A Fierce American in Toronto, Ontario

March 23, 2005

Oil-for-Food to pay Sevan's legal fees

Mar. 23 - Just when you'd think the leadership of the U.N. might be worried about their image they prove once again that they are better at looking after the interests of their fellow bureaucrats than they are at helping the oppressed peoples of the world: U.N. to Reimburse Sevan for Legal Fees:

Payment for Sevan's legal fees was to come out of the account containing the 2.2 percent of Iraqi oil revenues from the $64 billion program earmarked for its administration, U.N. spokesman Fred Eckhard said.
Sevan's fees are to be reimbursed with Iraqi oil funds set aside to help administer the program. That means Iraq oil money would essentially pay for Sevan to defend himself against charges that he bilked the program.

This is all the more apalling coming as it does on the heels of Kofi Annan's suggestion that developed nations should be levied to support Millenium Development Goals -- the funds for which are to be administered by the U.N.

I'd sooner invest in Enron.

By the way, Belmont Club has a new home and a post on the reforms Kofi Annan has proposed for the U.N. One sentence sums up everything that's wrong with the U.N.:

It is a maxim of the United Nations that progress is achieved by doing everything that never worked all over again.

I believe that is also a definition for insanity.

04:17 From Roger L. Simon, this post links to an article in the Financial Times, Annan son received $300,000 in payments from Cotecna , not the $175,00 that had previously been reported. It would seem some creative bookkeeping may have been at work as "... payments were arranged in ways that obscured where the money came from or whom it went to."

Posted by: Debbye at 02:21 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 301 words, total size 2 kb.

Another bombing in Lebanon

Mar. 23 - I've tried to avoid the implications, but this is the third time a Christian area has been hit with bombs in Beirut: Shopping mall blastÃ‚Â near Beirut killsÃ‚Â three.

I have to conclude that some elements (Hezbollah, Syria?) are trying to incite the same kind of sectarian violence which they failed to do in Iraq. I hope the Lebanese show the same restraint as or chose to fight back as Iraqis have been doing.

Do Lebanese Christians celebrate Easter by the Eastern or Western calendar? I've got a bad feeling about this weekend ...

06:50 - Many thanks to Kateland for answering my question so quickly in the comments. It appears that the majority of Lebanese Christians will celebrate Easter this weekend. (I also think I'm being overly nervous. I'm beginning to have "bad feelings" every holiday, clearly a case of The Other Shoe Syndrome.)

Posted by: Debbye at 12:17 AM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 154 words, total size 1 kb.

March 22, 2005

SSM and the CPC conference

Mar. 22 - The recent Conservative Party of Canada (CPC) policy conference was live-blogged by insiders Stephen Taylor and Hacks and Wonks.

Stephen covers it here and here, covers Stephen Harper's speech here (.pdf text of speech here.) He also covers the Party party here.

Hacks and Wonks covers the conference here and here here and here.

It's worth the time to read both bloggers. They have different styles and observations about the proceedings and the combination of the two adds dimensions and tone.

Two policy issues dominated after the initial procedural kerfuffle. The first was abortion, and the CPC decided not to challenge the current laws.

The other was same-sex marriage, and the CPC's decision to fight it while supporting civil unions has produced a lot of debate in the blogosphere as people decide if they can support a conservative party that does not support same-sex marriage. I've mostly been following the comments and links at Jay Currie's site here and here.

Crafting a position on same-sex marriage is a problem for the Conservative Party. On the one hand, the impetus to merge the Canadian Alliance and Progressive Conservative Party came about largely as a reaction to federal government moves to recognize gay marriage (and, more specifically, to call those unions marriage) and on the other hand, the influence on the party by what are called "so-cons" (i.e., social conservatives) run directly counter the views of hipper, urban conservatives and libertarians who should, by all that's logical, form a strong base of support for the party by Canadians who are tired of the ever-expanding tax load and furious over Adscam yet are strongly committed to human rights.

Ben takes a moderate view and Alan wants government out of marriages altogether. The Monger makes a good case for the 40% muggers (in a post about taxes, not SSM.)

Gay marriage is just not the big issue for me right now. I guess it's the curse of being an American and having American issues on my mind, but I'm still more worried about Islamofascists who want to kill gays than arguing over the designation of what to call legalized gay relationships.

I do hate the phrase "civil union," though. It is sterile, and fails to acknowledge the deep committment and love between gay couples.

I will state outright that I am annoyed that proponents keep pushing the notion that calling gay unions anything other than marriage is somehow an instance of "separate but equal" -- a barely disguised effort to connect this issue to the civil rights movement in the 60's -- but which displays either ignorance about or indifference to the institutionalized inequality of African-Americans in some states.

As those of us who were actually alive back then remember, "equal" was hardly a description of the public institutions and facilities made available to African-Americans who lived in states with Jim Crow laws (and in Northern urban areas.) There were also the matters of little or no police investigations into lynchings and the rapes of black women, being denied the right to vote, and being denied protection and due process under the law.

So unless it can be demonstrated that the designation "civil union" (or a more agreeable term) means fewer benefits, legal rights and protections, I am unconvinced that the failure to alter the ancient definition of marriage equals bigotry (nor can I deny there are some extremely homophobic voices raised against gays as well as gay marriage. That's the real pity and has clouded the debate somewhat.)

Posted by: Debbye at 11:03 PM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 598 words, total size 5 kb.

1 Sorry, totally off topic but I don;t see email and if I put it in an old post I didn;t know if you'd see it. Anyway, it's good news in Iraq: BAGHDAD, Iraq, March 22 - Ordinary Iraqis rarely strike back at the insurgents who terrorize their country. But just before noon today, a carpenter named Dhia saw a troop of masked gunmen with grenades coming towards his shop and decided he had had enough. etc http://www.nytimes.com/2005/03/22/international/middleeast/22cnd-iraq.html?ex=1269147600&en=4fab5dc83f59b0ae&ei=5090&partner=rssuserland

Posted by: Jay at March 23, 2005 02:40 AM (PuNh2)

2 Hi Jay - Great minds think alike - I just posted a reference in the above post. The courage of everyday Iraqis, as well as that of their security forces, is incredibly inspiring. Those who take liberty for granted can learn a thing or two from them.

Posted by: Debbye at March 23, 2005 03:22 AM (Gf7j8)

3 And if the semantics of what to call committed relationships was all that was at stake I would agree with you. "Homosexuality", however, was illegal in this country through the period of the American civil rights movement you describe. Men were wired up to the "fruit machine" (I am not making this up) and hounded from the civil service, chased off a cliff in the town I grew up in (that would be the country's capital... downtown), and subject to systematic discrimination I hope I do not have to detail. If, 40 years after the civil rights movement, African-Americans were entitled to "civil unions" and not "marriages" and hey it's only a word then there might be a comparison with the fights of gay Canadians. As it stands, gay Canadians are only now enjoying that right and we have a major political party that wants to take it away. So. Frankly. There is no comparison.

Posted by: Flea at March 23, 2005 07:42 PM (qsAvw)

4 Thanks for the plug. T'was a fun weekend. Can't wait for the next one.

Posted by: The Hack at March 24, 2005 01:41 PM (EgLuH)

5 You're welcome, Hack. Flea, I am not now nor will ever deny that gays were persecuted both by the law and by homophobes which back then ranged from the political left to the right. But gays were not subject to instutionalized, legalized second-class status because they were intentionally forced to be invisible (at least until the Stonewall Riots in 1969.) They were not sent to separate schools, forced to live in separate parts of their towns and cities, and ordered to the back of the bus. Another example: African-Americans were not allowed to stay in "white" hotels under Jim Crow laws. If there was no "colored" hotel, they had to find shelter in private homes. Again, there was a lot of "separate" but little "equal." The invisibility of gays was a different kind of curse and "coming out of the closet" was a joyous and self-affirming act even though it carried grave risks. I guess it comes down to the fact that for me, the definition of marriage is a civil union between a man and a woman. It stems from the same reasoning by which I call my children "sons" rather than "progeny," "offspring" or "issue" (unless I'm being sarcastic.) I'm not so intransigent on the matter, though, that I wouldn't support or oppose a political leader strictly on the basis of calling the union marriage either, although I would not support them were they to oppose extending full benefits and rights to gay couples and, to bring this full circle, it is the fact that full spousal benefits and rights will be enjoyed by gay couples, and it is that which denies the "separate but equal" meaning from the civil rights era. Sorry, really tired but wanted to try to answer you. Reserving right to clarify muddled thoughts and sentences!

Posted by: Debbye at March 24, 2005 03:40 PM (Iy8+M)

6 BLOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGGSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSSS!!!!

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 24, 2005 04:39 PM (t+KkC)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

March 20, 2005

Spring and the TTC

Mar. 20 - It's officially spring. It's been a pleasure to see the beginnings of dawn as I leave work and view full rosy dawn as the subway pulls out of Kipling station.

I can glare at the snow banks and think You Are Doomed! Doomed!

On a dour note, is it just me or has TTC service really sucked lately?

I hope the drivers aren't indulging in a little pre-strike action of their own. I think, given the chance, most riders would gladly dump the members of the Transit Commission. We'd even burn them in effigy if service would improve as a result.

Just some thoughts as I prepare to start my work week (which starts in a little over an hour.)

Posted by: Debbye at 09:08 PM | Comments (30) | Add Comment
Post contains 131 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Debbye, you Americans are altogether too violent a people. Just look at your own language. "I think, given the chance, most riders would gladly dump the members of the Transit Commission. We'd even burn them in effigy if service would improve as a result." Now this is not far from the literal truth for many Iraqi civilians, women and children that actually are incinerated almost daily in Iraq as the American Occupation grinds into its third year. Then consider how this violence abroad that Americans experience, finds its way home, as it did tragically in Minnesota earlier today. http://www.cbc.ca/story/world/national/2005/03/21/minnesota050321.html The headline reads: "10 dead in U.S. school shooting" The article goes on to report the following: "RED LAKE, MINN. - At least 22 people have been killed or injured after a gunman went on a shooting spree in northern Minnesota. At least eight were shot and killed at Red Lake High School on Monday afternoon. Two others, a man and a woman, were found dead inside a home in the community." The article continues: "Monday's incident is the worst school shooting in the United States since two teens went on a killing rampage at Columbine High School in Littleton, Colorado, killing 12 students and a teacher and wounding 23 before killing themselves, on April 20, 1999." It is profoundly sad that so many young people should have to die because the US Government is incapable of protecting its own citizens at home. None of these young people died at the hands of international terrorists. They died at the hands of the NRA gun lobbyists in Washington. I wish to express my profound sadness and condolences to thinking Americans that have to keep viewing these tragedies without any hope of ever stopping this violence in American society. I cannot erase from my mind Charleton Heston boasting about the rifle in his "cold dead hands" when I think of these dead youngsters who died almost before their lives began. As John Kerry said of his friend who died in Vietnam, "What a goddamn waste".

Posted by: Joe Green at March 21, 2005 10:18 PM (5dXW9)

2 "I wish to express my profound sadness and condolences..." But, of course, this is bullshit, isn't it, Joe? If you were sincere, you would not have jumped at the opportunity to use the tragedy to advance your WeAreNotCowards! protests. By the way, Einstein, the guns he used were reported by the police to belong to his grandfather, a tribal police officer. Of course, Canada has no murders or mass murders, right? Oops. PS: I just knew that either you or BG would start a hatefest over this. It is just the perfect ingredient for a Canadian HateAmerica rant. Thanks for sharing, Joe. I can always count on at least one Canadian to embarrass his country at this blog.

Posted by: mikem at March 21, 2005 11:21 PM (EzNXf)

3 Joe: How did you get from crappy TTC service to a high school (and family) massacre? As for burning someone in effigy, isn't this the routine tactic for the looney left at their demonstrations? Apparently you don't see the irony in criticizing the U.S. for being violent mere weeks after the RCMP suffered its biggest loss (four officers murdered)since its formation.

Posted by: John B at March 22, 2005 10:50 AM (ju7Wp)

4 "UGGGGGGGHHHHHH-" *SPLURT* "OH GOD YOUR FACE, YOUR FACE"

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 22, 2005 11:22 AM (t+KkC)

5 Argument #10,774 against the existence of comment boxes on the internet appears to be in progress. . . . .

Posted by: SparcVark at March 22, 2005 11:29 AM (X7hb0)

6 Well obviously if Redwing Minnesota had it's own TTC this never would have happened. Or maybe the student was upset about "Just some thoughts as I prepare to start my work week (which starts in a little over an hour.)"? "I wouldn't have to shoot all these kids if only they didn't make people in Canada work so much!"

Posted by: Jay at March 22, 2005 12:42 PM (PuNh2)

7 SparkVark, you rule! Good work, Mike and Jay. There is a clear connection between Toronto bus service, Canadian working conditions, and the Minnesota shootings. I blame Karl Rove. Exactly, John B. Glass houses indeed. Joe, are one strange dude. I must post more often or you will be forced to twist posts to find an anti-American angle. As for the TTC Commission, I really hope they have a lovely time in Rome because I was worried they recently raised my fares to improve service or meet contract demands by the drivers. But you missed the true target: my gloating over the imminent demise of the snow banks, which I'm pleased to report are retreating steadily in the face of relentless spring weather. Their days are numbered, yet not one word of protest from Joe or Blackglasses about American imperialism and the imposition of Western values on a reluctant Winter. Where are the human shields? Maybe they're silent because the snow banks are under assault from a multilateral coalition of Northern Hemisphere nations, so the violence inflicted by shovels is alright because France doesn't object. Alas, the coalition doesn't include Australia which has chosen to go it alone and will confront Winter without her Anglosphere allies or U.N. approval. Tsk tsk.

Posted by: Debbye at March 22, 2005 06:33 PM (Gf7j8)

8 I THINK SO YES!!! NOT HAVING ANY IDEA WHAT WE'RE DISCUSSING!!!! DONGS????? EXHAUSTED REALLY QUITE TIRED HURRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRGGGG TIRED! COCTEAU TWINS?

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 22, 2005 07:04 PM (t+KkC)

9 Debbye wrote: "But you missed the true target: my gloating over the imminent demise of the snow banks, which I'm pleased to report are retreating steadily in the face of relentless spring weather." So sorry Yankee, you make terrible, terrible mistake! We just let you think you were melting the snow banks, while we were actually planning a major counter-offensive. The largest this winter. The fresh snow has been falling all day throughout Canada as we move to reclaim the True North Strong and Free --- and ah White. Latest reports show that our tactics have succeeded beyond everyone's wildest imagination as Yankees are fleeing the fresh onslaught of the Canadian counter-offensive. American multinationals are leaving in droves as flights from Pearson have been backlogged for days, while the Canadians press on with their attack. One right wing newsblog interviewed the Canadian Chief of Staff and asked how did such a brilliant counter attack succeed so brilliantly. The General said that this was a rerun of the Battle of Stalingrad where the Germans showed up with light summer garb to face the Russian Winter that Khruschev and the Ukrainians were about to unleash upon them. While Yankees were slip sliding away in Toronto's Pearson Airport, Canadian combat troops, fully armed with shovels and mittens and armed to the teeth with fully rated felt boots, pressed the attack. Over a foot of snow in just a couple of hours; it was impressive and warmed the heart. The Yankees are falling back and hoping to regroup in Hawaii. The Canadian battle cry was "remember New Orleans!" as they bombed American positions with snowballs that size of grapefruits. Meanwhile the Canadian airborne parachuted into Pearson Airport, fully armed and fully equipped with snowshoes. The commanding colonel told the press that "we are here to stay, and we want to make sure they leave and don't come back until they have developed a proper respect for the snow at the heart of Canada's sovereignty. He then told the Yankees that the newsconference was over and they had to get their asses over to Terminal Two where hot meals were being served to all "detainees". The colonel said he was tempted to leave them in the snow banks, but that he did not want countries like Israel accusing Canada of torture.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 22, 2005 08:53 PM (5dXW9)

10 So Rubert, aka "Joe Green", exactly how many pseudonyms do you write under anyway? BTW, it is time consult your physician to increase/decrease the dose. Whatever you are taking now does not appear to be working.

Posted by: Flea at March 23, 2005 12:10 AM (HiNQV)

11 Fleabag wrote: "So Rubert, aka "Joe Green", exactly how many pseudonyms do you write under anyway?" Answer = none. Joe Green is my real name. Can you say as much? Thought so. Coward.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 23, 2005 12:26 AM (5dXW9)

12 Mikey said: ""I wish to express my profound sadness and condolences..."" "But, of course, this is bullshit, isn't it, Joe?" No, I meant what I wrote. If you have been reading what I write, you will know that I have condemned all killings. In your schools, in Iraqi schools, in Washington suburbs, in Baghdad suburbs. Its a great pity that you are so cynically wrapped up as Churchill would have observed; "a riddle wrapped up in an enigma". Churchill was referring to the Soviet Union, but it applies equally to the new Fascists in Amerika. Now, let me walk you through this Mikey, so open your eyes, and listen up. This is a political blog where people surf in from all over the world to post their opinions about political issues that Debbye in her wisdom leads off with.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 23, 2005 12:34 AM (5dXW9)

13 "...you will know that I have condemned all killings." Oh, really now? I just now posted a response to your passionate demand that Terri Schiavo be killed to save American democracy. Bad timing for your bullshit, Joe. The fact that you don't even understand the inappropriateness of your using the recent tragedy to advance your HateAmerica views is no surprise. Way over the average 'civilized' Canadians head. "Amerika"... How cute, Joe. I can't tell you how many times I have smirked at seeing "Canaduh" used, but I personally do not use it, not wanting to be associated with such childishness. I see you view yourself differently.

Posted by: mikem at March 23, 2005 12:50 AM (EzNXf)

14 Mikey wrote: ""...you will know that I have condemned all killings."" "Oh, really now? I just now posted a response to your passionate demand that Terri Schiavo be killed to save American democracy. Bad timing for your bullshit, Joe." You obviously do not have much reading comprehension. If you did, you would know that I have condemned this entire circus created by Republicans that have made the US Congressional system the laughing stock of the democratic free world. And you would also know that I do not support ending Terri's "life" through dehydration and starvation in this manner. My view, is that Jeb Bush failed to provide moral and political leadership in this issue by simply arranging matters so that the State would ensure that "brain dead" individuals like Terri would be cared for until they die of other natural causes, under the care of doctors who adhere to the hypocratic oath. I do not support Euthanasia either, and I do not support any idea of "getting it over with" as long as doctors can be sure that she feels no pain or suffering. If doctors are not sure they should try to do the best they can to control pain and suffering, and we need to leave difficult medical matters to them in deciding questions of medication, pain control and natural dying processes. In my view, its vital that doctors not be ever put in the position of "ending life", but rather they should keep trying their best to save Terri's life and heal her if they can. Its just that for Terri, the odds are very long indeed. Now Jeb Bush did not do that because like his brother he prefers a circus to a sound and ethical policy. Furthermore I do not agree with pseudo Christian heretics like Jerry Falwell who make up all kinds of stories about how Terri is "smiling" or doing any of the things that would contradict the hard medical evidence in this case. Why is it so hard for Falwell and other American fundamentalist Republicans to preach on Sunday that those who "sin" are "dead" and then not accept that Terri is also "dead"? I say the reason is that they are the same type of hypocrites that Jesus drove from the Temple. I also think that the Republicans have done a terrible amount of harm to Terri's family and to her husband. They have done things in a way that does not end their emotional suffering and grief. That, even the UN would recognize as a form of "torture". Had Jeb Bush done his job, the millions that have been pissed away on legal processes would have been avoided, and the tens of millions more wasted by the Congress would have all been avoided. There could have at least been some peace for Terri's parents and siblings, and her husband would have been able to get on with his life because Euthanasia is not, and should not be lawfully available to them, and ending his wife's "life" through asphixiation, dehydration or starvation would not be on the table as it now is. The lawyers and the politicians have removed an ethical outcome, which was to care for Terri until she died of natural causes, NOT for Terri's sake, but for our own as a civilization. I expect that is too hard a concept for you to grasp Mikey, but that was my actual position. Governor Bush should have simply brought forth a process that avoided this issues, paid the bill for Terri's care, and then defended his position that in these circumstances it was less costly then supporting the circus that has now been winding through the US Courts for the past seven years. But he lacked compassion and he lacked common sense. I guess, being American, you do not study ethics to the same extent as other people in other countries.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 23, 2005 01:57 PM (5dXW9)

15 Joe, sometimes I just plain feel sorry for you. This is one of those times. You obviously gave a great deal of thought to how to extricate yourself from the taint of your previous comment on Schiavo in which you quite clearly condemn the efforts to save her life. Today you think it is an outrage that she is being starved to death (good for you!), but try to find a way to lay it all on a Bush head (any Bush will do?) by condemning Jeb Bush for not 'interfering' earlier, which is precisely what you blast the other Bush and Congress for doing. You are so clearly trying to find a way to condemn Republicans regardless of the outcome, regardless of what they would do, that you could easily be convicted of using her struggle to live as political fodder just as you did with the massacre. You say America is a laughing stock because Congress gave voice to its concerns, but you condemn Jeb Bush for not 'creating a process to avoid' all this. What the hell are you talking about? Did you chuckle at your 'cleverness' in coming up with this? Any chance that, in your eyes, the "process" would be any less of a "laughing stock", that democracy and the system would be any less circumvented than you are already condemning America for? Just how and where should Jeb Bush have taken the issue away from the courts and met your approval, given your melodramatic predictions of the end of democracy for what George Bush and Congress have done so far? I carefully read your post, more than once since it did not have a logical thread to it. Your intent seems to be to condemn whatever a Republican does, or did not do earlier, to save this woman's life, while at the same time stating that her life should be spared. WTF? And please, I'm 51 and have had decades of listening to people condemn the people who are actually doing something and then demanding that 'a process be created' that will solve the problem without hurting anyone's feelings. But they never actually have a solution, just a mysterious miraculous process that only the enlightened can see (and need not share). That this should be the centerpiece of your attack on Republicans just adds to my sadness over a piece you obviously put a lot of work into. For ethics, I'll say this, I don't think Schiavo should be killed on the word of a greedy ex-husband. And I don't care who saves her or how, short of violence. Your ethics revolve around Republicans being the ones who are trying to save her and how they are trying to do it. I'll live with my ethics. You should work yours down from politics to basic justice.

Posted by: mikem at March 23, 2005 03:25 PM (EzNXf)

16 mikem wrote: "You say America is a laughing stock because Congress gave voice to its concerns, but you condemn Jeb Bush for not 'creating a process to avoid' all this. What the hell are you talking about?" There actually was nothing for Jeb Bush to "create". All the tools exist already where the Government of Florida already has the power and authority to effectively take over the role of guardianship over Terri and it has had that authority for at least fifteen years. There was nothing required of Mr. Bush, except to discharge his responsibilities as governor. In fact one reporter pointedly asked Mr. Bush how come it took fifteen years for the government of Florida to act. Bush answered that they has just now assembled all the information. I say that Jeb is a liar like his brother. Don't ask for whom the bell tolls, for it tolls for thee. You are essentially for all your 51 years, basically a moral cripple. I say that not because of your support for the Republicans, but for your evasions as a "neocon". You make excuses when you should have clear and unambiguous answers. You not only persist in misrepresenting what others have said (as was the case above) but you continue to evade the morale core of this issue with Terri's "life". Furthermore, you just cannot get past your principle mode of thinking, which is to find someone to blame, such as the husband in this case. Has it never occurred to you that he must be facing an almost impossible and endless emotional pain, to do what was right for his wife, to come to terms with her loss, to face the lies and libels and slanders thrown against him, and to somehow find a way forward, to somehow find a way past the bitterness that Terri's situation has visited upon the entire family? There are Conservatives in the US I expect who actually are compassionate, but the "neocons" that have created this circus are not among them. They simply latched onto Terri's tragedy for political gain, and now it appears that might backfire with the public as well as the courts. And if that happens, and if Jeb Bush fails to do what he should have done fifteen years ago, or five years ago, then indeed America will be a laughing stock, that the Bush Family will have delivered the black eye that your country would rightly deserve. Finally, go back and read everything I have written and then try to tell me what was there that I had to extracate myself from. Let me suggest to you that the correct answer is "nothing". I was right about this matter from the beginning, because I took a position that the Vatican agrees with, and which the Democrats partially agree with and which decent Republicans would agree with. The only bunch that strongly disagree with me are Joe McCarthy's Republican "neocons" like you. Why am I not surprised?

Posted by: Joe Green at March 23, 2005 05:42 PM (5dXW9)

17 "There actually was nothing for Jeb Bush to "create". All the tools exist already where the Government of Florida already has the power and authority to effectively take over the role of guardianship over Terri and it has had that authority for at least fifteen years." You are blowing smoke and hoping no one calls you on it. Just what are the "tools" (the mysterious tools now replaces the "bring forth a process") that you say Bush should have used 15 years ago? You expended a lot of energy explaining how immoral various Republicans are for not implementing these miraculous tools and processes. How about you expend a few lines and describe what you are proposing so we can determine if it is possible? I suspect you have not because you are blowing smoke. Prove me wrong. Are you proposing that the government intervene immediately and early and take over all brain damage cases from the affected families? So far, that is what you seem to be hinting at but certainly you can't expect that to be a solution to the problem, or do you? Inform us. You are talking like John Kerry. Criticize everyone who are trying to do something and then offer some nebulous miracle solution that you cannot reveal. What Solomonic opportunity did the Republicans pass up 15 years ago that would have solved this problem?

Posted by: mikem at March 23, 2005 08:33 PM (EzNXf)

18 According the the Governor, during a press conference, that was attended by other officials of the State of Florida, there exists a committee or a commission for the protection of vulnerable adults in the State of Florida. That commission always had jurisdiction to act in cases like Terri's. Terri case is not very complicated. The husband's evidence is that Terri would not have wanted to live as a vegetable. Terri's parents want to keep her alive under any circumstances and are prepared to do it if granted the "right" to do so. Clearly the husband and the parents are "conflicted". The State should have intervened in court, and stated their position that NEITHER husband nor parents should have legal guardianship, but it should have passed to a state official. That official should have simply issued instructions that would have provided for Terri's care until she died of natural causes. Withholding food, water and other essentials of life in Canada is a CRIMINAL OFFENCE. It should also be so in the US for very similar reasons in common law. Terri would have eventually died of some cause over which the doctors had no control. Its absolutely essential that doctors not be asked to assist anyone in a "merciful killing". That is because Euthanasia itself is wrong. Let me put it this way. Humane killing of pets, dogs, cats, and other animals is required of us as civilized persons. But we are not to engage in the humane killing of our own species. That is for nature, not doctors to decide, as long as doctors are able to control the pain and suffering. In practice, the doctors may require very large doses of painkillers to control the pain, but that is not the same thing as mercy killing. As for Jeb Bush, he as governor had all the tools he needed to have provided Terri with the care she needed, and to have provided a humane and also a legal answer to this family. And he could have accomplished it at a fraction of the cost required to run the circus of lawyers, experts, judges and courts that this court has seen, to say nothing of the public costs of legislatures, congress and the senate and of course President Bush's midnight helicopter flights to sign the bill into law. The tens of millions of dollars wasted on this case would have paid for the care of a dozen cases like Terri's in Florida. It would have given the public a better feeling, it would have been much better for Terri's family and even for her husband who would have been freed of the responsibilities of being Terri's legal guardian. But then, these "neocons" would not have been able to turn this into a "pro-life" circus for political gain. Indeed, one reporter did ask Jeb Bush why he waited fifteen years to act? Bush answered that all the information he required did not come together until the last few days. I say he's a liar like his brother in the White House. Just have a look at the interviews with the Bush Bros. on CNN, it paints a pretty clear and graphic picture of an inept and incompetent pair of politicians.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 23, 2005 09:04 PM (5dXW9)

19 That is it? That the state of Florida should have demanded that a judge grant it guardianship of Terri Schiavo because the family members were in conflict? Would you want the state (and state taxpayers) to decide whether you live or die? How would a judge justify taking custody away from family and handing it over to the state without a finding of abuse, neglect or abandonment? We don't allow the state to do such things. You have raised a solution that is not possible in America and I can see why you were reluctant to reveal your 'obvious' solution. It is also decidedly NOT a tool or process available to Jeb Bush, now or then. I guess he could have asked. He could also ask for 'the right of kings' to decide all manner of citizen issues that are complicated. Â“Terri case is not very complicated. The husband's evidence is that Terri would not have wanted to live as a vegetable. Terri's parents want to keep her alive under any circumstances and are prepared to do it if granted the "right" to do so.Â” This is not true. It is very complicated. You saying it is not does not change that. Terri's husband made no mention of Terri expressing a 'living will' desire to him in court. His testimony in fact was quite the opposite. That Terri needed a large award to provide for a lifetime of medical care. It is only after the lawsuit was won and the money guaranteed that saint michael suddenly decided that she would have wanted to die after all. Isn't that suspicious to you? It stinks to high heavens. And only one judge has decided on facts, the first judge. All other rulings have been jurisdictional and technical. You also falsely state that her parents Â“want to keep her alive under any circumstancesÂ”. They want her to have rehabilitative therapy that saint michael has forbidden. They don't trust saint michael's suddenly awakened memories that she expressed, to him alone, a desire to die under these circumstances. They have stated that if Terri had expressed such a desire, they would honor it. But she didn't. You were right to try to hide the 'obvious' solution that Jeb Bush should have put into use. It doesn't exist, at least not in this or most cases. No judge is going to hand over custody of a family member to the state unless there is evidence of abuse, neglect etc. Your unnamed Â“solutionÂ” was just a pathetic attempt to get political mileage out of a tragedy and blame Republicans somehow, somewhere no matter how this turned out.

Posted by: mikem at March 23, 2005 11:05 PM (EzNXf)

20 Mikey wrote: "That is it? That the state of Florida should have demanded that a judge grant it guardianship of Terri Schiavo because the family members were in conflict?" Had Terri's case surfaced in ANY Canadian jurisdiction in Queen's Bench, where family members were conflicted like this, the judge would have had the option to exercise his unfettered discretion and appoint the "public guardian" for Terri. All he would have required was evidence that the parents and the husband could not agree on what was best for Terri. In Alberta for example, the legal processes are almost "automatic" but the end result is very different and that is because the "neocons" do not believe in anything like "pro-life" positions. Had they gained control over Terri in Alberta, she would have been dead in a could of weeks. The problem in Alberta is not with the Courts, or the law, the actual problem exists with an evil and corrupt "neocon" government. But that is a different issue.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 24, 2005 03:47 PM (5dXW9)

21 Mikey wrote: "You have raised a solution that is not possible in America and I can see why you were reluctant to reveal your 'obvious' solution. It is also decidedly NOT a tool or process available to Jeb Bush, now or then. I guess he could have asked." So finally, you are conceding my point that Terri is actually a victim of the American Constitution and that most unfortunate and illegal rebellion in 1776. The solution I put forward flows straight out of the common law that WAS available to Americans before their nutty notions of "checks and balances". Just look at what has been created in Terri's case. No one it seems, can keep her alive or has the authority to do something as simple as feeding a helpless and innocent woman. When it comes to obtaining stays of execution for criminals, there is no shortage of procedures and lawyers. But for Terri, it would seem that the entire country has gone mad, from the lawyers, to the Courts, to the Florida Legislature and its inmates, to the Federal Congress, the Senate and the President. None of them have the power it would appear under your misbegotten Constitution to feed a helpless woman and give her water. Jesus when he was dying on the Cross, cried out "I thirst". And they gave him vinegar. Genuine Christians, (not the pseudo American ones) believe that Jesus died for our sins. Clearly Terri is also going to die because of the sins of her fellow citizens in Florida and the US.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 24, 2005 03:57 PM (5dXW9)

22 Hey joe: You know that song "Screaming at a Wall" by Minor Threat? You're acting it out when you try to talk to mikem. Seriously. No matter how valid and intelligent your points are, he'll just start calling everyone anti-semites and go on about "CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADIANS" in the hopes of derailing the conversation praying that you don't notice how dumb he really and truly is. PS MIKEM: How's the jizzy face going, piss bucket? My dick rubbing offer still stands!

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 24, 2005 04:42 PM (t+KkC)

23 So finally we corner Joe Green to identify the 'process and tools' that Jeb Bush ignored, for which Joe lambasted the entire Republican leadership for not employing and it turns out to be CANADIAN, not American. What a waste of time it was to actually assign some credibility to your 'facts' for the last few days. Your dishonesty (or stupidity, I guess you might have just mixed up countries) is pitiful. Your Canadian process has a decidedly Canadian flavor to it. If we are to believe Joe again, Canadians have decided to allow the state to make decisions of life and death for their loved ones. We can see the philosophy behind this in their foreign policy and even their day to day affairs. Better to look away from a loved one's troubles and pain. Make the state responsible for those pain in the ass, "What would my mother want us to do for her?" questions. Just turn away, turn it over (to the state) and walk away. Decidedly Canadian. Let someone else take responsibility. Let someone else do the painful emotional work. Better we just don't get involved in it. That way no one will be mad at us. Utterly Canadian way of looking at the world and now shamefully, at family responsibilities. "...Terri is actually a victim of the American Constitution and that most unfortunate and illegal rebellion in 1776." Proud of this one, Joe? Did you think that such shameful pomposity and cruelty was going to make me angry and give your fellow Canadians a temporary respite from their chronic inferiority complex? It doesn't. It makes me proud to be American and not YOU. "their nutty notions of "checks and balances" Those nutty Americans and their stupid checks and balances on government. Only an idiot American would not see the value of unbridled power. (1938 Germans would have agreed wholeheartedly with you, Joe. Way to take lessons from the losers.) Your entire post is self lampooning.

Posted by: mikem at March 24, 2005 08:28 PM (EzNXf)

24 CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADIANS TOTAL LINES: 14 TOTAL CANADA COUNT: 7 MIKEM HAS CANADA ON THE BRAIN!!!!! Perhaps he secretly desires Canada! (The same way anti-gay activists want hott hott men) SO, YOU'RE A CLOSET CANADIAN, EH MIKEM? Come on out!! OUT OF THE CLOSETS, INTO THE STREETS!!! PS: I have now taken your post and changed the nationality. It's funnier. HERE: So finally we corner Joe Green to identify the 'process and tools' that Jeb Bush ignored, for which Joe lambasted the entire Republican leadership for not employing and it turns out to be AMERICAN SAMOAN, not American. What a waste of time it was to actually assign some credibility to your 'facts' for the last few days. Your dishonesty (or stupidity, I guess you might have just mixed up countries) is pitiful. Your SAMOAN process has a decidedly SAMOAN flavor to it. If we are to believe Joe again, SAMOANS have decided to allow the state to make decisions of life and death for their loved ones. We can see the philosophy behind this in their foreign policy and even their day to day affairs. Better to look away from a loved one's troubles and pain. Make the state responsible for those pain in the ass, "What would my mother want us to do for her?" questions. Just turn away, turn it over (to the state) and walk away. Decidedly SAMOAN. Let someone else take responsibility. Let someone else do the painful emotional work. Better we just don't get involved in it. That way no one will be mad at us. Utterly SAMOAN way of looking at the world and now shamefully, at family responsibilities. "...Terri is actually a victim of the American Constitution and that most unfortunate and illegal rebellion in 1776." Proud of this one, Joe? Did you think that such shameful pomposity and cruelty was going to make me angry and give your fellow SAMOANS a temporary respite from their chronic inferiority complex? It doesn't. It makes me proud to be American and not YOU. PPS: Mikem's writing style is absolutely terrible. He obviously cuts and pastes in MS Word before hand, but it can't hide the fact that at best he's a hack with an introductory level writers craft course behind(Final grade: D-. TOO PURPLE!).

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 25, 2005 03:20 PM (t+KkC)

25 I have read this latest angry rant from Mikey, and I think what he wishes to actually express is a kind green jealousy of a peaceful neighbouring country that is a much better place to live than what he and his fellow Americans have been able to achieve with unbridled greed, corruption and automatic weapons that killed and injured another 22 students, teachers, family members and others in the "American family" this week. He also says that I do not "understand" how powerless the Bush Clan really is to save Terri's life. Because I somehow am applying "Canadian Values" to an "American Problem". Well, let me simply suggest that the Bush Clan are hypocrites without the slightest interest in Terri or her family; this is about pandering to the lowest common denominator in the American electorate. The Bush Clan want to be telling the heretics in the American psuedo Christian Churches that Republicans care about the "right to life" issues, while American Republican Judges kill Terri with their negligence and what Ayn Rand would admire as their "cold reason". The cold however is the cold of a Komodo Dragon, its fangs dripping with venom, not that of any sound and reasoned human thought.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 25, 2005 06:13 PM (5dXW9)

26 Mikey wrote: ""their nutty notions of "checks and balances"" "Those nutty Americans and their stupid checks and balances on government. Only an idiot American would not see the value of unbridled power." I never advocated "unbridled power" in any single person's hands. The Canadian Prime Minister for example, lives minute by minute "at the pleasure" of his caucus, which can end his job without any delay or process to speak of. The Americans are the ones that have invested their President with unchecked power, with nuclear weapons, and with the ability to wage war on other countries, with or without proper authority of the people and by the people, as the Constitution calls for, but which no one actually follows in Washington, except perhaps for elderly Senator Byrd. Consider the nature of the circus that the Bush Brothers brought to the American people this week. The Congress passed a law (not a resolution, but a "law") that was to provide for the continued care for a vulnerable adult in Florida. The Senate passed a law. The President signed a law. The Florida Governor always had the authority to take Terri into protective custody, but declined to use it. All these Republicans are claiming to be on the side of the "right to life", while Republican Judges all refuse to recognize the clear and very specific legislation passed by Congress, the Senate and approved by the President. The Republicans on the Supreme Court demonstrated their "legal courage", by refusing to actually consider these "new facts" in the case, since the "voice of the people" does not matter very much in the US. It kind of reminds me how their conduct reflected Saddam hiding in his spider hole. At least this part of the story is clear, however; Republicans never did give a shit about the "voice of the people". Then they are all going to wring their hands and tell the world how there was nothing more that could be done. Jesus would have condemned them all as hypocrites. As do I. As do I. What a pity that Martha Stewart and poor Terri were not Canadians because these vile injustices would have never befallen them in Canada. A flawed constitution written by wild eyed revolutionaries, radicals, cut-throats, and other social degenerates in the seventeenth century is what lay behind the injustices visited upon both these women.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 25, 2005 06:34 PM (5dXW9)

27 Congress voted and authorized both wars...oops, Joe Green caught bullshiting again. There is no process for the government to take custody away from any family, without a finding of neglect, abuse or abandonment. Remember yesterday when you had to cite Canadian law in answer to my question?... oops Joe Green caught bullshitting again. Your favored Senator Robert Byrd, Einstein, is a retired Klu Klux Klansman, for real. Don't you feel like an idiot after having used the juvenile "Amerika" spelling, now that you have shown your approval of the real thing? No, of course not. It would take self awareness. Your sarcastic references to religion and finally, the utter hatred shown by your repeatedly trying to make comedy out of this tragedy with ridiculous references to centuries old events, all this does is just shame your fellow Canadians. Whatever chuckles you get out of this hateful comedy of yours, I hope at some point you become aware of what you are doing and reexamine what kind of man you wish to be.

Posted by: mikem at March 25, 2005 09:28 PM (EzNXf)

28 The facts are that the US Congress NEVER was presented with and never endorsed or voted upon a solumn declaration of war against Iraq, as it did against Japan in 1941. That is a fact! No matter how Mikey twists in the wind, no matter how he evades, the facts are that the American Congress FAILED in this most basic of its duties. What in fact took place was a shameful abdication of responsibility and power and an almost insane deference to Emperor George Bush II. Senators, Congressmen, and lobbists were falling over themselves to come to support Mr. Bush and the Houston Oil Lobby. Which is why today, America finds itself stuck in a Vietnamese Quagmire in Iraq. To date, over 1,500 dead, over 37,500 serious injuries, and well over $280 BILLION DOLLARS in the hole, passing the half way mark in the Vietnam era budget for war. Finally Mikey confuses "hatred" for "contempt". What other word fits a situation in a country where the "will of the people" has been so totally defied, where resolutions by Congress, the Senate and acceptance by the President, STILL DID NOT HAVE ENOUGH POWER AND AUTHORITY to simply attach a feeding tube for a vulnerable and dependent adult in Florida. You want the world to RESPECT this kind of political behavior and leadership???? Just have a close and careful look at the example being set by the American Government to a sceptical audience around the globe. Who in his right mind wants this American style of government impotence??? The time has come to lay the responsibility where it properly belongs, on the heads of Republican judges that pretend to be Christians. Mikey comes here like a braying ass and attempts to deny the obvious. But you cannot fool all of the people all of the time. Is it not a sad commentary on Amerika, that the only person left in its government willing to defend its Constitution, is a former member of the Klu Klux Klan in the person of Senator Byrd.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 26, 2005 02:49 PM (5dXW9)

29 You've gone the way of Blackglasses, Joe. Statements without regard to truth or reality, comments that support one side then the other, both melodramatic and hyperbolic, the sum of which is zero. You sound like you are either in the process of losing it or you have stopped making an effort to sound sane. All in all, you sound like a man with a great deal of hate to live with.

Posted by: mikem at March 26, 2005 06:31 PM (EzNXf)

30 HOLY CRAP!!! mikem=Matt Moulton? Is that you OMH?

Posted by: Hohoho at March 26, 2005 06:51 PM (0xnjB)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Don't mess with Australian diggers

Mar. 20 - Investigations into allegations of sexual exploitation by U.N. peacekeepers has brought this to light: in 2001, an Australian digger who reported allegations of abuse in East Timor had to be defended and Diggers drew guns during a confrontation with Jordanian troops.

Australian digger Corporal Andrew Wratten had been told by some children that Jordanian peacekeeping troops had offered them food and money for sex.

"Wratten informed PKF (peacekeeping force) that he had been receiving complaints from local children about Jorbatt (Jordan Battalion) abuse," said a senior UN official who was based in Oecussi at the time.
"A Jordanian officer in HQ informed Jorbatt that he had ratted on them. Wratten and his guys manning the helo (helicopter) refuelling pad in Oecussi town started getting threatened.
"There was one occasion where Aussie Steyrs were pointed at Jorbatt and Jorbatt M-16s pointed at Aussies."
[...]
Corporal Andrew Wratten had to be evacuated and Australian commandos sent to protect Diggers in Oecussi, an East Timorese province in Indonesian West Timor, after he told the UN of the pedophilia that occurred in May 2001.

The Australians drew their Steyr assault rifles after being confronted by Jordanians armed with M-16s, in an escalation of verbal threats triggered by the betrayal of Corporal Wratten by a Jordanian officer in the Dili headquarters of the UN Transitional Administration in East Timor.

Two Jordanian peacekeepers were expelled in July, 2001, after an investigation into the abuse.

As no Jordanian is quoted in the above story, we don't have their side as to what happened and the Jorbatt involved may not even have been aware that they were protecting pedophiles.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:48 PM | Comments (26) | Add Comment
Post contains 281 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Everything about the un that's currently being discussed has been going on for ages. The people in charge don't care as long as they get their big fat tax free salaries and bribes. I think the folks there just see the whole pedo thing as a low level form of corruption and so perfectly normal. Did I ever tell you about this one?: http://www.whatreallyhappened.com/RANCHO/POLITICS/UN/peace.html (the site itself I wouldn't recommend - they're anti everything)

Posted by: Jay at March 20, 2005 10:26 PM (PuNh2)

2 I'da put my money on the Aussies,I'm just suprised they even bothered with guns

Posted by: big al at March 21, 2005 09:49 PM (SO/54)

3 Wow Jay. What a great source. I especially like how you recommend it, and then say "don't trust if for anything else". Ho ho ho- how rich. This is like when talk radio and right wing bloggers recommend Christopher Hitchens as a critic on their side. Wow- the media and internet DO make you stupid. (for example, just look at Debbye's blogroll)

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 22, 2005 11:37 AM (t+KkC)

4 BG, wasn't it you who I made fun of a few months ago for a post where, in the same paragraph, you said that the Toronto Sun was only read by idiots and halfwits and then immediately admitted that you read it several times per week for sports and features? Yeah, it was you. And you've done it again.

Posted by: mikem at March 22, 2005 05:00 PM (EzNXf)

5 Mikem: You have reached new levels of sad-funny with your fanatical ranting, much like i would expect from a drunk on a street corner (one of which i fought on St. Patricks Day) We are close together more ways than you think!! LET US RUB DICKS TOGETHER TO MAKE FIRE (RE: FRICTION) I WILL LET YOUR RUB YOURS AGAINST MINE (SO YOU ARE THE GAY NOT ME) OR COURSE, ACCORDING TO EINSTIEN IT DOES NOT MATTER!!! HEAT (AND GAY) WILL BE GENERATED IN ANY CASE!!!

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 22, 2005 07:09 PM (t+KkC)

6 I rest my case. Can you blame Americans for our patriotism when we have Canadians like Blackglasses to compare ourselves to? And he is quite par for the course, as my experiences here have shown. Someone, somewhere pulled off the greatest scam ever when they convinced an eager group of embattled Canadians that their's was a superior society. Cowardice is courage. Ignorance is intellect. Bizzaro world.

Posted by: mikem at March 22, 2005 08:04 PM (EzNXf)

7 Blackglasses, in addition to your fondness of reducing everything to personal insults, you are making a serious error in thinking your comment relates in any way to the post. Homosexuality is not the same as pedophilia. There is a vast difference between acts between consenting adults and the violation of children, and I refuse to term those who engage in the latter as straight or gay and prefer the term "sick bastards." Mike can take care of himself so I won't comment on the stupidity of the rest of your post.

Posted by: Debbye at March 22, 2005 08:15 PM (Gf7j8)

8 Jay, thanks for the link. It's a beyond chilling to see the many stories about torture and killings by U.N. blue helmets on one page.

Posted by: Debbye at March 22, 2005 08:31 PM (Gf7j8)

9 TO DEBBYE/MIKEM(ONE AND THE SAME) at the UN water saftey camp: HERE COMES MIKEM/DEBBYE JIZZYMCPISSFACE WITH THEIR TOYS HERE TO TELL US ALL ABOUT WATER SAFTEY. TO BEGIN: SUPPOSE SOMEONE DUMPS A BUCKET OF SAND UPSIDE YOUR HEAD WITH ONLY A SMALL HOLE WHERE YOUR MOUTH WOULD GO THEN A HUGE DICK CHOKES YOU UP GOOD AND BLUE. BETTER PUCKER UP BUTTERCUPS. that's all for today. PS: mikem/Debbye "Canada" count: 2! PPS the only thing that actaully chills Debbye to her core is that the propoganda machine that feeds her her daily dose of "reality" might break down one day and she might actually have to think for herself without the assistance of the PARTY. *Shudder*

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 22, 2005 10:24 PM (t+KkC)

10 In between you calling Zerbisias classless and agreeing with the Eva-Braun-ish All-Hate-Kate that she's fat pig... ...How many people this year have been murdered by Americans? I'm not just talking about the appalling murder rate in the States itself, but, when you factor in all the Iraqis this year who were murdered by Americans... So, Dubbya...how many bodies are your people responsible for, as of right now? And this isn't a snot-box question, Dubbya. I want an answer; in numbers.

Posted by: Malika at March 23, 2005 01:29 AM (9RRQI)

11 Oops, Malika is off her meds again, careening around the web. Somebody call her Mom.

Posted by: mikem at March 23, 2005 01:50 AM (EzNXf)

12 Considering Saddam was murdering between 200 and 1000 per day (700 is the most common average I've seen) a little math is enough to show that Bush is way into positive territory. At 18,000 max killed because of the war, the Iraqis were ahead after less than 4 weeks of the war. Even with that nonsensical made-up number of 100,000 they were ahead a long time ago.

Posted by: Jay at March 23, 2005 02:26 AM (PuNh2)

13 Malika clearly is off her meds and on the wrong web page as I've never commented on Zerbisias's appearance - period - nor have I called her classless. (I did say that warbloggers write with "more class" than she does. There's a difference, which you'll learn about when you reach high school.) Jay's point is correct: I've killed fewer Iraqis through my support of OIF than Malika has killed through her defense of Saddam's regime with its plastic shredders, mass graves, gas attacks on Kurds and and her present support of those terrorists who bomb religious processions, the opening of a new water treatement plant, hospitals, funerals, murder Iraqi judges and journalists, kidnap and behead people who work for companies trying to aid the people of Iraq, and bombing Iraqis who are lined up to vote. Joe Green does have a healthy sense of humour (who knew?) but clearly doesn't live in T.O. The theme of this week is ... well, actually, it's "look at all that ugly brown grass. We need rain!"

Posted by: Debbye at March 23, 2005 04:03 AM (Gf7j8)

14 Please clean the piss off your face before you post again. Thank you

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 23, 2005 05:49 PM (t+KkC)

15 Debbye wrote: "Joe Green does have a healthy sense of humour (who knew?) but clearly doesn't live in T.O." Oh yeah? I went to a Blue Jays game, ate a hotdog with onions and mustard, and had a coke in the skydome with the roof retracted. I like American baseball because it does not move nearly as fast as Canadian hockey. You have time to figure out whos on first, and whose not on the field between short business meetings. Beats golf in my opinion. You are also about to discover my powers as an oracle. May the snow fall upon you and may the invasion begin. The winter you see Debbye, is something uniqe to Canadian Politics that the Creator endowed us with. It kills bugs, mites, tics and fleas, and scatters Canada's enemies both foreign and domestic, to the four corners of the earth. Besides, my predictive powers of snow fall in Ontario are nearly perfect since I get to observe it in Alberta about three days before it befalls you in the Golden Triangle. There is still hope for you Debbye, as an American I mean. You would have received a much better reception in Canada had you been a war protestor or a draft dodger, never-the-less we have to work with what we are given. For my part, I propose a new Bi-Lateral Peace Commission. We should appoint Mark Twain and Stephen Leacock to be its members, and then we should drag George Bush and Paul Martin and his detractor, Stephen Harper and the current nobody from the NDP before it, to answer for their indiscretions. Finally the guilty should be executed by snowballs. Don't you see that as being fair Debbye? I suspect that just perhaps both are as pure as the driven snow. And what better way to go, then in a blizard of fatal snowballs.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 23, 2005 06:05 PM (5dXW9)

16 I can see why some bloggers don't have open comments after viewing BG's highly stimulating reparte`.

Posted by: big al at March 24, 2005 01:04 AM (tAeDA)

17 big al: You can't tell me with a straight face that you've never given head to anonymous Marines in the back of a Camaro with Quiet Riot Playing, can you??? I though not.

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 24, 2005 04:45 PM (t+KkC)

18 Forget the snowballs and politicians, Joe, and go with the exchange between Mark Twain and Stephen Leacock. Wouldn't that be something to witness? (Yes, I know they're both dead, but that's not what I mean.) Sherman, set the dial on the Time Machine!

Posted by: Debbye at March 24, 2005 05:55 PM (tkiwS)

19 Debbye wrote: "Forget the snowballs and politicians, Joe, and go with the exchange between Mark Twain and Stephen Leacock." Well, some of the red necks would get nervous at Mark Twain's "liberal" views on slavery for example, which "neocons" still seek south of the 49th parallel as being economically necessary for "freedumb". On the other hand, Stephen Leacock's view of his "banking career" could be enlightening for government deficits and public debts incurred with that curious phenomina called "optional wars". I think they both would have a lot of insight into that topic, and might even succeed in a new understanding that both Canadians and Americans would agree to, something we have not seen since D-Day in Normandy. It would be historic. One thing is certain however and that is "behind Leacock's beyond" would stand a man who would make surgery funny in Congress. That is something Americans have not seen since the days of Davie Crockett. Maybe that is what is missing these days in the US, not enough medicine of the Mark Twain variety.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 24, 2005 08:34 PM (5dXW9)

20 And no doubt the Marxists would have regarded Leacock as a "reactionary" from McGill (nothing original in this broken record either). Actually I think that Leacock taught his class more about Marxist economics then all the subsequent drivel that was churned out by Andrew Coyne (whose nameless and hapless relatives also had banking careers --- at least until the epoch that Mr. Diefenbaker ended). Something like what Mark Twain taught us about humanity when Huck Finn and his friends went rafting one day. Who knows Debbye, these two might have actually inaugurated a CAN-AM scholarship or a prize for the best meandering bloggers. Mark Twain I am sure would have had a twinkle in his eye as he would ask a nameless Governor what made the machine stop just short of the finish line, where it ran out of gas. I think both of them would have liked Theresa Kerry and her great cooking and hostessship. They both might have written an ode to the tomato as a kind of duet. I also think they would have liked Laura Bush as well, who has that most rare quality for an American woman, "royal jelly". Jacqueline Kennedy had it, but in pretty small quantities compared to Princess Diana who was a real Princess that could conjure up the whole country to cry without a spoken word. So I think that perhaps Mark Twain and Stephen Leacock would have taken both these ladies to dinner and fine conversation and told the men folk to attend to chores feeding the pigs on the back forty. I don't know that Debbye, its only a hunch. What do you think? Would they have sponsored a pork roast?

Posted by: Joe Green at March 24, 2005 08:55 PM (5dXW9)

21 How many of her husband's best friends would an American woman have to royally romp with in bed to gain your final approval, Joe? I thought well of Princess Di's charitable causes and even her, but your favored Royal Family and the British press thought she was a disgraceful tart for sleeping around with Charles' friends. "I think both of them would have liked Theresa Kerry and her great cooking and hostessship." She dropped the 'Kerry' and went back to Heinz after the campaign, Joe. You know... that sincerity thing. I am not surprised that you like Theresa Heinz. No one else does, not even the Democrats who tried mightily to shut up her wacky hateful mouth. She made Hillary look like Mother Theresa. Scared the heck out of a lot of people that she might end up as First Inmate. But just the type of woman I imagine a Canadian man admiring... wealth by marriage.

Posted by: mikem at March 24, 2005 10:27 PM (EzNXf)

22 Mikey more clearly then ever before demonstrates why he should not be seated at the table, and should be banished to the back forty where he could at least do something appropriate to his station in life, feeding pigs. Pig farmers, in case you missed it lack humour, and are never kosher.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 25, 2005 06:45 PM (5dXW9)

23 Taking lessons from Blackglasses now, Joe? Making pig and kosher references? Going for the Aljazeera audience? How Canadian.

Posted by: mikem at March 25, 2005 09:31 PM (EzNXf)

24 Losing sleep over my posts mikem? That was easy. Glad I'm getting under your skin. Please post another CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADIANS post soon. I like having the same thing (Utterly Canadian- Totally Canadian-Decidedly Canadian-Completely Canadian) repeated ad nauseum- it's like watching American cable news. And i'm itching to call Canadians Nigerians.

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 26, 2005 06:53 PM (0xnjB)

25 Oh yeah, BG, you are getting under my skin. Keep posting. More people, Americans and other, need to hear the voice of Canada that you carry.

Posted by: mikem at March 26, 2005 07:29 PM (EzNXf)

26 Here's another article about un peacekeepers and the diggers. Saw elsewhere about this, a pic of a bunch of goats in a pen, one looking up and the word balloon was "Oh no! It's the un peacekeepers again!": "Children were not the only victims - in early 2001, two Jordanians were evacuated home with injured penises after attempting sexual intercourse with goats." http://www.theaustralian.news.com.au/common/story_page/0,5744,12655192^2703,00.html

Posted by: Jay at March 27, 2005 12:57 AM (PuNh2)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Kyrgyzstan

Mar. 20 - Georgia, Ukraine, Kyrgyzstan.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:09 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 8 words, total size 1 kb.

Miss Canada Pakistan

Mar. 20 - Last night, in A crowning moment, 13 contestants in ethnic dress competed for the title of Miss Canada Pakistan.

A mini-controversy has swirled about the event, with some claiming that it violates the beliefs of Islam, and others saying it advances the cause of Pakistani women:

"It's a great opportunity to get out there and speak on behalf of the Pakistani community," contestant Sarvat Khan, 20, said.
"They call it a beauty pageant, but that doesn't make it wrong."
Organizer Sonia Ahmed said nothing, including threats or hate mail from radicals, would have prevented the third annual pageant from going ahead.
"We're trying to show strong, independent Pakistani women (who) will show their talents boldly in front of an audience," she said. "Canada is a free country and we have the right to express ourselves freely."

Indeed they do.

Posted by: Debbye at 07:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 146 words, total size 1 kb.

One-stop Adscam review

Mar. 20 - Lorne Gunter has a nice compilation of Gomery inquiry revelations about Adscam in the Edmonton Journal and a compact paragraph that lays out David Dingwall's role:

... In perhaps the most incestuous Adscam deal, Lafleur hired the minister who created Adscam, David Dingwall, to lobby the federal cabinet to give more money to VIA Rail, itself an Adscam player and recipient. In a twist of intrigue worthy of Kafka, sponsorship monies were paid to a sponsorship ad agency to pay the sponsorship program's founder to lobby the source of sponsorship cash -- Ottawa -- for even more sponsorship money for a Crown corporation that was already dispensing buckets of sponsorship cash. Over just seven months, Dingwall received $133,500 from Lafleur ($19,000 a month).

Must read.

(Link via Neale News.)

Posted by: Debbye at 06:54 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 136 words, total size 1 kb.

House to meet in special session for Schiavo bill

Mar. 20 - Terri Schiavo's feeding tube may be restored due to a House, Senate Compromise on the Schiavo Bill. The compromise would allow for the tube to be re-inserted while a federal court reviews the case.

The Senate passed the legislation today (Sunday) and the House will meet in special session tomorrow to consider the legislation.

The President will return to Washington tomorrow to sign the bill into law.

Mar. 21 - The House passed the measure 203-58 and the President signed the measure at 1:11 a.m. It now goes to the federal district court in Tampa.

Posted by: Debbye at 12:24 AM | Comments (30) | Add Comment
Post contains 116 words, total size 1 kb.

1 Those who are trying to kill Teri will doubtless point out the added discomfort which will be caused in re-inserting the tube. Which raises the question even more: knowing full well that this was likely to happen, why did they simply choose to not put fluid and nutrition through the tube, or better yet, delay a few more days to minimize the pain they're causing to Teri? Why did they feel the need to show their contempt of Teri (and, of course, of Congress) by removing the tube in the first place? Every day it's becoming more obvious that their agenda has nothing to do with love for Teri or respect for her wishes.

Posted by: Paul at March 20, 2005 05:13 PM (qdmu0)

2 Paul wrote: "Those who are trying to kill Teri will doubtless point out the added discomfort which will be caused in re-inserting the tube." What a story! The Courts have been dealing with this specific issue for at least the past seven years, and the lady has been brain dead for the past 15 years, ever since her heart stopped and irreversibly damaged her brain. Doctors say she is in a vegetative state with no hope of recovery. And the Republicans are now going to elbow the Courts out of postion, and begin taking cases themselves. I suppose they are jealous of all the Democratic lawyers that keep beating them in Court, men like John Edwards. Every Republican in the US is now busy flying back to Washington in a midnight emergency session to pass the required bills that would undo something like 200 years of judicial practices in America. Of course, it will also tell the world that in America, an independent judiciary is a joke. Wow! What a stunning demonstration of the "rule of law". Even Emperor George II is getting in on the act, making a late night flight by helicopter back to Washington. Money is no object when it comes to Republicans saving people that are already brain dead. What a country! Even Ancient Rome had nothing on these guys when it came to "giving them circuses". In the meantime, I suppose that Gerry Falwell, is now going to visit Terri Schiavo's hospital room, and perform a "raising from the dead" ceremony. Rev. Falwell said that medical science is irrelevant if God tells him to "raise the dead". Is it any wonder that these guys cannot put down the terrorists in the Middle East?

Posted by: Joe Green at March 20, 2005 05:28 PM (5dXW9)

3 I've wondered that too, Paul. No one is being harmed by prolonging Terri's life nor by allowing a full review of her case, so why the rush to remove the tubes? This isn't a partisan issue, Joe, but you don't understand American politics because you filter everything according to your own narrow prejudices.

Posted by: Debbye at March 20, 2005 06:30 PM (g2zRC)

4 Gotta love Joe Green. He leaves all sorts of material to lampoon. And he thinks he just did a slam dunk. "Even Emperor George II is getting in on the act..." Americans love to hear a Canadian use this type pejorative to describe our President. While Joe chuckles to himself that he has scored a point with a reference to 'American royalty', he is apparently clueless to his own system of government which actually has a Queen as its head of state. Remarkable. While Joe uses Â“ Emperor George II Â“ as a fantasy insult, his reality is a constitutional monarchy to which Canadians submit themselves. We elect our head of state. Canadians count on royal breeding on the other side of the Atlantic to provide theirs. Too bad Joe wasn't around when the Supreme Court upheld the 2000 Presidential election. We could have had a Canadian on George Bush's side telling his peers to grow up and accept the Supreme Court decision instead of hearing 'selected, not elected' for four mind numbing years. All these people who are so anxious to kill off this woman should be ashamed of themselves. If you have been following this story in depth, you would know that only her Â’saintedÂ’ husband claims that she expressed a wish to be killed. Most suspiciously to all but the hatefully blind, he suddenly had this memory soon after a lawsuit was won and her care started eating into the money. Curious how her husband decided to finally Â“end her sufferingÂ” only after she received a large settlement, which was intended to provide for her future medical care. (!!!!) Those who draw a picture of a loving husband trying to carry out his dear wifeÂ’s wishes are either willfully ignoring the circumstances or are simply enjoying the opportunity to engage in hate. And finally, Joe provides this gem, Â”Is it any wonder that these guys cannot put down the terrorists in the Middle East?Â” A Canadian, with Canada's growing reputation as a coward and do-nothing in international affairs has the nerve to insult America for not ridding the ME of terrorists fast enough. Not even the french would allow themselves to be seen as so clueless as to play tough guy in a fight she ran away from. Only a Canadian...

Posted by: mikem at March 21, 2005 12:05 AM (EzNXf)

5 Two things: 1) an ABC news survey shows that Bush and his cronies are FAR out of touch with most Americans. 70% oppose the federal government intervention. Tellingly, 50% of all evangelicals also oppose the intervention, as to 63% of Catholics. (http://abcnews.go.com/images/Politics/978a1Schiavo.pdf) Naturally, you will all just dismiss this as "liberal" media bias, and cite some insane survey off of, say, newsmax or freerepublic, so no big one there. I'd like to take this oppurtunity to thank the liberal media for raising this non-issue to a hysterical fever pitch and giving American congressmen some juicy political fodder. KUDOS!!! More importantly: 2) This seems to be grossly unconstutional to me, not to mention out of step with many republicans positions. Congress and Bush seem to be trying to set up a centralized federal goverment with no checks and balances (read Supreme Court) I await your talking points

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 21, 2005 03:05 PM (t+KkC)

6 First of all, the correct name to apply to political organizations that highly concentrate and centralize power is "fascism". And if Blackglasses applies that name to the Bush Administration, then he would be accurate indeed. But also understand what a breathtaking assault has been made against the "rule of law" in the United States. Clearly if you do not like a Decision of the Court, you get your neighbourhood friendly congressman and republican spiderman to write a new law, pass it through Congress and the US Senate, and for an appropriate fee, you can get the President it sign it into law that same evening. As they say "money talks". You see, voila, who needs the "rule of law" and who really needs an independent judiciary when you can have Republican lawyers acting as judge, jury and executioner. Not since the days of the Third Reich have we seen such "efficiency". Ralph Klein does this same kind of shit in Alberta, or at least tries to. Ralph's problem however is a much better system of checks and balances in Canada which prevent a Premier from making appointments to the Court of Queen's Bench. And in Canada, the system of checks and balances prevents a Prime Minister from appointing Crown Prosecutors. For all its PR and baloney, the United States is falling apart before our very eyes as a "nation of laws". Rather, its a nation of politicians who give or take away life depending upon the way the political winds are blowing. There exists no finer demonstration of this fact, then events of this past weekend. Just look at how many people were executed by this Emperor, some without even the basics of proper representation. So much for the Emperor's "pro-life" stance. What a terrible result you get when you let lawyers and Courts make basic decisions over life and death, and what even worse decisions you get when they are made on the battle field in Iraq for example, where over 98,000 innocent, functioning, civilians, women and children are murdered by the Emperor's weapons for the dubious cause of his wealth and power. I wonder what Jesus would have said of their hypocrisy.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 21, 2005 05:14 PM (5dXW9)

7 Whew, what an effort it takes to take you seriously. "centralized federal government": Look up centralized, then look up federal. Your might as well be referring to a "female woman", or as one nitwit did here, a "human woman". "with no checks and balances (read Supreme Court)": Somehow you got the idea that not only are judges allowed to rule on the applicability and constitutionality of law, but that legislators are not allowed to pass laws, especially in Congress. Just what the heck are you trying to say? Look up checks and balances for a lesson in the American system before you waste time citing Bush's efforts (the executive) and Congress' efforts (the legislature) as violations of 'checks and balances' Talking points, indeed.

Posted by: mikem at March 21, 2005 05:16 PM (EzNXf)

8 mikem wrote: "A Canadian, with Canada's growing reputation as a coward and do-nothing in international affairs has the nerve to insult America for not ridding the ME of terrorists fast enough." I suppose that is why Americans are flocking in record numbers to WebSites to buy Canadian pins and badges for their jackets and luggage so that they might pass themselves off as Canadians eh??? Look Mikey, its time to "fish or cut bait". Colin Powell, said the principle is simple, "you break it you buy it". Well, you broke it, and you bought it. Canada under Jean Chretien had the integrity and the honesty to separate out the issues of terrorism and Bin Laudin, from American "pretexts" for waging Imperial wars for oil in the Middle East. One other thing. Canada did not run away from ANY conflicts or wars. Ever! But neither do we get into wars on a spur of the moment, nor do we start wars where our vital national security and survival is not at stake. Bush had options in this conflict, but he wanted to show the world how tough he was. Little runts like Bush and Hitler share that psychological feature I suppose, and we in Canada suffered when another runt, in the person of Brian Mulroney also was in power. Maybe the lesson is not to vote for runts, particularly Conservative runts. They start wars the usually go badly.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 21, 2005 05:24 PM (5dXW9)

9 Wow, Joe. Almost every wingnut talking point in one breathe.

Posted by: mikem at March 21, 2005 05:25 PM (EzNXf)

10 "Maybe the lesson is not to vote for runts, particularly Conservative runts. They start wars the usually go badly." You mean like Vietnam, started by a liberal, escalated by a liberal, and ended by a conservative? "I suppose that is why Americans are flocking in record numbers to WebSites to buy Canadian pins and badges for their jackets and luggage so that they might pass themselves off as Canadians eh???" Hate to burst your bubble, Joe, but the numbers are the reverse of your little fantasy of Canada as a Mecca for the world or for Americans. More Canadians leave for America than the reverse. We just don't make a big deal out of it, as you would. But keep up the faith! Your defense of Canada's cowardice is sad. It reminds me of a mother telling her child that it takes more courage to walk away from a fight than to stand up and take a punch if necessary. I don't fault the mother too much. She is trying to provide some dignity for a child who is just too scared to fight back. But for an adult to rely on childish reassurances is just sad. But what the hell. Canada has made sure that she is too weak to fight anyway, so just use that as a backup. The US, Britain and Australia will do the heavy lifting. Canada can count on that.

Posted by: mikem at March 21, 2005 05:48 PM (EzNXf)

11 Hmmm.... I seem to know the difference and understand the nuances between "Central" and "Federal", as well as the concept of checks and balances, yet you don't mikem. As for "Federalism" -isn't this taking away the rights of the states here by the big meanies in Washington? Aren't state rights the new sexy cause in American political discourse? That says a lot about the American educational system right there. Also, maybe you want to check the US Constitution- not the Bill of Rights, but the Constitution. Don't you find it grossly unconstitutional and quite QUEER that congress is conducting an emergency session for one person and one family? I know that AM radio tells you its ok, but just think for a second. Look past your biases and prejudices and think instead of reguritating.*** (I realize it is useless talking to you though, as your online character reaches new levels of hilarity in its super troll attempts) ***Here: focus on this and ignore everything else. I imagine something like CANADA CANADA CANADA will be written. Again you derail the discussion and Debbye gets off scot free for making hilariously wrong statements like "this isn't a partisian issue". Hmmmmm.....

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 21, 2005 06:01 PM (t+KkC)

12 "Don't you find it grossly unconstitutional and quite QUEER that congress is conducting an emergency session for one person and one family?" No. And that you find it "grossly unconstitutional" is a fine example of your sense of reality and level of understanding. Look, Joey, Blackglasses... whatever. Do as I suggest and look them up. Stop embarrassing your fellow Canadians. You Canadians are really having to dig deep into your bag of HateAmerica to rationalize killing this woman. Why not just allow her to live and allow that Bush may be right this time? Does she have to starve to death so that Canadians can have something to hate Bush about? Let her live. Let her family take care of her. It is just pathetic that Canadians are in an uproar over Bush's attempts to save her life. Just what does Canada stand for, if anything?

Posted by: mikem at March 21, 2005 06:23 PM (EzNXf)

13 Besides the "CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADA CANADIANS" comments you always seem to make, you don't seem to have an understanding of the Constitution of the country you call home....Debbye. You also do not know the difference between federalism and centralization, in any govermental system as seen by your ponderous (ignorant and confused?) silence. Once again you speak volumes about the glories of the American educational system. Look, I know Rush Limbaugh said this morning that congress can control and override the courts, but you know that that's not true- you just can't admit it, because it would make your trolling persona look stupid. Disagree with Dubya, even for a second? Perish the thought! NO! must...stay the...course... Hey: 70% of Americans are against this, as are 63% of Catholics and 50% of evangelicals! Hell, even some freepers are bothered by this! Looks like Americans should be asking themselves what they stand for, if anything. (OH NO) Also: as for Americans loving life so much, I guess that means that you personally love life so much you are against the Iraqi war and the death penality.Don't people die under unfairly in those situations? Wouldn't be opposed to say, the iraqi war be indicative you embracing the "culture of life" that is sweeping through congress?

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 21, 2005 08:19 PM (t+KkC)

14 "Don't people die under unfairly in those situations? Wouldn't be opposed to say, the iraqi war be indicative you embracing the "culture of life" that is sweeping through congress?" What are you trying to say? For everyone's sake, please think before you type. One of the many reasons I often skip over your posts is this type of disjointed, grammatically tortuous effort. Aren't you the one who likes to call others stupid and dumb? Have some pride and LOOK IT UP.

Posted by: mikem at March 21, 2005 11:44 PM (EzNXf)

15 Oh I have. I've also studied it at an academic level. Naturally, FOX and El Rusho can find their own "experts" to make Bushie look good, but then again they can also find people who justify torture and say that Bush isn't committed to the total fiscal runiation of the United States.* I'm not going to bother positing ther pertinant sections because I am so sure not only do I know it like the back o' me bum, but I also relish the fact that you are totally oblvious to the political and burecratic structures on which your country was founded. Guess that doesn't make you a true American, does it mikem? Why, being that ignorant of American political life means (by your own deifintion) that you're nothing more than a CANADIAN!!!(oh no!) Additionally, since most Americans oppose the congress' grossly unconstiutional intervention, the question arises: why does American hate the "culture of life"? Hey: since you're a little puppet whose all for the will of the majority of the American people via polls and everything (they want the war, love bush and whatnot) does that mean that you now have to hate "the culture of life" as mikem ? If you oppose the will of the American people, does that mean you hate America? I think you do. *PS: once the US economy totally collapses in the foreseeable future, it's gonna be like the late 1970s and early 1980s all over again. And you know what that means: AWESOME PUNK BANDS

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 22, 2005 11:34 AM (t+KkC)

16 Actually, there is one cogent point that has emerged from Blackglasses's rant: the president and Congress have proceeeded despite poll numbers against the legislation. Imagine proceeding on the basis of legality and morality instead of poll numbers! This case has a lot of side issues. The mandate of doctors to "do no harm" has been slowly changing over the years, and Americans need to weigh a great many factors centering on how we treat our disabled citizens. Congress showed great wisdom in making this a bill for a specific case. Now we have to step back and consider the far-reaching implications of this and other cases including the right to live and the right to die. It is also a reminder to make a living will.

Posted by: Debbye at March 22, 2005 06:55 PM (Gf7j8)

17 Debbye wrote: "Congress showed great wisdom in making this a bill for a specific case. Now we have to step back and consider the far-reaching implications of this and other cases including the right to live and the right to die." Actually, Congress disgraced itself before the whole world. In making this single case, they began creating "Ralph Klein Law", or if you like, "privatized laws". Of your 285,000,000 souls, many with similar problems, instead of petitioning the Courts, will now write their favourite Congressman and your friendly neighbourhood spiderman, and seek the same remedy. This act by the US Government has held the "rule of law" in contempt. It has probably also violated your Constitution as well, which provides for a separation of powers. Unlike the US Congress, the Canadian Parliament DOES HAVE the HISTORIC RIGHT TO CONVENE ITSELF AS A COURT OF LAW. But it has never done so in the history of Canada since 1867 since Confederation. Because of the US Constitution, its highly doubtful that the Congress can constitutionally overturn a Court Decision. Only the Supreme Court can do that, PROVIDED that all the proper and normal due processes are followed. No sitting American President has so threatened your Constitution like this one has since the days of Richard Nixon and Watergate. Can you find even a single example in the entire history of the United States that ever passed such a privatized law that has no precedent? A sad day all around. For everyone. Everyone is covered in shit, even the family. Only exception is Terri's sister who understands what is going on and understands her sister as only sisters can. This debacle actually holds up "American values" to the world and shows them to be as shallow and many of America's enemies claim. Its as if everything that America ever stood for has been debased and desecrated. Even the normal civility that used to exist and be extended to families in grief has been turned into a Larry King Live circus. I wonder what Ike would have said. I wonder what Churchill would have said to Ike to console him. Diefenbaker would have been in full flight against those that perverted Congress and the "rule of law". Mike Pearson would have been saddened for our southern neighbours. Trudeau would have been academic and might have tried to make suggestions that might have worked. And Joe Clark even, would have been at least telling Americans how badly we felt for them. Not unlike what Louis St. Larent would have been saying about Joe McCarthy, in private of course. How has this great stream of independent American jurisprudence come down to this? How did the bold vision of George Washington and Benjamin Franklin come to this end? Where Congress will pass laws to protect the "living dead", but will fail to protect its own citizens from deranged killers with guns because of a perverse and twisted perspective on guns? What a fucked up country!

Posted by: Joe Green at March 22, 2005 09:58 PM (5dXW9)

18 Contents of post deleted.

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 22, 2005 10:17 PM (t+KkC)

19 Observe the passion that Joe feels on this subject. The overwrought fears and predictions. The intensity of his rage. " No sitting American President has so threatened your Constitution..." " A sad day all around. For everyone. Everyone is covered in shit, even the family. Only exception is Terri's sister who understands what is going on and understands her sister as only sisters can. {Oh, so NOW a family member's opinion counts.} This debacle actually holds up 'American values' to the world and shows them to be as shallow and many of America's enemies claim. Its as if everything that America ever stood for has been debased and desecrated." Yeah, incredibly enough Joe has reached this conclusion because the US Congress demanded that Terri Schiavo's case be reviewed by judges to insure that her civil rights (to not be starved to death) have been adequately addressed. The world is ending because elected representatives are demanding an accounting of the procedures that will result in a brain damaged, healthy woman (not terminally ill or "on life support for 15 years" as the push polls have falsely stated) being starved to death on the word of a greedy ex-husband who perjured himself previously in court on this very case. This is not a right to die issue, since her wishes are not known. This is a right to not have an ex-husband decide that his ex-wife should die before the money meant to provide medical care for her dries up. Canadians like Joe Green are anxious to find something, anything, to damn America for to salve their shame at being on the wrong side on issues of freedom and democracy around the world. To this end, Joe vomits up this overwrought concern that a judge's ruling be accepted without any interference from the other two 'checks and balances'. On another day, Joe would be condemning the American judicial system as disgraced and shameful, bought and paid for because he did not get a ruling he wanted on captured terrorists. Thanks for your sudden respect for American court rulings, Joe. I think though that America will survive having members of Congress express concern for an individual's life. Our's is a democracy, not a constitutional monarchy like Canada. We have more respect for the individual in America and we demand representatives who will speak up for the defenseless. Lastly, Â“What a fucked up country!Â” By Joe's thinking, America is so because hundreds of the highest elected representatives in the land will drop everything and travel thousands of miles to defend a helpless woman. Canada should be so screwed up.

Posted by: mikem at March 23, 2005 12:33 AM (EzNXf)

20 Mikey wrote: "Our's is a democracy, not a constitutional monarchy like Canada. We have more respect for the individual in America and we demand representatives who will speak up for the defenseless." Bullshit! America is a republic, not a democracy. Canada is a confederation, not an "indisolvable union". And Canada is a "constitutional monarchy" where the head of state is Queen Elizabeth II, who is the reigning monarch without any political power. She and the Governor General who stands in her place, have never embarrassed us as Canadians by being drunk at an official State Dinner (Bush I in Japan for instance). I have never heard more bullshit about American "individualism" than that posted above. I for one am very glad NOT TO BE AN AMERICAN. I live in a country where the "rule of law" are not empty political slogans. In Canada, Martha Stewart would have been able to talk to officals and police officers and anyone else without any special powers as "agents of the government". Lying to police officers and government officials in Canada is not a felony. You have to lie on a weighty and sworn matter before the Courts in Canada before you get into legal difficulty and the reasons should be obvious and clear. Up here, police officers are not goons with guns, and telling them to "stick their heads where the sun don't shine" is not a "felony". Of course, in Canada, there is no such thing as a "felony" to begin with. So Martha Stewart would not be in jail if she were a Canadian, while Bernie Ebbers would have been in Criminal Court long before all the civil nicities have played out in the US for CEOs bound for the executive suite in a minimum security federal "golf and country club". Corrections Canada does not operate such prisons in Canada, nor are they "contracted out" or "privatized". And this mess for Terri and her family, would have never become such a waste of public and private resources. Part of the reason for the difference is that Canadian judges are EXPECTED to be COMPASSIONATE and are given LATITUDE in making their rulings and are expected to apply their UNFETTERED DISCRETION. And these same judges function faithfully with the "common law" that in Canada dates back to the Magna Carta without any interruption by revolutions and civil wars. These features for the most part in the US have been lost with the Revolution, and the Constitution weighs as heavy as a communist manifesto upon the people. What other country on earth would allow its judiciary to be opened to such grim charges of "constitutional killings of innocent life"? Ultimately, Terri is the victim of the American Revolution that installed this perverted and twisted legal framework upon a people. The American Federalists that installed this "republic" were the very antithesis of democrats. They were in fact, the political perverts that the United Empire Loyalists fled when they moved to Ontario and resettled under the Crown and fought to defend their new homes from these wild eyed American revolutionaries. At least the US Courts DID reflect one aspect of America that is true. This is a society where the culture of death is everywhere.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 23, 2005 09:45 PM (5dXW9)

21 Oh my Lord. A real life unashamed Loyalist, in the 21st Century at that. How intriguing. How cute. "the Constitution weighs as heavy as a communist manifesto upon the people." I love this. Even our enemies have expressed admiration for our Constitution, but Joe compares it to a communist manifesto. Great educational system up there guys and gals! Take a pill, Joe. You burned yourself out apparently and have started sputtering. Thanks for the laugh. And I'm sure your Lords in Britain appreciate your peasant loyalty.

Posted by: mikem at March 23, 2005 11:24 PM (EzNXf)

22 Notice I allowed the Bush/Queen remark to pass. Out of loyalty to our allies I make it a habit not to mention all the humiliation the Royal Family brings to Britain. But... My first inkling of just how easily ignorance and arrogance can creep into inbred bloodlines was Princess Margaret'ss visit to Chicago, "Irishtown, USA", where she told the Irish Mayor Jane Byrne that "the Irish are pigs, all pigs". Real class act, that one. Real awareness of the outside world. A perfect symbol for Loyalists like Joe.

Posted by: mikem at March 23, 2005 11:39 PM (EzNXf)

23 Mikey wrote: "Oh my Lord. A real life unashamed Loyalist, in the 21st Century at that. How intriguing. How cute." That is 100% correct! I stand shoulder to shoulder with John Diefenbaker on that one, who was a Conservative. A Pregressive Conservative who believed in "One Canada". Her Majesty said at his funeral, "He never waivered". I agree and I hope the same can be said of me someday. No higher tribute can be paid to a Canadian leader. Its not "cute". Its "real".

Posted by: Joe Green at March 24, 2005 04:11 PM (5dXW9)

24 Mikey wrote: "I love this. Even our enemies have expressed admiration for our Constitution, but Joe compares it to a communist manifesto. Great educational system up there guys and gals!" We Canadians are not your enemies. God help you if you were. But that does not mean that because we are your friends that we "admire" your Constitution. I think its a pretty imperfect instrument and rather inferior to our system of Government and our Parliament. And yes, Canadians do have one of the finest education systems in the world, and its also why most Canadian cities outrank American ones in terms of the best places to live on this planet. You need to take up this competition seriously. Go back and try to beat us with infrastructure, efficiency and plain old quality. There is no reason that Seattle for example cannot be as good or even better than Vancouver. But the facts are that right now, its far behind. Your problem is that you refuse to see these things as important, but for many other people around the planet, these are pretty important factors.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 24, 2005 05:25 PM (5dXW9)

25 "We Canadians are not your enemies. God help you if you were. (!!!!) Canada, international tough guys. Beware awakening the sleeping giant. This is too much. You guys can't even transport your own troops. You're afraid of your own shadow and Joe is online warning us not to make enemies of mighty Canada. I wont bother to check your 'facts', Joe. You have no credibility, so I will just assume you made them up, just as you have done in previous threads. (Maybe you're mixing Canadian with American figures) The fact is, Joe, that tens of millions of people are not trying to get into Canada. They are trying to reach America. But keep reassuring yourself. Canadians have made an entire industry out of trying to convince themselves that their feelings of inferiority are misplaced. In any case, you have that royal Head of State thing to fall back on. Having a Queen to bow before is a nice modern quality of life issue that Canada has held onto.

Posted by: mikem at March 24, 2005 09:57 PM (EzNXf)

26 MIKEM ON DATING: DICKS GO IN MY MOUTH! PLEASE JAM THEM IN!!

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 25, 2005 03:22 PM (t+KkC)

27 Mikey wrote: "Canada, international tough guys. Beware awakening the sleeping giant. This is too much." Don't let it worry you. In the First World War, Canada entered and fought from 1914 to 1918. America joined in 1917. In the Second World War, Canada entered and fought from 1939 to 1945. America joined at the end of 1941, on December 7. But don't let that get you down. While Americans were dropping bombs on Canadian troops in Afghanistan, NATO forces led by Canada came within a whisker of catching Osama Bin Laudin. Do you know who he is Mikey? He is the fanatic responsible for the terrorist attacks against New York and Washington. Don't get him mixed up with Saddam Hussein. Saddam is an Iraqi. Oh yes, one more detail. Most of the terrorists that attacked the US and triggered the NATO forces of Canada, France and Germany into action, were from Saudi Arabia, not Iraq. Saudi Arabia is an American Ally that shares extensive business interests with the Saudi based Bin Laudin Group of Companies, Carlyle Group and the Bush Family group of companies in Houston. And the Saudi attacks succeeded primarily because they were able to obtain all the things they needed from within the United States including the four large airliners that were filled with fuel and hijacked while on domestic flights within the United States. Even providing safe transport out of the United States after the attack for the Bin Laudin Family members after all US Airspace was closed to all traffic. Do you have any doubts that one of these days, NATO and the Canadians will kill Bin Laudin? I don't. And they are going to do it with or without American help. In fact, given the above "help", it would be perhaps better if the Americans stayed out of the way. The casualties we take from the Taliban fighters is bad enough.

Posted by: Joe Green at March 26, 2005 03:12 PM (5dXW9)

28 "NATO forces led by Canada came within a whisker of catching Osama Bin Laudin." Nato forces led by Canada????? Bwahahaha. Whose planes did you rent to bring in your troops, Great Leader??? Bwahaha Nato forces led by Canada.............. In your approved history books, no doubt. Just so you'll know, Einstein, your 'aggressive' forces were playing war games at night when they were mistaken for enemy forces. They were practicing war while a war was being fought, not exactly an indication of a busy aggressive force if your commander feels it necessary to play pretend war. The US apologized a million times for it, something I notice that British and Canadian forces do not require of their commanders when they do the same. In fact, those were the FIRST Canadian 'combat' casualties in the war ( April'02), despite the fact that the war began in October'01 and Taliban forces fled in Nov/Dec'01. We appreciate the Canadian contribution, Joe, and I have always admired the individual Canadian soldiers (who overwhelmingly were supportive of Iraqi Freedom), but you have timid leaders with timid citizens supporting them. And yeah, the US joined on December 7th, 1941 while you were getting your ass kicked all over the globe and turned everything around. We were holding you above water prior to December 7th with our economic and manufacturing might and we saved your forces from defeat with American forces and leadership. Thanks for bringing up WWI and II. We don't like to because we are accused of rubbing it in when we do. I usually demure out of humility, but since you brought it up, there it is. And don't worry, when it gets right down to it, we will save your weak souls again. Nato forces led by Canada.... Too rich. What a fantasy land your mind dwells in.

Posted by: mikem at March 26, 2005 07:14 PM (EzNXf)

29 "The casualties we take from the Taliban fighters is bad enough." In fact, Joe, Canadian forces had not suffered any casualties from the Taliban, 6 months into the war.

Posted by: mikem at March 26, 2005 07:18 PM (EzNXf)

30 BesIDes you not Knowing anything abou the command structure of NATO mikem (funny- but then again you dont even know about how your own country's government works, so its par fo the course :-p) I AM now posting oyur post MADE LESS GAY AND MORE FUNNY: "NATO forces led by CAMBODIA came within a whisker of catching Osama Bin Laudin." Nato forces led by CAMBODIA????? Bwahahaha. Whose planes did you rent to bring in your troops, Great Leader??? Bwahaha Nato forces led by CAMBODIAN.............. In your approved history books, no doubt. Just so you'll know, Einstein, your 'aggressive' forces were playing war games at night when they were mistaken for enemy forces. They were practicing war while a war was being fought, not exactly an indication of a busy aggressive force if your commander feels it necessary to play pretend war. The US apologized a million times for it, something I notice that British and CAMBODIAN forces do not require of their commanders when they do the same. In fact, those were the FIRST CAMBODIAN 'combat' casualties in the war ( April'02), despite the fact that the war began in October'01 and Taliban forces fled in Nov/Dec'01. We appreciate the CAMBODIAN contribution, Joe, and I have always admired the individual CAMBODIANsupportive of Iraqi Freedom), but you have timid leaders with timid citizens supporting them. And yeah, the US joined on December 7th, 1941 while you were getting your ass kicked all over the globe and turned everything around. We were holding you above water prior to December 7th with our economic and manufacturing might and we saved your forces from defeat with American forces and leadership. Thanks for bringing up WWI and II. We don't like to because we are accused of rubbing it in when we do. I usually demure out of humility, but since you brought it up, there it is. And don't worry, when it gets right down to it, we will save your weak souls again. Nato forces led by CAMBODIA.... Too rich. What a fantasy land your mind dwells in.

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 27, 2005 01:01 AM (9dSHC)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

March 19, 2005

Hope Trumps Despair - 2 years in

Mar. 19 - There have been a series of terrorist attacks in Asia today:

27 Killed in Pakistan Bombing at a Shiite shrine located about 210 miles south of Quetta. Two other bombs went off further south wounding four people.

A car bomb in Beirut wounded nine. Pro-Syrian President Emile Lahoud said he won't attend an upcoming summit of Arab leaders in Algeria due to security concerns in Lebanon.

A bomb in a Qatar theater killed a Briton and wounded 12.

Five police officers were killed in Iraq.

On Thursday, a bomb killed 5 and wounded 32 in Kandahar. A suspect has been arrested.

Mar. 20 - 00:37 Australian News is reporting that Scotland Yard has issued an alert for a new campaign by "rogue Irish republican groups." /end update

Today in Europe, tens of thousands of people protested the ongoing violence intended to derail Iraq's steps toward consensual government after Iraqi voters defied terrorists and voted in the historic elections there Jan. 30. Oh wait, that's wrong. They were protesting against the war that removed Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein.

"I think it's important to show that we still care about this," said Linn Majuri, 15, a member of the environmental organization Green Youth, who held a banner reading "Drop Bush, not bombs!"
"People have become apathetic about this, it's no longer something they walk around thinking about every day," she said.

Didn't millions of Iraqis disprove her assertion that "people have become apathetic about this" only last January?

Okay, I'll behave. They were actually protesting non-U.N. sanctioned American action (because the U.N. represents ~~corruption~~ international law, you know) against Iraq, and what they perceive as the unleashing of America's military might.

Silly rabbit, Operation Iraqi Freedom was launched in order to avoid unleashing America's full military might. In terms of air power alone, we conducted that war with one arm tied behind our backs.

Sept. 11 represented an escalation of on-going attacks and our counter-attack could have taken many forms (and don't imagine for a minute that there weren't plenty of people agitating for the nuclear option) but the best, albeit most risky, response was to try to avoid the ultimate confrontation by offering the people in the Mid-east a different future: one of hope and realized aspirations. Wicked, huh?

There were small demonstrations in Canada, the largest of about 3,000 being in Montreal. There were also demonstrations in the U.S.A., but, again, they were sparsely attended.

President Bush said

America is a friend to the people of Iraq. Our demands are directed only at the regime that enslaves them and threatens us. When these demands are met, the first and greatest benefit will come to Iraqi men, women, and children. The oppression of Kurds, Assyrians, Turkomans, Shi'a, Sunnis and others will be lifted. The long captivity of Iraq will end, and an era of new hope will begin.
Iraq is a land rich in culture, resources, and talent. Freed from the weight of oppression, Iraq's people will be able to share in the progress and prosperity of our time. If military action is necessary, the United States and our allies will help the Iraqi people rebuild their economy, and create the institutions of liberty in a unified Iraq at peace with its neighbors.

No, wait, that was in October, 2002. His message today was

On this day two years ago, we launched Operation Iraqi Freedom to disarm a brutal regime, free its people, and defend the world from a grave danger.
Before coalition forces arrived, Iraq was ruled by a dictatorship that murdered its own citizens, threatened its neighbors, and defied the world. We knew of Saddam Hussein's record of aggression and support for terror. We knew of his long history of pursuing, even using, weapons of mass destruction, and we know that September the 11th requires our country to think differently. We must, and we will, confront threats to America before they fully materialize.
Now, because we acted, Iraq's government is no longer a threat to the world or its own people. Today the Iraqi people are taking charge of their own destiny. In January, over eight million Iraqis defied the car bombers and assassins to vote in free elections. This week, Iraq's Transitional National Assembly convened for the first time. These elected leaders broadly represent Iraq's people and include more than 85 women. They will now draft a new constitution for a free and democratic Iraq. In October, that document will be presented to the Iraqi people in a national referendum. Another election is planned for December to choose a permanent constitutional government.
Free governments reflect the culture of the citizens they serve, and that is happening in Iraq. Today, Iraqis can take pride in building a government that answers to its people and honors their country's unique heritage.

On the current political landscape in the Mid-east:

Today we're seeing hopeful signs across the broader Middle East. The victory of freedom in Iraq is strengthening a new ally in the war on terror, and inspiring democratic reformers from Beirut to Tehran. Today, women can vote in Afghanistan, Palestinians are breaking the old patterns of violence, and hundreds of thousands of Lebanese are rising up to demand their sovereignty and democratic rights. These are landmark events in the history of freedom. Only the fire of liberty can purge the ideologies of murder by offering hope to those who yearn to live free.
The experience of recent years has taught us an important lesson: The survival of liberty in our land increasingly depends on the success of liberty in other lands. Because of our actions, freedom is taking root in Iraq, and the American people are more secure.

Yes, I know, the new meme is that bringing freedom to the Mid-east would have a domino effect was an afterthought when locating WMD didn't pan out, but if that is so, why has so much bandwidth been used these past two years with arguments over the feasibility of functional consensual governments in Muslim countries?

Posted by: Debbye at 11:07 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1011 words, total size 7 kb.

March 18, 2005

Updating the blogroll

Mar. 16 - More additions to the blogroll, mostly in the growing Great White North section (and a big hooray! for the growing blogging community up here.)

Under News and Commentary:
Austin Bay Blog
Salim Mansur homepage
Canada Free Press

From Canada:
Italics Mine
Angry in the Great White North
A Journey Through Time
Hacks and Wonks
Strong World
Rightwing.ca
Canada Free Press Blog
My Left Wing Girlfriend
myrick.ca, a Canadian living in Shanghai

Soldier blogs:
letters from garrison
Marine Corp. Moms (don't tell me they don't serve!)

The rest of the world:
Davids Medienkritik, an American living in Germany
Aldaynet
Country Store
Who Tends the Fires
Half-Canadian
Geek Empire
The Warrior Scholar
Garfield Ridge

I know some of the sites already on have gone dormant, but I stubbornly hope they will return to posting (because I'm a hopeless optimist.)

Off to work. Party hearty, you lucky souls for whom Friday is Friday.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:36 PM | Comments (9) | Add Comment
Post contains 159 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Hey, thanks for the link, Debbye, I'll be happy to return the favor. And hey, in case you didn't get the memo, women are scared of politics. You lot are too soft, liable to swoon at a nasty remark. You know, stick to hobbies like knitting, and being pregnant. So thanks for putting the lie to such stupidity, keep up the good work

Posted by: francisthegreat at March 19, 2005 01:57 AM (nuIsA)

2 Thanks for the kind words, Frank! You are spot on: without the Kevin Drums and Steven Levys of the world, folks might have thought female poli-bloggers were just regular people who were interested in politics, but now the truth is out: we are confronting our Fear of Politics through blogging!

Posted by: Debbye at March 19, 2005 10:22 AM (oAR9w)

3 Debbye, thanks for the link, it's much appreciated. Being American in T.O. was one of the first Canadian blogs I ever read and it has been on my blog roll for some time now. Keep up the great work!

Posted by: Bill at March 19, 2005 09:01 PM (3G4Ez)

4 Bill, I'm only sorry it took so long. I'm no techie, and venturing into indexes and hyper tag stuff is a fearful thing! You have a good, straight-shooting writing style. Common sense is vastly underrated.

Posted by: Debbye at March 19, 2005 10:16 PM (w6cQu)

5 Thanks from me as well. It's much appreciated.

Posted by: Chris Myrick at March 19, 2005 11:42 PM (d1fI7)

6 AWESOME!!! More dummies!

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 21, 2005 08:21 PM (t+KkC)

7 AWESOME!!! More dummies! Whenever liberals cannot hold their own in an argument, they will resort to name-calling. (Ann Coulter)

Posted by: Bill at March 22, 2005 12:23 AM (ukM0n)

8 Chris, again I apologize for taking so long! That Asian blogroll of yours is awesome ... I've spent several hours looking at the sites. Bill, I too like Ann Coulter. She can be a bit over the top, but she hits more nails than she misses.

Posted by: Debbye at March 23, 2005 06:44 AM (Gf7j8)

9 As for name calling: you rightes seem to think that "moonbats" is the absolute apex of wit. Listen: no one but other bloggers know what that means. And its not funny anyways. Pinko was good. Try something like "Terror bride". Brainstorm here people. I give points out for creativity. "Moonbats". God. That's what happens when you read nothing but the "DaVinci Code" and watch reality television.

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 26, 2005 06:57 PM (0xnjB)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Party financing and national unity

Mar. 18 - A portion of our taxes are now turned over to political parties to pay for their campaign expenses during federal campaigns. This legislation, which came into effect in 2004, was heralded as ending the corrupting influence of corporations, through their donations, on political parties.

Let me repeat: my tax money goes to finance the election campaigns of parties with which I vehemently disagree, such as the Bloc Quebecois, which advocates separation from Canada. As the money is apportioned to the politcal parties based on the percentage of votes they garnered in the previous federal election, I don't even have a little box on my tax form to indicate to which party I want my involuntary donation to be directed.

Corporate donations to finance political parties = bad. Nassty corporations. We don't likes them or their filthy lucres.

Earmarking taxpayer dollars to finance political parties = good. Stoopid taxpayers. They don't have the sense to know to which parties they should give their money. We don't trust them to make sensible, personal decisions, so we'll make those decisions for them.

Stealing taxpayer dollars, under the guise of promoting national unity, to finance the Liberal Party = genius. National unity is best achieved if there is only one political party, the Liberal Party. There can be only one.

Adscam started as an inquiry into the funneling of tax dollars to Liberal-friendly advertising agencies and the appearance was that these funds were in payment of services received or about to be received, but testimony again today indicates that actual cash donations were funneled back to Liberal Party workers.

CBC News: Groupaction masked payments to Liberals, Gomery told:

Bernard Thiboutot worked for former Groupaction advertising executive Jean Brault, who made millions from the sponsorship program.
Thiboutot, who had his own consulting company, told the inquiry that Brault asked him to send five cheques worth $57,000 to five people. Brault then paid Thiboutot $57,000.
The inquiry hasn't yet heard what type of work the five did, but Radio-Canada says Michel Monette, Jacques Roy, Guy Bisson, Franco Iacono and Louis Pichette were all Liberal Party organizers.
Bisson worked on the Liberal campaign in 2000, Roy worked as an organizer for the Liberals in Montreal, Monette worked on the Liberal campaign in Laval, Iacono was a lobbyist who used to work for former public works minister Alfonso Gagliano and Pichette was a Quebec campaign worker.
Brault didn't want to appear connected to the five people, Thiboutot said. The payments instead went through Thiboutot's company, Commando Marketing, in the same week in October 2000 that former prime minister Jean ChrÃƒÂ©tien called a federal election.
Brault faces criminal charges related to the sponsorship scandal and has been named in a $41-million government lawsuit.
Thiboutot also testified that Brault pressed him to make two contributions of $10,000 to the federal Liberals.
Earlier in the inquiry, another communications executive, Gilles-AndrÃƒÂ© Gosselin, said Brault asked him to make a $10,000 donation to the Liberals.

There are bigger questions which have yet to be addressed, and the biggest one is the ease with which the Prime Minister usurped the powers of Council and Parliament. That must be addressed but has not been addressed. That is my biggest concern, but I'm just an American who doesn't understand all this enlightened stuff and worries about minor stuff like a Prime Minister who promises a Parliamentary debate on ballistic missile defense but suddenly announced the decision without a public debate. Martin promised to address the "democratic deficit" in Parliament and he did so in a manner reminiscent of Ed Norton's advice to Ralph Kramden in the golfing lesson: Hel-lo ball!

Then there is the involvement of Canadian civil service workers and patronage appointees in furthering the misappropriation of public funds. The systems of political patronage appointees as well as the hiring and promoting civil service workers desperately needs reform. Whistle-blower protection also needs to be enacted.

Another mega-question is how millions of taxpayer dollars could be stolen over a period of several years and nobody knew, including the Finance Minister, who at that time was current PM Paul Martin. (I can't help wondering if his new persona, Mr. Dithers, is a smokescreen as he might be forgiven for being a bumbling fool but not for being competent and thus a knowing enabler of Adscam.)

A new controversy has recently arisen about the use of federal funds to finance foundations, many of which bank rather than spend the money, none of whom are accountable for the public funds they receive, and the potential of that money to find its way back into Liberal Party coffers.

Non-accountability, thy name is Bureaucracy, and that issue is also at the heart of the Oil-for-Food scandal as well as Adscam.

[N.B. Despite the plethora of Quebec locations, this is a scandal involving the federal Liberal Party, not the provincial Liberal Party. There is a difference.]

Personal aside: I'm tired of those who shoot back "Yeah, what about Watergate?"

What about it? Did the Nixon campaign steal millions of taxpayer dollars to finance his campaign, or did they misuse private donations to the 1972 Republican election campaign? As we say back home, That dog won't hunt.

Posted by: Debbye at 07:47 PM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 850 words, total size 6 kb.

1 Wouldn't Quebec seperating be a good thing for everybody in Canada (except Quebec)?

Posted by: Jay at March 18, 2005 08:48 PM (PuNh2)

2 as i said to a polish friend recently, when she asked about our quebec separation problem, the only separation problem we have is that they won't. and they won't. why would they, if we keep sending them money?

Posted by: keith at March 18, 2005 09:42 PM (HRjgG)

3 A girl I knew from Alberta (this was about 11 years ago) said "we don't really care if they do, we just wish they'd make up their minds and shut up about it".

Posted by: Jay at March 18, 2005 10:01 PM (PuNh2)

4 So how often is Quebec allowed to vote on the issue? From my limited knowledge of the events, I recall this was voted on twice, with the last vote very close. If Quebec voted for independence, would they alone be allowed to reverse the decision if they decided that it was a disaster, or would the rest of Canada have to vote Quebec back in?

Posted by: mikem at March 18, 2005 11:39 PM (EzNXf)

5 As friends in Montreal often remind me, what about those in Quebec who want remain part of Canada? Given how quickly the federal Liberal Party tried to blame Adscam on corrupt Quebeckers, and how quickly the press here seemed to be willing to accept that interpretation, I wonder just how much the Liberal feds are employing a "divide and conquer" strategy and trying to keep Francophones and Anglophones at each others' throats in order to maintain Liberal rule. Without the Bloc, might Quebeckers have chosen to vote Conservative in the last federal election to punish the Liberals? Just a thought (I have no evidence, but the "divide and conquer" strategy is an old trick because it works so well, and the media certainly plays their part in presenting the Conservatives in a poor light.)

Posted by: Debbye at March 19, 2005 08:52 AM (u22Kj)

6 I'm not clear on something: Are corporate donations now outlawed? Are private donations outlawed? I ask because the thing that jumped out at me most was that the tax money is divied up according to percentage of votes in the previous election. If a new party can get neither private/corporate donations nor public funding then how in the world can a new party get off the ground? Aah, incumbants voting in laws that protect their incumbancy. There's a lot of that going around these years.

Posted by: Tuning Spork at March 19, 2005 06:44 PM (H4Yfg)

7 Nail on the head, Tuning Spork. They can't! No corporate donations are permitted to fund political campaigns (and there's a restriction on what advocacy groups can do as well.) I'm not that clear on the limits (not being a citizen up here) but private donations are also severely restricted.

Posted by: Debbye at March 19, 2005 10:07 PM (w6cQu)

8 *SPUTTER* *Spurt* "OH GOD- YOUR FACE, YOUR FACE YOUR FACE!!!!!"

Posted by: Blackglasses at March 21, 2005 08:22 PM (t+KkC)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

UN Whistleblower blasts Oil-for-Food

Mar. 18 - Whistle-blower: 'Gaping holes' inÃ‚Â oil-for-food:

Rehan Mullick testified that by his estimate more than 20 percent of the shipments to Iraq, worth $1 billion a year, were not distributed properly, with many goods pilfered by the Iraqi military.
"A fourth or fifth of the supplies were not distributed," he said.
Mullick, 39, an American sociologist of Pakistani origin, appeared before the House International Relations Subcommittee on Permanent Investigations in Washington.

Mullick was a data analyst for the U.N. program, and his duties included monitoring the humanitarian shipments into Iraq.

"Soon after I started my job, it became amply evident that there were gaping holes in U.N.'s efforts to meet [its] objectives," Mullick told the committee in his written statement, though he read aloud only parts of it.
Mullick said in his statement that a database to track the humanitarian shipments was "muddled beyond repair," that survey techniques "were at best amateurish," and that statistics quoted by the United Nations were "misleading."
[...]
Mullick told the subcommittee that he repeatedly alerted U.N. officials of problems he observed but was rebuffed.
"Each suggestion resulted in my supervisors reducing my job responsibilities," Mullick said. "This continued to occur until my only job was to run the slide projector at staff meetings."
Mullick said he eventually submitted a 10-page report to U.N. headquarters in 2002 reporting that 22 percent of supplies imported under the program never reached Iraq's 27 million people.
"I heard nothing," Mullick said. "Finally I was contacted and told my contract was not being renewed."
[...]
... the United Nations found the program to be a success, saying, for example, that food delivered reduced the malnutrition rate among Iraqi children by 50 percent.
Mullick described the United Nations as having "old mafia-style management."
He added in his statement, "Had the U.N. chosen to listen to and offer protection to those who blow the whistle on bureaucratic injustice and corruption, a program like oil for food would have worked more in the interest of the impoverished Iraqi people rather than their detractors." (Bolding added.)

So who did he alert? Was it Frechette?

There is no whistle-blower protection for U.N. employees, and the human cost of unreported crimes has spread from Iraqis who were supposed to benefit from the Oil-for-Food to shocking revelations about sex-crimes committed by blue-helmeted troops and U.N. workers.

The U.N. is said to represent "international law." Those who would chose to live under the rule of an unaccountable, cynical bureaucracy don't know the meaning of the word "law" much less understand the power of freely electing one's own lawmakers with the attendant power to replace them in regular election cycles.

From one of my favourite 60's-era songs:

Oh, Freedom!
Oh, Freedom!
Oh, Freedom over me!
And before I'll be a slave,
I'll be bured in my grave,
And go home to my Lord and be free.

Posted by: Debbye at 06:11 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 480 words, total size 3 kb.

March 17, 2005

Happy St. Pat's

Mar. 17 - Sorry for the light posting today, it's been a wild week at work and I slept longer than usual today. (In other words, I overslept and even as I write this, I'm waiting for the ride I begged from my first-born.)

Happy St. Patrick's Day to you all!

Posted by: Debbye at 09:02 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 57 words, total size 1 kb.

March 16, 2005

Iraqi Assembly Sworn In

Mar. 16 - This is a history day for three reason.

Today marked the anniversary of the 1988 gas attack on Halajba which killed 5,000 people.

Second, Iraqi Assembly Sworn In:

"In the name of God, I swear to carry out my duties and legal responsibilities diligently. I swear to protect the sovereignty of Iraq and the interests of its people and to protects its land and air, its natural resources and its federal democratic system. I also swear to protect public and private liberties and the independence of the judiciary system and to carry out the country's laws, so help me God."

Third, the swearing in ceremony was televised.

(Not historic but nonetheless notable: Iraq forces now number over 14,000.)

Posted by: Debbye at 08:44 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 127 words, total size 1 kb.

Or maybe we'll go just a little

Mar. 16 - I said I wasn't going to go into it, but how can I resist when National Post Columnist Barbara Kay takes a more sober look at the lack of female columnists and, by implication, of female bloggers, and makes this very insightful observation:

Dowd ends her column with a kneejerk feminist suggestion: "I have no doubt there are plenty of brilliant women who would bring grace and guts to our nation's op ed pages ... We just need to find and nurture them."
No, Maureen, you've got it backwards. If a woman needs finding and nurturing, she's wrong for the job. We don't want shrinking violets on our op-ed pages. We want strong proactive women writers with definite opinions, who scorn affirmative action and like to duke it out in public.

Either we are equal or we are not, and that means our work should be judged without consideration of our gender.

(Link via Neale News.)

Posted by: Debbye at 08:33 PM | Comments (5) | Add Comment
Post contains 171 words, total size 1 kb.

Darfur death toll may be as high as 180,000

Mar. 16 - According to Jan Egelund, special U.N. envoy, Darfur death toll double previous UN estimates:

Jan Egeland, the UN's under-secretary for humanitarian affairs, said that war-induced starvation and disease were killing around 10,000 in Darfur every month, with many of them dying in squalid refugee camps.
Mr Egeland's latest assessment indicates that Darfur's crisis is far worse than previously thought.
Moreover, the figure of 180,000 does not include those who have died violent deaths. Sudan's Arab-dominated regime has been accused of waging a "genocidal" counter-insurgency campaign by unleashing the notorious janjaweed militia on Darfur's black African tribes.
Those who have been killed by these mounted raiders and government forces - or the equally brutal rebels styling themselves the Sudan Liberation Army - number in the tens of thousands.

What, exactly, is the numbers threshold to declaring mass murder to be genocide?

We have a legal concept known as "accessory before and/or after the fact." Those who have died in refugee camps were murdered as surely as those who remained in their villages and died.

If people think I am too harsh of Canada's reduced military, it is precisely because of places like Sudan, or Haiti or even Lebanon. Peacekeeping missions with Canadian troops would be viewed far less suspiciously than American troops would be and would re-affirm Canada's role as peackeeper.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:14 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 239 words, total size 2 kb.

Air India jury acquits (Updated)

Mar. 16 - Lots of links at the top of this story, Air India defendants cleared.

I gave up following the trial once it became clear that too much of the evidence consisted of conversations, which, without compelling supporting physical evidence, leaves a "shadow of a doubt" in judges' minds.

Sadly, the relatives of the 329 people who died in the 1985 downing of Air India Flight 182 (see this fact sheet if you can't remember it) have yet to see justice for their loved ones which leaves a gaping wound in their lives.

Mar. 17 - It cost $7.4 million to build a special courtroom. It cost $130 million on investigations and trials. And we learned during the trial that CSIS destroyed evidence that could have led to convictions rather than turn it over to the RCMP.

From today's editorial in the Toronto Sun editorial (one-day link):

During the trial, Judge Josephson cited what he described as the "unacceptable negligence" of the Canadian Security and Intelligence Service for, among other things, erasing hundreds of crucial wiretap tapes connected with the case. The court also heard that the Royal Canadian Mounted Police bungled their investigation and did not follow correct procedures. As a result, the judge rejected the testimony of a number of Mounties.
In addition, turf wars and infighting between CSIS and the RCMP (and a poor relationship between the RCMP and the FBI) were said to have resulted in a failure to share information in a timely way and in the burying of some evidence.
There was speculation from RCMP sources that CSIS had a source inside the alleged conspiracy, had advance knowledge that planes might be bombed but failed to act, and that it tried to undercut the court case to protect its source.
CSIS has categorically denied any advance knowledge of the bombings, having an inside source or that it deliberately bungled the case. CSIS officials have accused the RCMP of attacking CSIS as a method of diverting attention from their own incompetence in the event the charges were dismissed.
Given all this controversy about a terrorist act that ended in Canada's worst case of mass murder and the troubling questions it raises about CSIS and the RCMP, a public inquiry is clearly needed to find out what went wrong with this investigation and to come up with ways to insure it never happens again.

The automatic "hold an inquiry" notion over problems between CSIS and the RCMP that happened 20 years ago might seem foolish were it not that many suspect that those problems still exist, but Deputy PM Anne McClellan has rejected a probe. The difficulties between the FBI and RCMP are another issue, and looking at the relationship between Canada and the U.S.A. today, I'm sorry but I don't know how much information I want the FBI (or CIA) to share with their respective Canadian counterparts (and I state that even knowing how incompetent the American agencies are) because I don't trust either the honesty or honour of the Canadian government or its appointees.

Bob MacDonald has more about the screw-ups of CSIS and ties it into the "soft on violent crime" approach of the Canadian justice system. (He ties into grow operations too. Sigh.)

Posted by: Debbye at 07:53 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 550 words, total size 4 kb.

Anti-Semitism in Toronto

Mar. 16 - A report issued by B'nai Brith says that out of 857 anti-Semitic incidents reported in Canada, 405 happened here (Problem worst in GTA with more here.)

I wish I could say I was surprised, but I'm not. Tolerance is easy to talk about but harder to feel and impossible to enforce. I constantly overhear anti-Jewish comments which go by unchallenged but, were they directed against African- or West Asian-Canadians, would be immediately denounced by everyone in the room.

Something else that would be interesting to track would be expressions of hate toward Chinese- and East Asian-Canadians.

The Toronto police will release a report next month on acts which legally constitute "hate crimes."

Posted by: Debbye at 06:28 PM | Comments (2) | Add Comment
Post contains 121 words, total size 1 kb.

7,000 plants make it a grow-op

Mar. 16 - At one point in my life, I would have fervently wished I was standing upwind - Pot up in smoke.

The fiery debates over grow houses could end very easily - either legalize it or don't. Decriminalizing possession is hypocrisy, much like letting johns go free but prosecuting prostitutes (er, sorry, "sex workers.")

Commentary here, and a little hysteria here.

Posted by: Debbye at 06:08 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 75 words, total size 1 kb.

194kb generated in CPU 0.0325, elapsed 0.1094 seconds.
74 queries taking 0.0863 seconds, 306 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

Monthly Traffic

Pages: 6354
Files: 10
Bytes: 82.0M
CPU Time: 5:13
Queries: 392957

Content

Posts: 3544
Comments: 4125

Feeds

March 23, 2005

March 22, 2005

March 20, 2005

March 19, 2005

March 18, 2005

March 17, 2005

March 16, 2005

Search Thingy

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Monthly Traffic

Content

Feeds