada. He is a trained Al-Qaeda operative, and given Canada’s lax justice system, chances are that he would be quickly released and would once again be free to pursue his collaboration and association with that terrorist organization.

Premier Stelmach Expected to Raise Royalties on Oil and Gas Development in Alberta

2007-10-23T21:43:00.000-04:00

For a long time Alberta with its attractive tax rate has been an oasis for billions of dollars in investment in its oil and gas sector. This however could change with an expected announcement tomorrow, in which Premier Stelmach may raise royalities on oil and gas development by as much as 20%.

Hopefully this will not be the case, as the initial short term gain for Alberta from this draconian measure will most certainly end up as long term losses. Nothing good can come from such a radical change in policy, as it will only serve to discourage future investment.

The one piece of advise I have for Premier Stelmach is "Don't Kill the Goose the Lays the Golden Egg" Excessive greed by the Province will turn into long term need, especially if the oil and gas companies cut back on their investment and number of people they employ in Alberta.

Update:

From the Toronto Star - John Cotter

Stelmach vague on new energy royalty system

In a televised speech Stelmach said his government will create a new system for charging royalties but will give companies time to adapt to it.

The premier did not say if the changes will yield the 20 per cent increase in royalties called for last month by a review panel commissioned by his government, how the new system will work or when the changes will kick in.

"Now we are ready to take decisive action," Stelmach said. ``One that delivers the fair share Albertans rightly expect from the development of their resources.

Alberta Liberals are distancing themselves from the Federal Liberal Party

2007-10-21T14:13:00.000-04:00

The sponsorship scandal, internal infighting, weak leadership and the lack of direction in the Federal Liberal party have severely tarnished the once proud “Liberal” brand name. This turmoil is causing some of its provincial counterparts to begin distancing themselves from the Federal Liberal Party.

“EDMONTON -- Like a young person embarrassed by his parents, Alberta Liberals are taking great pains to distance themselves from their namesakes in Ottawa.
..
The party executive is sending out letters urging news organizations to refer to the party and its members as "Alberta Liberals" rather than "Liberals."

With possible provincial and federal elections looming, Alberta Liberals are gritting their teeth at the prospect of being lumped together with their federal counterparts.

"We need you to call us by our real name," reads the letter, adding that it is "critical" for Albertans to distinguish between the federal and provincial parties. "After all, the Alberta Liberal Party is a completely distinct Alberta-born and bred political party ... with a clear vision for sustaining Alberta's prosperity."

The letter goes on to note that Alberta Liberal Leader Kevin Taft is not even a member of the Liberal Party of Canada.

This cannot be good news for a federal party that considers itself the natural governing party of Canada. From what I see, it is just another sign of people jumping ship before the big shipwreck as the Liberal party’s fortunes have clearly declined.

Right now they are experiencing a decline in the polls, poor leadership, massive debts, a decline in donations and lack of a clear message and direction. These days many are questioning what does the Federal Liberal Party stands for? It does not seem to have a clear position on issues such as the economy, crime, the environment, the justice system and the Afghanistan mission. If they are not able to turn things around quickly, the NDP may one day replace them as the opposition.

Nine Convenient Untruths In Al Gore's Documentary

2007-10-14T18:49:00.000-04:00

Al Gore’s documentary, An Inconvenient Truth, has been found to be an alarmist, one-sided film containing nine major errors that are presented as fact. Despite this revelation, many schools in Ontario and other Canadian provinces continue to use this movie for educational purposes. In nearly all cases where this movie is being shown, it is being presented as fact without any opposing arguments.

So now what we now have are students in schools all across Canada being indoctrinated by a film with major flaws, instead of being presented with all sides of this debate. They are not given the opportunity to see films that demonstrate an opposing view, such as the Global Warming Swindle, and allowed to decide the facts for themselves. They have become political pawns who are being manipulated by various school boards in this debate.

In regard to the court ruling, Victoria Serda, Ontario's deputy Green party leader has dismissed it as "minor".

"How can a judge in England make a determination on whether something is scientific fact when he has no background in it?" Ms. Serda said. "This is a judge that doesn't even know what he's talking about, he doesn't work in the field, he's not a climate scientist, he's not a peer-reviewed scientific journalist. He has no basis in order to even go forward with this decision he's making. It's just kind of silly."

My response to Ms Serda is:

“How can a documentary produced by a career politician, such as Al Gore, without any background or training in climateology be endorsed and presented as fact in our schools despite having at least nine major flaws? It’s just kind of silly."

Here are the nine untruths

Untruth 1

Mr Gore claims that a sea-level rise of up to 20 feet would be caused by melting of either West Antarctica or Greenland "in the near future".

The judge said: "This is distinctly alarmist and part of Mr Gore's "wake-up call". He agreed that if Greenland melted it would release this amount of water - "but only after, and over, millennia"."The Armageddon scenario he predicts, insofar as it suggests that sea level rises of seven metres might occur in the immediate future, is not in line with the scientific consensus."

Untruth 2

Gore says: Low lying inhabited Pacific atolls are being inundated because of anthropogenic global warming. "That's why the citizens of these Pacific nations have all had to evacuate to New Zealand."

Judge says: "There is no evidence of any such evacuation having yet happened."

Untruth 3

Gore says: The shutting down of the "Ocean Conveyor" would lead to another ice age.

Judge says: "According to the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change, it is very unlikely that the Ocean Conveyor (an ocean current known technically as the Meridional Overturning Circulation or thermohaline circulation) will shut down in the future, though it is considered likely that thermohaline circulation may slow down."

Untruth 4

Gore says: Two graphs relating to a period of 650,000 years, one showing rise in CO2 and one showing rise in temperature, show an exact fit.

Judge says: "Although there is general scientific agreement that there is a connection, the two graphs do not establish what Mr. Gore asserts."

Untruth 5

Gore says: The disappearance of snow on Mt. Kilimanjaro is expressly attributable to global warming.

Judge says: "The scientific consensus is that it cannot be established that the recession of snows on Mt. Kilimanjaro is mainly attributable to human-induced climate change."

Untruth 6

Gore says: The drying up of Lake Chad is a prime example of a catastrophic result of global warming.

Judge says: "It is generally accepted that the evidence remains insufficient to establish such an attribution."

Untruth 7

Gore says: Hurricane Katrina and the consequent devastation in New Orleans is due to global warming.

Judge says: "It is common ground that there is insufficient evidence to show that."

Untruth 8

Gore says: Polar bears have drowned swimming long distances to find ice.

Judge says: "The only scientific study that either side before me can find is one which indicates that four polar bears have recently been found drowned because of a storm."

Untruth 9

Gore says: Coral reefs are bleaching because of global warming.

Judge says: "The actual scientific view, as recorded in the IPCC report, is that, if the temperature were to rise by 1-3 degrees centigrade, there would be increased coral bleaching and widespread coral mortality, unless corals could adapt or acclimatize."

Tory throne speech to embarrass Liberals over Kyoto: report

2007-10-12T09:17:00.000-04:00

Government sources told the Canadian Press that Prime Minister Stephen Harper believes the Liberals are so desperate to avoid an election that they will roll over and accept a throne speech that describes Kyoto climate-change targets as unattainable.

If this is true, it will certainly put Opposition leader, Stephane Dion and the Liberals between a rock and a hard place with two unpalatable choices. Have an election that they are not prepared for and do not want or effectively abandoning their support on implementing the Kyoto Accord within the required timeframe by allowing the throne speech to pass?

I think the Conservatives need to be careful if they plan to use this approach. Dion's tenure as Liberal leader would certainly be severely damaged if he goes along, so he might just opt for an election.

An election over the Kyoto protocol might be the single rallying cry that may unite a Liberal party in disarray and cement Dion’s position as its leader. The environment is not one of the Conservative Party’s strong points, and a significant amount of voters view it as an extremely important issue and may become swayed by the propaganda that will certainly come from the opposition parties, so having an election on it is not a very prudent or pragmatic approach.

If the Conservatives do end up using this approach, they need to provide and communicate a very strong and clear message to Canadian voters. They need to spell out in financial and economic terms the implications of implementing Kyoto and how it will affect their daily lives. Otherwise the opposition will have a field day with this issue.

Are the Liberals doing a flip flop on their throne speech demands?

2007-10-11T00:06:00.000-04:00

Just two weeks ago, when the Bloc and NDP were threatening to defeat the Conservative government by opposing the throne speech, opposition leader, Stephane Dion weighed in with his demands. Unless the Conservative government satisfy four key priorities, they would risk not having Liberal support said Stephane Dion,

He knew that two of these demands, including the reintroduction of bill C-30 and telling NATO allies that Canada would end the combat mission in Feb 2009 would likely not be satisfied in the throne speech, but he still included them, so he was in was in fact laying the groundwork to defeat the government.

When Mr. Dion made these demands, he thought he was being clever. The gap between the Liberals and the Conservatives were as little as two points in some polls back then and in his mind he had finally put Prime Minister Stephen Harper in a box, where he would be forced to implement the opposition’s parties agendas, as the Prime Minister would not want to risk an election. Instead he was outfoxed when the Prime Minister called his bluff with the “fish or cut bait” news conference.

Now with increasing turmoil within his own party and the loss of Liberal support in the polls, Mr. Dion and the Liberal party seems to have done a 180 degree turn. They are now saying that they don’t want an election, and if there is one, it will be Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s fault, even though the Conservatives hold a minority of seats in parliament.

Toronto-area MP, Bryon Wilfert, associate foreign affairs critic in the Liberal caucus, is now advocating partial abstentions by the 96-member Liberal caucus in the Commons, in order to keep the government in power. Mr. Dion has not refuted this, so he appears to be endorsing this change in policy. No longer is he making the minimum demands for Liberal support that he was making just two weeks ago.

Mr. Dion is now caught between a rock and a hard place, as he faces two unpalatable choices. He can either “stick to his principles” and have his party defeat the government on the throne speech, but face an election that they are not ready for, or he can grudgingly support the policies outlined in the throne speech and be forever perceived as a weak politician without any principles. It will be interesting to see whether Mr. Dion and the Liberals do a flip flop on this issue and allow the throne speech to pass without satisfying their four key priorities. If he does, he would lose a lot of creditability and it will be the beginning of the end for Mr Dion's tenure as Liberal party leader.

The Folly of Negotiating Peace with the Taliban

2007-10-09T10:05:00.000-04:00

Politicians like Federal NDP leader, Jack Layton and others like him who are promoting the idea of Canada negotiating with the Taliban should take a look at what is going on in Pakistan right now.

Fighting resumes between Pakistan and pro-Taliban militants

In September last year, the Pakistani government signed a peace accord with pro-Taliban militants that was supposed to end five years of fighting between them in the North Waziristan region of Pakistan. Under that deal, Pakistan withdrew its military forces from that area in exchange for promises that militant tribal groups there would not engage in terrorist activities.

When the deal was announced, many criticized the Pakistani government decision, as they rightly felt that it would not be respected by the militants. As early as July, militants were already flouting the agreement by launching suicide attacks and bombings.

Militants in Pakistan Flout Peace Agreement

Pakistani authorities on Monday were investigating a weekend of suicide attacks that killed at least 73 people, tracking suspected links between the bombings and the army's recent assault on a mosque held by Islamic extremists.

Now the breakdown in the ceasefire and the resumption of fighting between Pakistani troops and pro-Taliban militants have demonstrated the foolhardiness of ever making such an agreement in the first place. The only beneficiary of this agreement was the militants, who used it to rearm and rebuild their network and resume attacks on civilians in the area and against NATO troops across the Afghanistan border.

It just goes to show that you can’t negotiate with the Taliban or their allies. Hopefully Jack Layton and others like him who want to talk peace with the Taliban will see the foolhardiness of making such a decision.

Afghan minister praises Canada as 'greatest ally'

2007-10-05T06:18:00.000-04:00

Afghanistan’s education minister, Mohammed Atmar, praised Canada and referred to our country as its greatest ally during a visit to Toronto yesterday.

"You protect our people and advance the basic rights of our people," he said. "Our government is so proud to convey to you that you are our greatest ally -- an ally that we depend upon, an ally to be appreciated, an ally that we will long be grateful to."

Mr. Atmar also spoke on the improvement to education that has been made in Afghanistan since the Taliban were overthrown.

"What is happening in terms of education is a strategic transformation of society," he said, noting more than six times as many children are going to school now than when the Taliban ruled the country from 1996 to 2001.

Statements like these makes me proud as a Canadian that our troops, as well as other citizens, are doing a lot of good in that country. It really makes me ashamed that the Federal NDP’s position is that they want all Canadian troops to be immediately pulled out of that country. It really makes me ashamed that the Liberals, who begun this mission are now politicizing and undermining it. Not only are these parties undermining the mission, they are also doing it at a time when Afghanistan desperately needs our help.

Both Afghan President, Hamid Karzai and Education Minister, Mohammed Atmar have emphasized the good that Canadian troops are doing in that country, despite the challenges that they face. They have asked the opposition parties to reconsider their stand on the mission. Hopefully the opposition will take a genuine look at Afghanistan from a humanitarian point of view and at least reconsider their stance.

Common Myths Spread By The Left About Conservatives

2007-10-04T05:24:00.000-04:00

I came across this post, “Confidence schmonfidence... it's just brinksmanship” by the Take off, eh? blog on the liblogs.ca website. It was in response to a challenge Prime Minister Stephen Harper made to the opposition parties if they voted in favour of the throne speech, but opposed implementation of the policies outlined in it , that it could trigger an election. This is because the vote on each policy would be considered a confidence vote.

What was interesting was that it contained the common myths spread by the left about Conservatives, which could not be further from the truth. For the longest time it was a successful tactic, but now thankfully more Canadians are seeing it for what it is. Just propaganda!

Here they are:

The Conservatives don't support women
They don't support native Canadians.
They don't support Eastern Canada.
They don't care much for Ontario, or rather the GTA
They don't really care for anyone who invested in income trusts
They don't really give a rats ass about climate change (even now as they feign belief in it)

Chretien recovering after quadruple heart bypass surgery

2007-10-03T17:54:00.000-04:00

Former Prime Minister Jean Chretien had quadruple heart bypass surgery today at the Montreal Heart Institute. The news came as a shock to me.

I am wishing him a speedy recovery.

Regards,

Tony

Darfur Rebels Overun an African Union peacekeeping base

2007-09-30T23:02:00.000-04:00

Last year, NDP leader, Jack Layton, was appealing to the Canadian government to send peacekeeping troops to Darfur, even though there was still fighting between government and rebel troops. A peace deal had been signed by both groups, but neither side respected or observed it.

NDP wants Canada to lead on Darfur mission

The federal New Democrats want Canada to take a lead role in any UN mission to stop the bloodshed in Sudan's Darfur province, even if that means scaling back its commitment in Afghanistan.

Apparently the peacekeeping mission is not going very well for the African Union peacekeeping troops stationed there.

Darfur Rebels Kill 10 in Raid On Peace Force

Hundreds of Darfurian rebels overran an African Union peacekeeping base in the central Darfur region of Sudan in a surprise raid over the weekend, killing at least 10 soldiers, possibly kidnapping dozens more and seizing supplies that included heavy weapons, African Union officials said Sunday.

If Canada had gone ahead and sent troops to Darfur and had suffered casualties, would Mr. Layton now be demanding a withdrawal of Canadian troops from that country? Chances are, his party would blame the Conservative government for handling the mission badly and demand an immediate withdrawal, as in the case of Afghanistan.

U.S. refugee worker was arrested while trying to enter Canada with illegal aliens

2007-09-30T16:19:00.000-04:00

Janet Hinshaw-Thomas, a U.S. refugee worker was arrested at the border crossing of Lacolle, Que. last week, as she tried to enter Canada from New York state with 12 illegal aliens from Haiti, including seven children and five adults.

She has been charged under Canada's Immigration and Refugee Protection Act, but has since been released on $5000 bail.

As usual, the left-wingers, including Maxine Jennings of the Liberal Party and Olivia Chow of the NDP, are already attacking the use of Section 117 of the Immigration Act to charge her.

"Instead of arresting Good Samaritans and harassing faith-based humanitarian non-profit organizations, the Harper government should focus its attention on many known illegal immigration consultants who prey on the most vulnerable refugees, who coach them to lie and strip them of huge sums of money," Chow said in an e-mail.

"This section of the Immigration and Refugee Protection Act was designed to catch human traffickers, so why is the Harper government exploiting it to go after a well-intentioned refugee advocate?" Jennings said in a statement.

"That means that Rob Nicholson, the Attorney General of Canada, authorized it, and that's a clear misuse and misinterpretation of the law," she said.

"He has explanations to give."

But excuse me, how is this a misinterpretation of the law? The law clearly says the following

"Organizing and aiding entry into Canada is an offence under Section 117 of the (act)."

The Liberal Party, with the support of the NDP, Bloc and defunct Alliance Party made this amendment to the Immigration Act in 2002. If the Liberal Party had meant for this law only to be used in specific cases, shouldn’t they have structured it that way?

As usual, there are those who want these illegal aliens to come unimpeded into our country. They do not care about the additional burden in terms of financial, social and health care cost that our cities and urban centres have to absorb, even though many of them are operating under inadequate funding.

For them, Canada is a rich country and we can afford to absorb all of these illegal aliens that arrive here without a problem. It's easy for them to say this, because they are not the ones footing the bill.

Janet Hinshaw-Thomas is not just simply a refugee advocate, as some would like you to believe. She is actively involved in transporting illegal immigrants to the Canadian border for the purposes of obtaining asylum.

She frequently drives asylum seekers to border crossings, according to her lawyer, but alerts officials ahead of time.

Ms Hinshaw-Thomas only has herself to blame for the predicament that she finds herself in. Canada should never be allowed to become a dumping ground for illegal aliens, who are nothing but economic refuges trying in enter our country by claiming asylum. So anytime a refugee advocate or anyone else breaks our immigration law, they should be prosecuted to the fullest extent of the law.

What is Afghan President, Hamid Karzai thinking?

2007-09-29T10:46:00.000-04:00

What was Afghan President, Hamid Karzai thinking when he makes decisions such as this?

Karzai offers government office to Taliban

Especially after this

Taliban unveils hardline Afghan constitution

The 23-page document envisages a country where women would remain veiled and uneducated, "un-Islamic thought" would be banned and human rights would be ignored if "contrary with the teachings of Islam".

But here is the kicker

On freedom of speech the Taliban charter, which is written in Pashto and Dari, is clear: "Every Afghan has the right to express his feelings through his views, writings or through other means in accordance with the law."

However "un-Islamic thought" is strictly forbidden and "violators will be punished according to sharia" - under the Taliban's strict interpretation of Islamic teachings.

Talking to the Taliban with the hope of involving them in government is a serious mistake. They are not interested in peace and reconciliation unless they get everything their way. The Taliban will not accept anything less than for Afghanistan being run under their rules, so talking to them is a waste of time, unless the aim is to return Afghanistan to the 'dark ages'

Public Safety Minister Day promises 'consequences' for illegal refugees

2007-09-29T05:09:00.000-04:00

It is good to see that Public Safety Minister, Stockwell Day, is actually going to crack down on illegal immigrants to Canada. Especially after the increase in illegal aliens from Mexico and Latin America, who have living in the US, but allowed to enter Canada through Windsor to apply for refugee status.

Day said Canada will take a zero-tolerance approach to anyone trying to enter the country illegally, but wanted to investigate specific claims in Windsor more closely.

In an earlier post, I referenced an article that appeared in the National Post that described a potential illegal-immigrant nightmare situation that could engulf our urban centers. It described the journey of Manuel Ortega, a Mexican who was living illegally in Florida for 15 years, but decided to flee to Canada to avoid an immigrant crackdown.

Mexicans pour into Canada from US

Ortega's dream, as he recounted it Tuesday standing outside a room at a Windsor motel, is now but a memory. He is one of an estimated 180 Mexicans from Florida who've rushed across the border and into Windsor to claim refugee status, fleeing a crackdown on illegal aliens in Florida.

The thing that incensed me the most was that he was not fleeing persecution or in fear for his life. This was basically an economic refugee whose time was running out in the US, who decided to come to Canada and jump the queue ahead of legal immigrants, many who had waited years and followed the system to legally enter our country.

Local agencies that work with refugees have been told to brace for 4,000 to 8,000 refugee claimants."
...
"After driving his 1996 Grand Caravan for 24 hours without stopping -- except for gas and food -- the Ortegas arrived at the Windsor tunnel Sept. 11. When they told the border guard they were seeking refugee status, the Ortegas were given a list of social services organizations to contact for support"

After reading this, the first question that came to my mind was, why did our border guards not refuse entry to this person and hundreds of others who did the same thing? It was my impression that the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement was supposed to limit cases like these from occurring. Below is my understanding of the agreement

Those applying from a "safe third country," such as the U.S., are ineligible to make refugee claims at a Canadian border crossing by land.

If Mexicans come to Canada through the U.S., for example, they must make refugee claims there, and are not eligible here.

If this is the case, why are our border guards letting these people in? During the time that they are here awaiting their claim, which most likely will be denied, they are given housing, welfare cheques and other forms of social assistance at great cost to our urban centers. Would it not be prudent and cost effective to simply turn these people back?

According to this article that appeared in the ctv website

Dozens of settlers have begun receiving welfare benefits from the government while they wait for their refugee claim cases to be processes. Most of the claims have little chance of success.

It has been reported that the immigrants may not be covered under Canadian refugee status, meant to be given to people with a well-founded fear of persecution in their home country.

Take for example the city of Windsor. They are facing a severe financial crunch due to this issue.

Last week, he said it had so far cost the city $230,000, about 20 per cent of the annual budget for shelters.

Windsor's unemployment rate is currently pushing 10 per cent, making the influx of jobless refugees the last thing its economy needed.

In addition to the financial crunch, Windsor is also dealing with refugee advocacy groups, who are aiding and abetting the arrival of these illegal immigrants. One of the most prominent members is Jacques Sinjuste, founder of Jerusalem Haitian Community Centre in Florida.

On Friday, Windsor Mayor Eddie Francis met with a Florida man accused of being responsible for sending the wave of immigrants to Windsor. He told Francis there are more busloads of potential immigrants on the way.

"There are individuals or organizations that are now planning for these types of arrivals at the Detroit-Windsor gateway," Francis told A-Channel after his meeting with Jacques Sinjuste, founder of Jerusalem Haitian Community Centre in Naples, Florida.

Mr Sinjuste has been blamed for starting the exodus of illegal immigrants from Florida to Windsor and his group is under investigation by the Florida police after complaints from Canadian and Mexican authorities. His group is accused of making false promises of asylum in Canada to their clients.

Kristi Lester, media communications officer for the county sherriff's office has confirmed that investigators are looking into reports the agency has received concerning JHCC activities. However, she termed the probe an "open investigation," meaning there are currently no charges pending.

Canadian and Mexican authorities have complained that the organization misled Mexican nationals living illegally in the U.S. and fearful of a government crackdown, promising them that Canada was offering asylum and legal status. It's been alleged that JHCC accepted donations of between $300 and $400 to help the Mexicans obtain Canadian refugee applications.

Sinjuste acknowledged that misleading information was passed along to between "20 and 40" illegal Mexican aliens who came to his office after a Spanish-speaking staff member was interviewed for Spanish television.

Hopefully Canada will step up to the plate soon and start enforcing our immigration laws against these illegal refugees. They also need to take firm action against those refugee advocacy groups, who are actively involved in facilitating illegal immigrants to enter our country. Earlier this week, Janet Hinshaw-Thomas, a US refugee worker was arrested at the Quebec border crossing of Lacolle, for tying to help 12 Haitian asylum seekers into Canada.

Her arrest was made under Section 117 of the act, which makes it illegal to "organize, induce, aid or abet" the entry of persons without visas or passports.

More actions like these need to be taken to crack down of illegal immigrants and groups that are assisting them. If nothing is done, Canada could be very soon facing the same, out of control, illegal immigration problems that exist in US border states, such as California, Arizona and Texas.

Charles Adler's Response to his interview with NDP MP Alexa McDonough

2007-09-28T04:44:00.000-04:00

This is an update to my previous post concerning an interview that talk show host, Charles Adler, had with NDP MP, Alexa McDonough.

In that interview, she accused Afghan President, Hamid Karzai of having the speech he gave to parliament, during his visit to Canada, written by the Canadian military. It did not seem to matter to her that this accusation by NDP defence critic, Dawn Black, had been flatly denied by Afghan ambassador to Canada, Omar Samad.

Previous post: NDP Alleges that the Canadian Military wrote Afghan President Hamid Karzai's speech to Parliament

Sound clip of the original interview
(Note: You need Windows Media Player to hear it)

link to original interview

In his blog, Adler on the Edge, Charles Adler responds to Ms. McDonough's allegations against the Afghan President.

She wore a long black veil to cover her mind by Charles Adler Sept 27/07

"That's over the top Charles. We never said Karzai was a puppet of the Canadian military," said the NDP's Alexa McDonough. Over the top?

Alexa McDonough in a radio interview on Adler On Line, was delivering the "scoop" that much of the messaging in a speech delivered by Afghan President Hamid Karzai in the Canadian House of Commons last year, was prepped for him by Canadian military officials.

She insisted that the messages we got weren't necessarily those that the people of Afghanistan would want us to have. By any objective standard, the NDP is calling Karzai a puppet. What's over the top is not my characterization of the NDP position. What's completely out of bounds and over the line is patently false charge that Afghanistan's first democratically elected leader is a puppet of Canada's Department of National Defense.

When I asked McDonough to name one single fact in the Karzai speech that was untrue, she said this issue wasn't about the truth. The former boss of the New Democratic Party spoke volumes with that little chestnut. Ideologues care little about the truth.

It's all about ideology. Karzai, in the Canadian Parliament, simply delivered his boiler plate speech to the West. He talked about an Afghanistan where instead of schools being burned to the ground, they were being rebuilt, and instead of girls being denied the right to go to school, there were now two million of them attending. He talked about an Afghanistan where twenty percent of the members of their parliament were women, and where per capita incomes were going up instead of down. Yes, he was grateful to our military for helping to create a better life for many Afghans.

The NDP could learn a lot from the graciousness of the Afghan leader. He has far more respect for our military than the NDP does. And it isn't because military communications people laid down a few words on a piece of paper to help him get his message across. It's because they laid down their lives to give his people an opportunity to have a life.

I gave Alexa McDonough three chances to come up with a single fact stated by the President of Afghanistan that wasn't accurate. Three times she swung her propaganda bat and missed. The NDP's issue in their own words, isn't about the truth. It is a remarkable confession from a Canadian political party which continues to offer feint praise for the bravery of our troops but consistently fails to admit that they have made a difference for the people who inhabit one of the poorest countries in the world. When McDonough was asked if she could admit that our troops were doing some good down there, she would not do so. I offered her the litmus test of honesty by asking her to tell me how many of the 2 million girls now going to schools in Afghanistan how many of them would be attending if our troops and other Nato forces had not been sacrificing their lives.
"Charles you know that is a question that is impossible to answer." "How about zero, Ms McDonough? That would be a truthful answer." She then called my arithmetic ridiculous.

What requires public ridicule is the idea that the NDP has even a shred of moral authority on issues involving our military. What's clear as a bell is that the party has no respect for the military because of their inability to distance themselves for their core pacifist ideology. The NDP refuses to acknowledge that sometimes when bad things to people, the only way to stop it is to kill the bad guys, or as General Hillier once called them, the scumbags.

The NDP refuses to acknowledge that there are times when the only way to help people is through armed force. It is not NDP rhetoric that opened up the schools of Afghanistan and converted the soccer stadium in Kabul from a place to execute "disobedient" women to a place where teams now play soccer. It is not NDP rhetoric that has created better health care for many Afghans and freedom from the TALIBAN barbarians that the NDP seem to prefer.

At least those headchopping, women hating Taliban types aren't reading speeches that have been vetted by the Canadian military. Isn't that something Canadians should respect? When given a choice between condemning the democratically elected leader of Afghanistan or the thugs that who would condemn that country to the dark ages, the NDP position is now crystal clear. And while Alexa McDonough did not have to wear a head covering to do an interview in Canada, a country kept free by the military she tries to diminish, the objective truth was concealed by her prepared talking points. For my part, I am eternally grateful to the Canadian military for keeping me free enough to have the opportunity to unmask the dishonesty of the party that some stooges of the left continue to call the conscience of parliament.

Update:

Alexa McDonough has been shuffled out as NDP critic on foreign affairs by Jack Layton. Her new portfolio is international development, international co-operation, peace advocacy, Atlantic Canada region.

NDP Alleges that the Canadian Military wrote Afghan President Hamid Karzai's speech to Parliament

2007-09-27T21:07:00.000-04:00

It is amazing how ridiculous some of the allegations made by left-wing supporters against anyone who stands for the mission to Afghanistan are. The NDP is now alleging that the speech made by Afghan President, Hamid Karzai to parliament during his visit to Canada last year was written by the Canadian military.

Dawn Black, the NDP defence critic, said the documents indicate military advisers were asked to prepare an initial draft of Karzai's speech, delivered on Sept. 22, 2006.

"What Canadians heard was not the voice of the Afghan people, but the talking points of the Department of National Defence,'' Black said.

The Afghan ambassador to Canada, Omar Samad, has strongly denied the allegation, but that did not matter to the NDP.

"I can say something simple and say it's laughable and I could say something a bit more serious and say it verges on being insulting.''

Afghan ambassador denies NDP claims on speech

"I was one of those who spent hours, along with other Afghan officials, with the president himself working on the speech, and the president himself was the last person who edited and finalized it, as is his style," Samad said.

On his radio show yesterday afternoon, host Charles Adler interviewed NDP MP and former Federal NDP leader, Alexa McDonough.

Charles Adler's interview with NDP MP Alexa McDonough
(Note: You need Windows Media Player to hear it)

link to original interview

Some of things that Ms. McDonough said and implied were indeed shocking. In that interview:

She refused to acknowledge that the 2 million Afghan girls that are in school, were there because of the sacrifices made by Canadian and NATO troops.
She said that (Canadian) military communications people delivered the words that (Hamid Karzai) delivered in parliament when he visited Canada last year
She feels that there has been an incredible exploitation of the Canadian military in a propaganda war.

Here is the kicker: (Note I am paraphrasing here, as I did not get all the words)

Charles: "...give me a single line from that speech based on life in Afghanistan that he portrayed that is not true"

Alexa: "No that’s not…It is not a question of what is true. It is a question of are we hearing ah from the President of Afghanistan the message that the people of his country want delivered to Canada through parliament. I mean that’s ah a pretty major venue in which to give that opportunity"

Charles: "That’s a pretty serious charge. It’s a pretty serious charge that he does not represent his own people. That he represents something else. That’s a very serious charge."

Alexa: "What was recorded by our own military was that he took his messages, his themes, the key statistics, as well as the overall structure of his speech provided to him and delivered it to parliament and I find it deeply disappointing and I find it very frightening."

Charles Adler's interview with NDP MP Alexa McDonough
(Note: You need Windows Media Player to hear it)

What is really shocking here is the level of contempt that the NDP has shown for a democratically elected head of state from a war-torn country, who simply came to Canada to say thank you and inform Canadians of the good that their troops are doing.

But then again, why should I be surprised? The left-wing, and their friends in the MSM, have had a concerted campaign to do anything in their power to portray the Afghan mission in a bad light and minimize the good that is being done there.

Update:

Terror charges reinstated against Omar Khadr

2007-09-25T06:42:00.000-04:00

A US military appeals court has overruled a judge who threw out murder and terrorism charges against Omar Khadr.

The decision by the U.S. Court of Military Commission Review means the Pentagon once again has the green light to put the 21-year-old on trial before a war-crimes tribunal at Guantanamo Bay, Cuba.

There are some groups that have been advocating for the return of Omar Khadr to Canada. Such a move would be premature, as he is a hardened, al-Qaeda trained combatant, who is accused of killing a US medic. There is no guarantee that Omar will not return to his previous al-Qaeda activities and plot against our troops serving in Afghanistan. Take for instance his late father, Ahmed Said Khadr.

Ahmed Khadr was a financier for al-Qaeda and was being held in prison in Pakistan. At the urging of the Khadr family, former Liberal Prime Minister, Jean Chretien, while on a visit to that country advocated for his release. That decision brought nothing but unnecessary trouble and regret for him and his government.

Jean Chrétien raised the Khadr case with the Pakistani prime minister at the time, Benazir Bhutto, and within weeks, Ahmed Said Khadr was released.

Once he was released, Ahmed Khadr immediately resumed his al-Qaeda activities and was later killed in a gun battle with Pakistan troops.

It is probably best for Canada that he stays in Guantamo Bay. Given Canada’s lax justice system, chances are that he would be quickly released and free to pursue his association with al-Qaeda.

There is not much sympathy for the Khadr family from the Canadian public, especially because of their links to terrorist groups and the contraversal interview in which Ahmed Khadr's wife and daughters denounced Canada during a television documentary. Without the support of the Canadian public, there is no urgency on the part of the government to intervene on his behalf, so Omar may remain in Guantamo Bay for a long time.

The Canadian public has had little sympathy for the Khadr family since it was revealed that patriarch Ahmed Said Khadr was a close associate of Osama bin Laden. Comments made by his wife and daughter during a television documentary further agitated some Canadians, who demanded their citizenship be revoked.

In government circles, the "Khadr effect" is also meant to serve as a warning not to intervene in foreign security cases if there's potential for embarrassment. That goes back to 1996 when prime minister Jean Chrétien intervened in the case of Ahmed Said Khadr, who was under arrest by Pakistani authorities for allegedly financing a terrorist bombing.

Canada can't find 50 Afghan detainees

2007-09-22T09:18:00.000-04:00

The Globe & Mail is once again harping on the Afghan detainees issue.

Canada can't find 50 Afghan detainees

Apparently 50 detainees are un-accounted for after being handed to the Afghan authorities. There are all kinds of possibilities as to what may have happened to them.

They could have been released or bribed their way to freedom, as what often occurs, in that country.
They could have been transferred to another prison, but due to shoddy record keeping, it was not recorded.
They could have escaped from custody and gone back to the Taliban.
In the worse case scenario, they could have been tortured and executed in captivity, but there is no evidence to support this scenario.

Afghanistan is still dealing with over 30 years of civil war, and there have not been effective government institutions for a very long time, so record keeping is shoddy at best.

The article mentions that Canada struck a deal with the Afghan authorities to monitor detainees handed over to them by Canadian forces after May 3rd. The detainees mentioned were handed over to the Afghan authorities before this agreement was in place, so tracking them down is en extremely difficult and complicated exercise.

Detainees transferred after May 3 have been monitored under a deal struck in reaction to uproar over the issue, but the Canadians were also anxious to know about the earlier transfers. Sending detainees into places where they face abuse or torture might constitute a violation of the Geneva Conventions.

Months later, however, a quarter of those 200 detainees remain missing, neither listed as released nor still in custody.

As usual, in their zeal to promote their agenda against the Afghan mission, the G&M automatically assumes the worst-case scenario without any evidence and automatically brings up the possible violation of the Geneva Convention.

Sending detainees into places where they face abuse or torture might constitute a violation of the Geneva Conventions.

There is no evidence that Canadian forces are intentionally sending detainees to be tortured and it is not known if these unaccounted detainees have been tortured, but that does not stop the G&M from bringing it up. Also, for the Geneva Convention to be violated, prisoners would have to be knowingly transferred to places for the purpose of torture, but this in fact has not occurred, so there is no basis for a possible violation of the Geneva Convention.

There May be a Federal Election this fall

2007-09-22T05:00:00.000-04:00

There is an increased possibility of a federal election this fall, as all three opposition parties are now balking at supporting the throne speech when parliament resumes on October 16th. Bloc Quebecois Leader, Gilles Duceppe, is considering taking his chances by opposing the throne speech, as he now realizes that the Conservatives, not the Liberals, are the biggest threat to his party’s hold on the seats it has in Quebec. The longer the Bloc waits, the more its influence and support diminishes to the Conservatives.

The Bloc Quebecois has issued a five-point set of demands for the Conservative minority government that appears to be a reaction the party's bruising in byelections earlier this week. It also appears to be setting the stage for a fall election.

List of Bloc Quebecois demands:

Eliminate all federal spending powers in provincial jurisdictions;
Respect the Kyoto Protocol and establish targets for greenhouse gas reductions;
Assistance for workers in the ailing forest industry;
Changes to supply management for dairy farmers;
And finally, "non négociable," in the Throne Speech, an announced end to the combat mission in Afghanistan by Feb. 2009

It is unlikely that the federal government will satisfy the Bloc's requirement for respecting the Kyoto protocol, so there is an increased possibility of the Bloc not supporting the throne speech.

NDP leader, Jack Layton as already indicated that the NDP will not support the throne speech, even though they have not even heard it as yet. For the NDP, their best chance may be now, as they are still riding the momentum of their historic win in the Outremont by-election. The longer they wait, the greater their chances of some of their core supporters drifting to the Greens and Liberals.

The Liberals are the party that find themselves in a pickle. They are still in debt from the last leadership convention, have not had good fortunes with Stephane Dion as their leader.

In an article in the Toronto Star, Dion admits that his own image needs polishing. To make matters worse, he is also having a communication issue with members of his own caucus that feel that he is not listening to them.

On Wednesday, staff from Dion's office met with Liberal MPs' staffers, in what was reportedly a frank and sometimes tense exchange over lack of communication among Liberals on Parliament Hill. The main message to the Official Opposition Leader's office, according to staffers who attended the session, was: "You are not listening to us."

Despite this though, several Liberals have indicated that their support for the throne speech will be highly impossible unless the Conservative government revives the C-30 bill. But since the government has already said that the bill will not be revived, Liberal support is not likely.

A fall election would be advantageous to the Conservatives for several reasons.

They seemed to have lost their focus after last Spring’s budget. A new election campaign will allow them to focus on a new mandate.
The Conservatives are swimming in cash. They have raised more than 3 times the amount of money raised by the liberals. They now have the means to have an even more effective election campaign than the previous one.
The Conservatives have largely erased the fear and apprehension that was falsely being spread by the Liberals and their friends in the MSM that was preventing many Canadians from voting for them. Many people no longer see them as composed of extremist elements, bent of introducing social policy.
The Conservatives have proven that they can govern the country well and conduct sound economic and foreign policy. They are not perfect, but even with the income trust issue and the Afghan detainee issue, they have governed far better than the Liberals.

If the fall elections occur, hopefully this time the Conservatives will get a majority..

Why is Immigration Canada not enforcing our Immigration Laws?

2007-09-20T04:29:00.000-04:00

Kudos to fellow blogger, SDA for raising this issue in one of her posts.

According to an article in the National Post, 180 Mexican illegal aliens, who were living in Florida have been allowed to enter Canada through the Windsor crossing, by Canadian border guards. Local Canadian agencies that work with refugees have been asked to brace for another 4000 to 8000 more Mexican refugees.

Mexicans pour into Canada from U.S

"Ortega's dream, as he recounted it Tuesday standing outside a room at a Windsor motel, is now but a memory. He is one of an estimated 180 Mexicans from Florida who've rushed across the border and into Windsor to claim refugee status, fleeing a crackdown on illegal aliens in Florida.

Local agencies that work with refugees have been told to brace for 4,000 to 8,000 refugee claimants."
...
"After driving his 1996 Grand Caravan for 24 hours without stopping -- except for gas and food -- the Ortegas arrived at the Windsor tunnel Sept. 11. When they told the border guard they were seeking refugee status, the Ortegas were given a list of social services organizations to contact for support"

The question that I have is why did the Canada border guards not turn these illegal Mexicans aliens back to the United States, as mandated by the Safe Third Country Agreement? Most of them are economic refugees, not facing any harm or persecution in their own home country.

I thought that there was an agreement between the United States and Canada, called The Safe Third Country Agreement that prevented refugees that arrived first in the United States from claiming refugee status in Canada.

Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement

"Under the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement, persons seeking refugee protection must make a claim in the first country they arrive in (United States or Canada), unless they qualify for an exception to the Agreement.

Execptions

Family member exceptions
Unaccompanied minors exception
Document holder exceptions
Public interest exceptions

From what I see, most of these Mexican refugee claimants would not qualify under any of the above categories, so why are they being let into our country? In our cities, our social services are already strained and stretched beyond capacity.

Immigration Canada needs to step up to the plate and start enforcing our immigration laws, otherwise Canada will soon be facing the same, out of control, illegal immigration problems that exist in US border states, such as California, Arizona and Texas.

Police arrest native protesters in Caledonia

2007-09-19T15:57:00.000-04:00

Police are now moving to arrest native protesters who have been occupying a residential subdivision site on Stirling Street in Caledonia.

Hmmm, I wonder if this has anything to do with the upcoming Ontario Provincial elections. Especially since the police are only now beginning to enforce law and order. It looks like McGuinty is finally beginning to feel some pressure to do something about the native occupation.

Drama continues in Caledonia

CALEDONIA (AM900 CHML) - It's another day of dramatic activity in Caledonia.

Police are now moving in to arrest native protesters who have been continuing to occupy a residential subdivision site on Stirling Street.

Joe Gualtieri, the brother of Sam Gualtieri, the builder who was attacked and seriously injured by young native protesters last week, saw what he said was about 100 police in full riot gear.

Residents are being told to stay away from the area.

Development was expected to be allowed to continue after the builder and Six Nation's Confederacy reached an agreement last weekend.

France: Prepare for war over Iran

2007-09-17T06:04:00.000-04:00

French foreign minister, Bernard Kouchner, on Sunday warned that the world should prepare for war with Iran if it obtains nuclear weapons.

"There is no bigger crisis in the world at the moment," said Kouchner. "We have to prepare ourselves for the worst, and that is war," he added during a television interview.

It is good to see France finally asserting itself on the world stage, by standing up to Iran after being absent for such a long time. The May 6th election of Nicolas Sarkozy, as President, represents a drastic change in French foreign policy from one of appeasement to one of assertiveness.

The Hypocrisy in Stephane Dion’s Position on the Canadian Mission to Afghanistan

2007-09-15T19:12:00.000-04:00

All does not seem to be well with Opposition Leader, Stephane Dion and the Liberal caucus these days.

There is an article in the Montreal Gazette in which Dion publicly attacked 24 of his own MP’s for voting to extend the mission in Afghanistan. Comments made by Dion seem to imply that his fellow MP’s were not intelligent enough to listen to arguments, both for and against the extension of the mission and come to a sound decision.

Dion said the 24 Liberal MPs who supported the motion were wrong to have done so.

"They believed the government," Dion explained.

In other words, not only were they wrong, they were duped.

It does not matter to him that this mission begun under a previous Liberal government. It also does not matter to Dion that the decision to move the Canadian troops from the relative safety of Kabul to Taliban-plagued Kandahar in June 2005 was endorsed by the Liberal cabinet, of which he was a member. They were aware that the mission in Kandahar would be a dangerous one, where they risked attacks from and combat with al-Qaida and Taliban insurgents, but they still proceeded.

Then Prime Minister, Paul Martin responded to criticism from those who said that sending troops to Afghanistan would endanger Canada, by saying that fighting terrorism is the government's responsibility.

Even back then, Gen. Rick Hillier of the Canadian Armed Forces admitted that there was a likelihood of Canadian troops encountering Taliban fighters and their al-Qaeda allies.

"Gen. Rick Hillier said last week that Canadian troops will likely encounter Taliban fighters and their al Qaeda allies".

As far back as 2005, critics of the Afghanistan mission were already expressing concern of the increased risks, including IED’s that Canadian troops would face, but the Liberal government still proceeded with it with full cabinet approval.

According to, Eric Margolis, a seasoned war correspondent, in his criticism of the Canadian mission.

"You cannot go into a war and expect you're not going to get shot at. It's foolish and it's illusory to do so, so Canadians have to be prepared,"

Other critics of expressed the concern back then that Canadian soldiers could face dangers in Kandahar similar to those seen by American forces in Iraq.

As late as August 2005, only three months before the fall of the Paul Martin government, the combat aspect of the mission to Afghanistan was not only taking place, but was being reported by the MSM. Not only that, but the war rhetoric that the Liberals and their left-wing allies in the MSM are now criticizing the present Conservatives government of doing was actively taking place before the Conservatives even got into office.

"When you project an image that you're ready for a fight, they'll go somewhere else to look for a fight," Commander Robbie Ball (Aug, 2005)

Taking all of these factors into account, the thing that is most disingenuous about Staphane Dion and his cheerleaders in the Liberal party and the MSM is his insistence that the Canadian mission changed to a combat mission under the Conservative government. That is definitely not true. As early as 2002, Canadian troops were involved in conflict with Taliban and Al-Qaeda insurgents and their snipers were lauded by the MSM for their exceptional performance in combat.

Lets not forget the reason why foreign troops are in Afghanistan. The Taliban government allowed Saudi terrorist Osama bin Laden and his Al-Qaeda allies into Afghanistan. They then started carrying out terrorist activities against other countries, including destroying the World Trade Towers in New York, which killed close to 3000 people, including 24 Canadians. The United States gave the Taliban the option of keeping their government, but extraditing bin Laden and closing their terrorist camps and they refused. So the Taliban only have themselves to blame for losing power in Afghanistan.

It is absolute hypocrisy for Mr. Dion to criticize his fellow MP’s for voting their conscience in their support for extending the mission. A lesson that he needs to learn is that being Opposition leader does not necessarily mean opposing everything that the government does, especially when previously supporting it. It means being an effective counterbalance to the government to keep them honest, responsible and accountable to the Canadian people.

The MSM Obsession with Actors Criticizing Canada’s Foreign Aid Policy

2007-09-11T18:26:00.000-04:00

The left-wing MSM seems to have an obsession with movie stars and entertainers criticizing Prime Minister, Stephen Harper and the Canadian government over its foreign aid commitment to countries like Africa. In the “top stories” section of the CTV news website, there is an article titled, “Matt Damon criticizes Harper”. But if you read the MSM's spin on this story, it would imply that the population of Africa is suffering and children are starving because of "selfish" countries like Canada that refuse to give them more money.

The MSM conveniently fails to mention that Canada is one of the most generous countries in the world, when it comes to aid to that region. So by their omission of this very important fact, they have bolstered Matt Damon argument, and given him credibility in the eyes of uninformed readers, when he has absolutely no credentials when it comes to discussing Canada’s foreign aid or financial policy.

What is also missing from the article is the misuse and misappropriation of the majority of financial aid that is sent to that region. A large proportion of it is squandered by various dictators, who end up spending it on their friends and cronies, while very little of it goes to the people that it is supposed to help.

Despite more than 30 years of economic aid to Africa, there is still an ever increasing occurrence of poverty, starvation, death, disease and misery experienced by a vast majority of people in many of these countries. This is due in large part to mismanagement of its resources, thievery and failed economic policies followed by many of its leaders. So at some point, we really need to consider whether Western aid to Africa in its present form is really making a difference.

So, with these facts in mind, any responsible government would first of all insist on stringent conditions attached to any foreign aid it gives to a region with such a bad record of misappropriating the aid it receives. A responsible government also would not blindly pledge a percentage of its GDP or billions of taxpayer dollars for foreign aid on a recurring basis without any type of parliamentary debate, where it could be properly scrutinized. Such a commitment would depend on budgeting, fiscal and other obligations that the government has to Canada and that can change at any moment.

This policy apparently was not good enough for Bob Geldof and Bono. They were howling with indignation over Canada’s insistence of properly accounting of any aid given to Africa during the G8 summit in Germany in June. They were in fact falsely accusing Canada of "blocking other G8 countries from making clear targets" in the group's humanitarian aid package to Africa. Instead of looking at all of the facts, the left-wing MSM willingly swallowed this story "hook line and sinker" while the Liberals spun the story, portraying the Conservative government as cold and heartless.

Just sending money to Africa will not by itself reduce the poverty, disease and lack of economic opportunity that many of its inhabitants find itself. Africans need implement reforms in the way their government operates and need to have a mechanism to hold them accountable when they fail to produce results.

The MSM would be better served by promoting the necessary reforms needed in Africa instead of becoming the mouthpiece of entertainers such as, Matt Damon, Bob Geldof and Bono. Their simplistic solution, advocated by many left-wingers, of simply throwing more money at the problem has been tried for 30 years and has failed miserably. So it is now time for a new approach to be tried to combat this problem.

Why I Hate The Left

2007-09-03T08:23:00.000-04:00

I have many friends and acquaintances that are lefties, but what I do disagree with is what they stand for politically. My biggest pet peeve against the left is their “slash and burn” techniques that many of them and their friends in the MSM use whenever anyone presents a reasonable argument against any of the things that they hold dear.

Anyone who disagrees with the indoctrinated views imposed by successive liberal governments over the past 30 years are suddenly labeled extremists, bigots, racists, un-Canadian, etc

Kyoto – Argue against the economic cost or science of Kyoto and you are accused of being the following - “Global warming denier”, “In the pockets of big-oil”, “In bed with the polluters”, “If you are against Kyoto, you not care about our planet and our children’s future”

Universal healthcare vs. Allowing private health-care to exist alongside with public healthcare – “Un-Canadian” (Even though some of the most vocal critics of private health-care have gone to the US or taken family members there for treatment instead of having to wait in the queue like most Canadians), “Trying to turn Canada’s healthcare system into a completely private one like the US” (Even though that is not what most of us are advocating)

Supporting Canadian troops in Afghanistan (Even though it was the Liberals who moved Canadian troops from the relatively safe Kabul to Kandahar and initiated the combat phase of the mission) - “War-monger”, “George Bush’s poodle”, “Anti-Islamic” (despite many Muslims being among the people brutally killed and mutilated by the Taliban and Al-Qaeda)

I have many friends and acquaintances that are lefties, but what I do disagree with is what they stand for.

This comment by one of the readers to my blog symbolizes many of the things that I, as a person to the right of the political spectrum, have against the left.

Yes, I HATE the left;

I hate their moral relativism that puts wicca, paganism and new age Californian crystal power theology on the same footing as Judeo-Christian tradition.

I hate their secular humanism that tries to make faith something to be ashamed of.

I hate the ease with which they use the suffix "...phobe" to stifle any discussion or debate.

I hate their victimhood industry that works to remove all personal responsibility for ones actions. You're in one of the "victim" groups, society made you do it!

I hate their Michael Moores, their Al Gores, their Laurie Davids, their Leonardo DiCaprios who have perfected the selective use of facts to support their do as we say-not as we do agendas.

I hate their influence on the judiciary that has resulted in a softening in sentencing and the removal of the punitive aspect of a prison sentence. Cable TV and taxpayer funded tattoo parlors; now that's hard time.

I hate how all of these left-wing ideas have turned Canadian government into a tax and spend nanny state and Canadian society into a whiny, politically correct subservient population that shies away using the word HATE.

I hate the left and all it stands for and I will not apologize for that.

Piracy or peaceful protest?

2007-09-01T06:58:00.000-04:00

Toronto Sun columnist, Joe Warmington, has an article about the Greenpeace organization's latest stunt. Three Greenpeace activists were arrested for boarding and blocking a coal ship in Lake Erie from delivering its load to a coal plant at Nanticoke. Ontario Police Commissioner, Julian Fantino, referred to this illegal action as "dangerous, despicable and an act of anarchy”

"We will not be silenced by intimidation," Bruce Cox, executive director of Greenpeace Canada, said in a news release.

Excuse me, but who is doing the intimidation? The Greenpeace organization, that has a history of attacking sea vessels, or the OPP commissioner, who has a duty to uphold the law and is justly criticizing “law breakers”? Maybe it is time that this organization takes a serious look at changing the name, Green-peace, as there is nothing peaceful about this one proud organization, that has now been overrun by thugs.

As usual, the "Red" Star and other left leaning media outlets have put a positive spin on their illegal action. What they fail to realize is that power from the Nanticoke generating station is contributing to keeping the light on in their offices and is keeping many of these protestors homes warm during the winter. Hopefully with enough prodding some of these misguided individuals will soon "see the light"

Liberal Leader Stephane Dion calls on Harper to clarify Quebec Nationhood

2007-06-24T17:45:00.000-04:00

Opposition leader, Stephane Dion, is now calling on Prime Minister Stephen Harper to clarify what he means when he says Quebec is a nation.

It is very strange that Mr. Dion is now questioning the wording of a motion that was passed with an overwhelming majority in the House of Commons. Especially since he, Interim Liberal leader Bill Graham and NDP leader Jack Layton, were consulted by the Prime Minister when the motion was being drafted.

…the leaders of the two other federalist parties were consulted on Harper's resolution, as was Liberal leadership candidate Stephane Dion, an academic and battle-hardened Quebec federalist…

The House of Commons passed the motion recognizing Quebec as a nation within Canada on November 26th, 2006 with an overwhelming majority of 266 to 16. It was supported by a majority of MP’s from the Conservatives, Liberals, NDP and Bloc parties.

If Mr. Dion needed clarification on the wording of the motion, which he ended up supporting, why didn’t he seek it at the time he was being consulted? Why is he suddenly asking for clarification seven months later? Is he really being serious or is he just trying to score political points?

Un-elected Senate Passes Kyoto Bill

2007-06-23T09:24:00.000-04:00

Fellow blogger, Unambiguously Ambidextrous, wrote a very interesting article, Stephen Harper Tries To Teach Liberal Party Math, on the constitutional impossibility of the Conservative government complying with the new law passed by the “un-elected senate” that requires the federal government to adhere to Kyoto commitments. It is not a money bill, so it will be difficult to see how the government will be forced to implement it, taking into account the enormous costs estimated by economists to be in the billions of dollars.

According to Jayson Myers, chief economist for the Canadian Manufacturers and Exporters, in a Feb 9th, 2007 article featured in the National Post

"To implement the protocol we need to reduce fossil fuel energy by about 30% in order to get a 30% reduction in emissions and you need to do that in a four -to-five-year period," … "It is impossible to do”

...

"To reduce emissions in Canada by 30% you could eliminate the entire manufacturing sector, you could take all of the cars off the road, and together that would still not close the gap. So anyone who says we can ever meet Kyoto has absolutely no idea what the immensity of this problem actually is."

Mr. Myers also mentioned the staggering costs that Canada would face if it simply goes ahead and buys “emission credits”, as many of the countries in the EU are doing.

"That's $25-billion that's going offshore and is not going to reduce greenhouse gas emissions in Canada, so we lose $25-billion. It's a poor use of money."

Despite revelations such as this from Mr. Myers and other credible economists, the "Un-elected Senate" still went ahead and passed the Kyoto bill, knowing full-well that it would never be accountable to its constituents for the massive cost or significant job-losses that would affect the Canadian economy if it were ever implemented.

The irony of this bill is that it compels the Conservative government to implement a plan in 60 days that the previous Liberal government was not able to do in the 13 years that it was in office. So the true intent of the bill seems to be designed to back the Federal government into a corner and chose between two unpalatable options. They can either ignore it and be accused of snubbing parliament and the constitution, or implement policies that would have such devastating consequences for the Canadian economy and cost our country thousands of jobs, higher taxes and a significant increase in the cost of living.

Fred made a brilliant comment in response to the article that sheds some light on some of the drastic measures that would have to be taken, should PMSH chose to implement policies to reduce Canada’s GHG from its present level of 30% over the 1990 level (Thanks to the Liberals) to 6% below the 1990 level by 2012. I have chosen to include it for the benefit of the readers

This comment is in the form of a hypothetical speach to parliament :)

“Mister Speaker, since the Liberal dominated Senate rushed approval of the Bill, I rise today to announce measures that my government must take to comply with C288, otherwise known as the “Pablo Rodriguez Law of Unintended Consequences”.

In order to comply with the Bill and Kyoto, it is necessary to take some drastic measures to either reduce emissions I Canada. Because it is not a money bill, we cannot buy credits from other signatory nations of the Kyoto Protocol who do not need to reduce their emission but get to sell these credits. We can force ordinary Canadians to use their disposable income to buy the needed credits.

Canada got hosed at Kyoto. Jean Chretien’s Liberal government signed Canada to a treaty that means we must reduce our standard of living in order to comply. Bill 288 further obligates Canada to reduce its economy in order to comply and because of the way the Bill is worded, our Government must achieve the 2008 - 2012 targets within 180 days of the Bill being granted Royal Ascent, so we must act NOW.

I am instructing a number of government department and agencies to enact the following emergency measure so that we can comply with the will of Parliament, or at least the Liberal, NDP and Bloc Quebecois parts of parliament.

1. Immediate shutdown of all coal fired power plants in Canada. We realize that this will hit Ontario very hard – 1/3 of Ontario’s electricity is coal generated, but look on the bright side, the lack of power will also cause the shutdown of thousands of plants and factories, throwing hundreds of thousands out of work. While we are it, we’ll close down all the top ten GhG emitters, as researched by Pollution Probe, listed below:

Rank Company Name Province

1 Ontario Power Generation On
2 Transalta Utilities AB
3 Sask Power SK
4 Alberta Power Corp AB
5 Nova Scotia Power Inc NS
6 Syncrude Canada Ltd. AB
7 Suncor Energy inc. Oil Sands AB
8 EPCOR Generation Inc. AB
9 Petro-Canada AB
10 Dofasco Inc. On

2. Immediate shutdown of the entire Petroleum industry across Canada – we will need to import our oil but we are only going to import oil from countries that will sell us Kyoto Credits. Besides we won’t need gas or oil because we won’t have the money to buy these big GhG emitters.

3. Immediately ban all wood burning fireplaces, charcoal and propane BBQ’s and summer campfires. All recreational vehicles and activities are deemed frivolous and will be banned. Sorry Bombardier, you are jusr screwed. No more skidoos and water jet boats. We are investigating how to ban forest fires as well, but that has its challenges.

4. A 50 cent per litre “GhG Kyoto Credit Buying Tax. Based on recent data that we use about 45 Billion liters of gasoline every year, this new tax revenue should make up the shortfall in general tax revenues caused by the overall collapse of the Canadian economy caused by the cheap political theatrics of the Liberal Party of Canada. It will not make up for the billions in lost income taxes the Federal and Provincial governments will not collect by the 35% contraction of our economy we need to achieve to be Kyoto compliant.

5. We will not be able to afford generous EI support for all the laid off workers because the numbers will reach in the millions. Shutting down the oil sands alone will result in huge job losses in Alberta, but also in Quebec and Ontario, where tens of thousands of workers make the pipes, valves, machinery, trucks, tires, computers and other equipment that would have been purchased had we not put these actions in place to meet the requirements of the “Pablo Rodriguez Law of Unintended Consequences” Bill. Buzz Hargrove is going to be really, really, pissed off at Steffi & his best buddy Pablo “The economy Killer” Rodriguez. Shutting down the transportation industry will also be hard on employment, but we haven’t had time yet to count how many truck drivers there are in Canada, so we can’t tell you yet how many of their jobs will be toast.

6. For the tens of thousands of workers in the Financial sector, we are aware that the mortgage and credit crisis these moves will cause will result in the devastation of your industry as well, but we expect that the Barons of Bay street will be able to salvage a few jobs scamming a few bucks in the International Carbon Credit Trading Market, or as some have come to call it, the Kyoto Hot Air Credit Socialist Money Sucking Ponzi Scheme. Hopefully you will be one of the few out of the tens of thousands Financial Sector workers who will get one of these new jobs – you might even make megatonnes of money.

7. Since there will be a huge rise in the number of corporate and personal bankruptcies, our government will be enacting new legislation to simplify the process. Simply nail a sign to the front door of your home saying “WE QUIT” or for consumer debt, place your cut up credit and bank cards in an envelope and mail them to Pablo Rodriguez. That’s all, no lawyers or courts needed

8. We will also be reducing the size of the federal government payroll by at least 35% to meet the requirement to keep the budget balanced to the new and much lower levels of Federal revenues. That should be a few hundred thousand fewer Civil Servants at the Federal Level and many, many more at the Provincial level. We understand this will devastate the economy of Ottawa, but what the Hell, the rest of Canada doesn’t care about what happens in Moonbat Land sur Rideau, so no worries. To the 150,000 or so Civil Servants who will lose their ticket to the Golden Pension Plan, tough shit.

9. We will be forced to make massive reductions to the Federal government’s transfer of Social Services & Health dollars to the provinces to fit within the new fiscal capabilities of Canada’s Federal government. We will leave it up to individual provinces to decide to close schools or hospitals, or both, or whatever. It’s a provincial responsibility, but at the very least, expect much longer waits for even basic medical service. Since Canada, in addition to using “more than our fair share of Carbon” also uses more than “our fair share of global health care”, it’s about time we cut back, suffered more, did away with excessive health care and just suffered along with the rest of the world.

Its not all bad news. Canada should be able to save a fortune in Immigration costs. We have a forecast from government experts that Canada will go to last place in the quest for skilled immigrant labour. Somehow they don’t want to come to a country with power shortages, no air conditioning, limited winter heating, no jobs a Health Care system modeled on Zimbabwe and a devastated economy. Go figure. The USA and Australia will benefit from these immigrants and their skills.

Mr. Speaker, let me close by thanking the Liberals, especially Mr Chretien who’s stupidity, ego and driving need to buy himself a political “good-guy” legacy got us into this mess, the current Liberal mega green leader Citoyen Dion, the NDP, under the leadership of Jack “Talban” bin Layton, the Bloc Quebecois and their inspired of Gilles “Hairnet” Duceppe for voting for Bill C288. But especially all Canadians want to thank Liberal Pablo Rodriguez for devastating our economy and depressing our standard of living to upper third world status. And of course, all those unelected, self-serving Liberal Senators with a life long lip-lock on the public, taxpayer funded teat would actually have to work for a living instead of sucking the blood of taxpayers like a swarm of malarial mosquitoes.

As we huddle in the cold and swelter in the summer heat, as we stare at our old car we can’t afford to drive, as we fondly remember how hard it was to get out of bed on a Monday morning to go to the job we used to have, we can take pride in being the best-est, wonderful-est, the most moral-est international goody-goody boy scout country supporting the great socialist ponzi scheme called Kyoto and proving we are doing our part to help the planet be saved.

Thank you Mr. Speaker”

Canadian Wheat Board Taking Federal Government to Court

2007-06-22T05:46:00.000-04:00

The Canadian Wheat board is taking the Federal government to court to challenge an end of its monopoly on the sale of barley as of August 1st. Its supporters in the NDP are already expressing delight at this development. This is not surprising, as this party along with the Liberals have always advocated for and supported bloating government bureaucracy at the expense of the free-market.

NDP agriculture critic, Alex Atamanenko ( Southern Interior ) made the following statement:

"Ever since this Conservative government was elected they have been openly hostile in to the Board and have caused nothing but harm and confusion to everyone involved,". "This timely scrutiny by the courts will hopefully cause the government to be a little less heavy handed in future dealings with the Board"

This is despite a democratic vote by Western farmers in the Provinces of Alberta, Saskatchewan, Manitoba and British Columbia to end this monopoly.

Approximately 29,000 votes were cast. Out of this, 48.4 % of farmers voted to end the monopoly and allow Western farmers to market their own barley, but still have the option of marketing through the Canadian Wheat Board. 37.8 % voted to retain the CWB monopoly, while 13.8 % voted to abolish the CWB role in the marketing of barley. This means that approximately 62% of the Western farmers voted to have the option the to independently market their own crops.

By moving to end the CWB monopoly, Federal agriculture minister, Chuck Strah is courageously defending the rights of Western Farmers. For too long, these farmers who assume all the risk in growing and harvesting their own crops have been denied the right to independently market their own crops. It is expecially unfair, when farmers in Eastern and Central Canada are free to do so. There is something inheritantly wrong with a system where many western farmers have been thrown in jail for attempting to do sell their barley independently, when all they want is to get the best price for their products.

For too long many farmers have been complaining of being shortchanged by the CWB not paying them a fair price for their product. Some are complaining that they can get between $4.00 and $4.50 a bushel on the open market, while the CWB is only paying $3.00.

Federal Agriculture Minister, Chuck Strahl

"If you go the prairies right now, I'm telling you, the farmers will tell you what they want is to finally get from the market what's coming to them"

One of the arguments made by the CWB is that they cannot survive as a voluntary marketing agency. MP David Anderson (Cypress Hills – Grasslands) refutes this.

“It would appear that they are either insincere, incompetent, or ignorant: Insincere because they know better but aren’t saying; incompetent because they truly can’t figure it out; or ignorant because they are unaware that prairie farmers already accomplished this feat in the 1920’s”

The CWB manopoly is a system that should have been abolished many years ago. A system that applies 19th century economics, does not belong in the 21st century. Especially one that does not share in the labour of growing and harvesting crops, but has the right to tell the farmers who did all the work in that it knows what is best for them when it comes to marketing their own crops. Hopefully the Federal government will prevail and give the Western farmers the freedom enjoyed by their counterparts in Eastern and Central Canada.

Canada's No-Fly list goes into effect

2007-06-18T08:27:00.000-04:00

Canada’s starts its own version of the no-fly list goes into effect today. There are approximately 1,000 names on this list and anyone who has the misfortune of being on it will be denied boarding on domestic and foreign flights.

Many of its critics have expressed fears, because of problems experienced in the United States with its version, even though it has been in effect since 2001. According to various estimates, the number of names on the American version is between 40,000 and 100,000 names.

About 2 weeks ago, CBS news show, 60 minutes did a feature on issues with this list and they found the following problems.

1. There were many innocent civilians who had the misfortune of having their name on the list, even though they had no connection to any terrorist activity. Several members of congress, including Congressman Don Young, John Lewis and Senator Ted Kennedy have been delayed or denied boarding on flights because their names were on it.

2. There is no transparent system by which one could plead his or her case to have their name removed from the list

3. There was the problem of anyone with the misfortune of having the same name as a suspected terrorist. The airlines only had the name and not much else, no picture, no birth date, so there was no way in which they could distinguish between an innocent person and the suspected terrorist.

Donna Bucella, who runs the FBI’s terrorist screening center, acknowledged that the list was not perfect, but expressed confidence that her department was doing its best to correct it.

“It's like painting a bridge. Once you finish one end, you gotta come back. So we endeavor to get the list as current and accurate and thorough as possible."

Federal Transportation Minister, Lawerence Cannon, has downplayed these concerns and have assured Canadians that they do not have anything to worry about.

"I can assure passengers that they'll be okay. The people who are going to be on this list are convicted terrorists, people who have made threats against both airlines and aircraft and people who have threatened air safety," Cannon said.
"Certainly that's not the case with the vast majority of Canadians."

Passengers over 18 will be required to carry at least one government issued photo ID or two pieces of non-photo ID, that will be screened against the “no fly list” at the airline ticket counter. If their names appear on the list, it will be cross-referenced against the date of birth, address and passport number listed. If there is a difference, the passenger will be cleared to board the flight

Hopefully the implementation of this “no-fly” list will make flying airlines in Canada safer from passengers while minimizing delays and inconvenience that they may experience. Its critics are already predicting long delays at Canada's major airports. Only time will tell how this issue will play out with the Canadian public.

Anti-free-trade protesters in Halifax blame the media for violence

2007-06-17T11:15:00.000-04:00

Organizers of an anti-free-trade protest in Halifax are blaming the media for the violence. According to the organizers, violence was the only way to bring media attention to their cause.

As usual, these groups refuse to accept responsibility for their actions, and the organizer refused to condemn his peers, that were vandalizing buildings and attacking the police

....organizer Pierre Blais says dozens of protesters that hurled paint balls and bottles at buildings and police on Friday weren't part of his group, but he doesn't condemn their actions.

It is time for the judiciary to apply stiff prison sentences to anyone convicted of committing violent acts during a protest, but knowing the weak justice system that we have in Canada, I am not holding my breath.

Culture of Violence

2007-06-16T18:09:00.000-04:00

A little over 2 weeks ago, 15 year-old teenager, Jordan Manners was shot to death inside his school. It was an extremely tragic event, but just the latest chapter to the ever- increasing black-on-black violence that seems to be permeating the city of Toronto. As usual the political opportunists immediately started coming out of the woodwork. "Ban handguns!" chanted Toronto Mayor, David Miller and Ontario Premier, Dalton McGuinty.

Unfortunately this has not worked in countries such as the UK and Australia that have tried it, as a majority of criminals obtain their weapons illegally anyway. It would only serve to deprive the law-abiding citizens of a means of protecting themselves from these thugs.

In several Toronto communities, such as "Jane and Finch" and "Rexdale", its inhabitants have only unwittingly contributed to this problem by refusing to speak to the police. As was witnessed last week, many of them screamed with indignation when the police took very drastic actions against the gangs plaguing their communities in a series of well-coordinated police raids. What the police found was that there ware several females and minors who assisted these gangs by storing its weapons, running drugs for them and acting as lookouts to thwart any police activity. Yet whenever there is a shooting, these same people accuse the police of not doing enough to stem the tide of violence affecting them.

It is time for these communities to make a decision. They need to stop offering protection to these criminals and deprive them of a safe haven. It is only then that will see a break in the culture of violence affecting these communities.