The (in)effectiveness of gun control

Nov. 28 - A report in today's Toronto Sun features a new study by The Fraser Institute on the effectiveness of restrictive firearm legislation in 3 Commonwealth countries: Australia, Canada and Great Britain, with results that are more devastating than even a could-be gun-totin' person like me would have thought probable.

To be honest, I chiefly oppose firearm regulation and registration on philosophical grounds: so long as I comply with the responsibilities that accompany ownership and use of a firearm, I see no reason to be restricted much less deprived of my inherent right to possess firearms. I'm pro-choice! It's not that I want to carry a gun, I just believe I have the right to choose.

This study casts that right in a different light which concludes that depriving law-abiding citizens of their rights has been accomplanied by an increase in violent crime, which was a reasonable, logical suspicion but until this report could not be proven based on actual fact. [Isn't it telling that private citizens are able to distinguish between proven and unproven yet a government cannot?]

Short version: If I am believed to be capable of defending myself, someone with ill intent is going to steer clear of me. If I am believed to be an easy target, I have just become potential prey.

That has always been a logical premise, and it seems it has been proven in the negative sense in that citizens of those Commonwealth countries studied which have restricted firearm possession have been victimized because they are indeed perceived to be incapable of defending themselves.

The report, The Failed Experiment: Gun Control and Public Safety in Canada, Australia, England and Wales, can be read in .pdf format online. The Executive Summary on that page states that

The widely ignored key to evaluating firearm regulations is to examine trends in total violent crime, not just firearms crime. Since firearms are only a small fraction of criminal violence, the public would not be safer if the new law could reduce firearm violence but had no effect on total criminal violence.

Affirmation of the adage Never bring a knife to a gunfight.

The United States provides a valuable point of comparison for assessing crime rates because the criminal justice system there differs so drastically from those in Europe and the Commonwealth. Not only are criminal penalties typically more severe in the United States, often much more severe, but also conviction and incarceration rates are usually much higer. Perhaps the most striking difference is that qualified citizens in the United States can carry concealed handguns for self-defence. During the past few decades, more than 25 states in the United States passed laws allowing responsible citizens to carry concealed handguns. In 2003, there are 35 states where citizens can get such a permit.

The upshot is that violent crime rates, and homicide rates in particular, have been falling in the United States. The drop in the American crime rate is even more impressive when compared with the rest of the world.

So violent crimes committed with knives, for example, have also been reduced in the US because the Justice System heavily penalizes those who commit such crimes not because we're vicious, but because we regard such crimes as intolerable in a civilized society.

The US government and justice system are based on the philosophy of "Social Contract." Citizens have the right to bear arms for non-criminal purposes, and that right is counter-balanced with harsh penalties when the terms of that contract are broken.

This report has special significance for Toronto because there is a mini-controversy in which the Toronto Star claims that violent crimes are down, and takes issue with Police Chief Julian Fantino's call for a public inquiry over concerns that violent crime is up (Jack is all over this one, and News Junkie Canada brushes aside accusations of being too blunt (heh) and weighs in.)

The Fraser Institute's press release not only calls the legislations "a failure", but makes what many opponents of the registry cite as the main crititcism:

Disarming the public has not reduced criminal violence in any country examined in this study. In all these cases, disarming the public has been ineffective, expensive, and often counter productive. In all cases, the effort meant setting up expensive bureaucracies that produce no noticeable improvement to public safety or have made the situation worse. Mauser points to these trends in the countries he examined: [England and Wales, Australia, and Canada.] (Emphasis added)

Good old entrenched bureaucracy. Admitting the gun registry is useless and abandoning it would mean a reduction in civil service jobs, and for them, it is deemed better to continue making the same errors than admitting failure, right? We're talking about a special interest group that never shows it's true face. Who runs these countries anyway, the Parliaments or the civil service? In who's interests are these countries run, those in the civil service who want to protect their useless jobs, or citizens, who are entitled to to protect their lives?

If we were discussing a fad treatment which made claims not only that it cannot prove but can be demonstrated to be false, wouldn't the fraud squad be called in?

The press release on the report cites that in England and Wales,

Both Conservative and Labour governments have introduced restrictive firearms laws over the past 20 years; all handguns were banned in 1997.

Yet in the 1990s alone, the homicide rate jumped 50 percent, going from 10 per million in 1990 to 15 per million in 2000. While not yet as high as the US, in 2002 gun crime in England and Wales increased by 35 percent. This is the fourth consecutive year that gun crime has increased.

Police statistics show that violent crime in general has increased since the late 1980s and since 1996 has been more serious than in the United States.

They are very critical of the confiscation and destruction of legally owned firearms in Australia, citing it cost over $500 million and the police services bureaucracy including that which oversaw the registry increased by $200 million. Armed robberies, on the other hand, have increased 166% since restrictive legislation was introduced in 1997.

The release calls Canada's gun registry "a farce."

The contrast between the criminal violence rates in the United States and in Canada is dramatic. Over the past decade, the rate of violent crime in Canada has increased while in the United States the violent crime rate has plummeted. The homicide rate is dropping faster in the US than in Canada.

The Canadian experiment with firearm registration is becoming a farce says Mauser. The effort to register all firearms, which was originally claimed to cost only $2 million, has now been estimated by the Auditor General to top $1 billion. The final costs are unknown but, if the costs of enforcement are included, the total could easily reach $3 billion. (Emphasis added.)

“It is an illusion that gun bans protect the public. No law, no matter how restrictive, can protect us from people who decide to commit violent crimes. Maybe we should crack down on criminals rather than hunters and target shooters?” says Mauser.

Now my American dander is really up. I am not a victim. I am a human being, and I have the right and obligation to defend myself and mine.

Blame it on Sept. 11 if you wish, because the fact is that one of the legacies of that day was the extradordinary actions of the crew and passengers aboard Flight 93 and the decision of those ordinary citizens to act to defend their country, their familes and themselves.

We rambled along in the 90's thinking the government should do everything we were too lazy to do, and it was a huge mistake. The blinders are off, and we have to assert that we are willing to take responsibility for ourselves as free people, including our own self-defense.

UPDATE: This should really infuriate the weasels at the Toronto Star: Chief Fantino wants the 3 young murderers of a 12-year old tried in adult court. Their weapons of choice were knives and baseball bats, and it seems these young offenders had a hit list of between 13-15 additional targets.

Posted by: Debbye at 08:57 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1350 words, total size 10 kb.

Sharia in Ontario

Nov. 27 - I'm really not sure what to make of this post about Sharia in Canada, or, more properly, in Ontario, from Damien Penny. Read the comments, too.

Although Damien doesn't think it is much of a problem because Ontario courts would still have the power to strike down any offensive decisions, I still wonder about the effect of having two tiers of civil arbitration structures. There's also the small matter of enforcement, which can involve the government should wages be garnisheed or seizure of property be deemed necessary.

As we have a Liberal government in Ontario now, I think any MPP who asked such questions would be treated in typical Liberal fashion: booed, accused of racism, and, in short, the questions wouldn't be addressed.

UPDATE: Jack comments and provides more information. I too didn't see anything about this meeting in the local media.

Posted by: Debbye at 12:26 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 151 words, total size 1 kb.

Clinton defends Chretien

Nov. 27 - Via Neale News, a National Post article Clinton defends Chretien and the decision for Canada not to support the US in Iraq. He explains that

Republican complaints that Canada, France and Mexico were soft on terrorism by refusing to join the war was unjustified and failed to take into account Chretien's strong belief in getting authorization from the United Nations, Clinton wrote.

[...]

Clinton praised Chretien as a valued friend, "whose intelligence, experience, common touch and common sense made him an extraordinarily effective leader."

Looks as though Clinton has learned to not publicly support people until they're out of office. Even he recognizes he's a curse!

More seriously, what binds Chretien to the UN? Maybe the fact that neither of them are required to be accountable? The ethical behaviour of Chretien and his Cabinet is of scandalous proportions up here, but there is no way to punish them unless Chretien choses to do so.

As for Chretien himself, we can write conflict of interest in huge honking letters whenever the names Bombardier and TotalFinaElf come up, but to no avail. The only ethics constraining Chretien are that which he places upon himself.

Roger L. Simon has a post that warms my cockles, demanding that the UN open the books and show where the money for the Oil-For-Food program went. As he points out, the funds required to maintain that vast police state and reward those who committed torture during Saddam's regime as well as the money now funding the terrorists in Iraq came from somewhere, and let's not forget the billions of dollars in both US currency and gold that were secured by US forces as attempts were made to smuggle same out of Iraq by the truckloads. (Be sure and read the comments, and link here for Gerard Van der Leun's devastating account of the French and Bonn banks' lending practices to any country known to be antagonistic toward the US.)

There is no legal requirement for the UN to account for the money it spends, and you don't have to be a genius to figure out that that guarantees corruption.

Accountability is the necessary partner for freedom, and, as an American citizen and Canadian taxpayer, I object to tax dollars being spent on any organization that doesn't have to account for that money.

Go Roger! As he points out, we have a right to know, as do the people of Iraq who were cheated out of food and critical medical supplies by the UN and Saddam.

UPDATE: Paul has some rather pointed comments about Bubba's defense of the PM in He just won't shut up . . .

Posted by: Debbye at 10:55 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 446 words, total size 3 kb.

Abdul Rahman Khadr

Nov. 25 - The US released 20 prisoners from the Guantanamo Bay facility including a former Toronto (Scarborough) resident Abdul Rahman Khadr.

According to Reynald Doiron, spokesman for the Foreign Affairs Office, Khadr reportedly went to a country of his own choosing. "Privacy concerns limit our ability to provide information on his current whereabouts," Doiron said. Khadr could return to Canada someday as a matter of right.

Oh goodie.

The man's father, Ahmed Said Khadr, is a known operative of al Qaeda and although he was reportedly killed by Pakistan forces during a raid on an al-Qaeda camp in Waziristan, Pakistan. last October, although it has not been substantiated. (If blogspotted, go to Oct. archives and use the search function (Ctrl+F for IE users) and key in Khadr. The original source was the National Post and their links live for only 2 weeks, poor things.)

Abdul's brother Omar, known to some as the "Toronto Teen" and to others as the murderer of a US Army medic in Afghanistan, was injured and captured and is still presumed to be held at Guantanamo.

Posted by: Debbye at 04:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 187 words, total size 1 kb.

Balancing the budgets

Nov. 14 - The Canadian Surplus shrinks to $1.6B for the first half of the fiscal year (April-September) which is somewhat less than the $4.6 billion recorded in the same period last year.

In Ontario, it seems there was a slight miscalculation by the incoming Liberal government for a projected deficit (as in the departing Tory government had balanced the budget as they had claimed) and there would in fact be a small surplus instead of a shortfall of $5.6-billion for the current fiscal year, which ends March 31, 2004.

[Finance Minister Greg] Sorbara had said a day earlier that a final accounting would show 2002-03 ended up in the red to the tune of hundreds of millions of dollars despite boasts by the Tories of a $524-million surplus.

"I double-checked my information and I wasn't entirely accurate," Mr. Sorbara said in an interview.

While the projected excess has "shrunk very significantly," there is likely still "a small surplus, not a deficit," he said, adding the books have yet to be closed on the year.

But even as one hand gives, the other is quick to take away. Toronto taxpayers may need to pay out over $1 million in severance pay to departing city councillors and their staff.

"Oh, my gosh," said budget committee member Jane Pitfield, who never figured the payouts would be so high. "Taxpayers would be shocked that so much money is being wasted."

I think Torontonians are way beyond shocked, but thank you for thinking of us.

"This is just highway robbery," bristled penny-pinching councillor Rob Ford, adding that councillors and their staff take the job knowing it could last only three years. "I guess we're not in such rough shape after all," said Ford, referring to the city's financial situation.

Councillors and the mayor are entitled to a month's pay for every year of service, over and above their pensions, up to a maximum one year's pay.

Note the inclusion of the phrase "above their pensions." Yes, they get a sizeable pension for being on the job for three years, but that's a scandal older than me.

Posted by: Debbye at 07:53 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 350 words, total size 2 kb.

Maher Arar

Nov. 14 - Canada's Solicitor General Wayne Easter is going to warn US Att. Gen. John Ashcroft that the US must respect Canada's values and human rights standards in the way it handles intelligence from the RCMP or CSIS. This is in response to the deportation over a year ago of Maher Arar, a Canadian citizen from Syria was was picked up at a New York airport during a stopover en route to Canada.

Arar is suspected of being a terrorist and of plotting to bomb the American Embassy in Ottawa. While under detention in Syria, Arar claims he was tortured (I tend to believe him) but was abruptly released and returned to Canada the day after the US vetoed a UNSC resolution condemning Israel for bombing a terrorist training camp in Syria. (The timeline is true, the connection is mine.)

The Canadian government had shrugged off criticism and accusations of torture while Arar was in Syria, but belatedly

Prime Minister Jean Chretien has lambasted the U.S. for sending the Canadian citizen to Syria, and asked two key cabinet ministers to find out if Canadian officials shared information with the U.S.

What took him so long? These questions were raised in the Commons at the time of Arar's deportation and immediately after his release and shrugged off. Forgive me if I regard this as cynical political posturing. Many people, including me, expressed deep reservations about the deportation when it happened, arguing that if he really was a terrorist, he belonged in an American or Canadian jail, not in a country known to abuse human rights.

The part that irritates me is not that criticism is directed at the US (I too am critical) but the failure to criticize countries that have held Canadians -- Iran, Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia -- and hold them now -- Egypt -- with nary a peep from those sworn to uphold Canadian values and human rights standards.

The Canadian government has not criticized the Syrian government for holding him without charges and torturing him. We're told this is soft diplomacy. Makes a lot of sense to use hard diplomacy with the US and soft diplomacy with dictatorships because . . well, actually, it doesn't. Using soft diplomacy with known violators of human rights is simply not consistent with Canadian values and human rights standards but is consistent with hypocrisy and more suggestive of a European approach.

The are still a lot of questions about the deportation of Arar, the biggest one being why the US would deport him. According to the Toronto Sun,

American media reports have also suggested Arar was the subject of a CIA "extraordinary rendition," which sends terrorist suspects to rogue nations to extract information through torture.

Other possibilities raised were that it was part of some sort of exchange, either of prisoners or of information. Or even a good-faith gesture when there were still hopes that Syria would actually be a partner in the war on terror.

The other big question is why the Syrians wanted him. In my nastier moments I've thought it was maybe to give him a medal or develop a working relationship with him as Syria's partnership in the war on terror is uneven at best and blatant double-dealing at worst. Arar left Syria when he was young, so it's doubtful it was for anything he actually did while in Syria.

All in all, this affair does manage to cast a better light on the facility at Guantanamo. A number of Middle East countries, particularly Saudi Arabia, have demanded that their citizens be returned to face justice in their home countries, which would include detention without charges, torture, and possbily execution and the US has refused to comply.

As for the threatened scolding, I think John Ashcroft can handle it. It might have meant something in September, 2002, but a year late is more than a loonie short.

Posted by: Debbye at 07:05 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 651 words, total size 4 kb.

Merge Alberta and Saskatchewan?

Nov. 14 - Maybe I mocked discussions over merging France and Germany prematurely because there is an article about two think-tank men who are seriously weighing benefits of a merger between Alberta and Saskatchewan.

While melding oil-rich Alberta with agriculture-based Saskatchewan could help the economies of both provinces decades down the road, a study into the idea of uniting Wild Rose Country with the Land of the Living Skies found there are likely too many political barriers -- especially since Albertans have little to gain.

"It really would be a trade-off as opposed to an absolute benefit," said University of Calgary economist Herb Emery.

"While it would make Saskatchewan a 'have' province, it would cost Alberta money. So the question is: Why would Alberta want to do this?"

In a report released by the C.D. Howe Institute Wednesday, Emery and fellow U of C economics professor Ronald Kneebone, concluded creating a "super-province" out of Alberta and Saskatchewan could eventually lead to benefits related to a larger population and economy and less repetition in government and bureaucracy.

That sounds familiar; hmm, wasn't that why Etobicoke was forced to amalgamate with Toronto? That hasn't turned out very well . . . now Toronto is massively in debt. Oh well, they'll just raise taxes again.

Such a merger would also put about $200 a year into the pockets of Saskatchewan residents while taking away about the same amount from Albertans, as Alberta would have to assume Saskatchewan's debt while sharing its oil and gas revenues with almost one million more people.

I was happy to assume that the proponents of this merger don't follow socio-political news in Canada, but I was wrong.

While Emery and Kneebone looked at the economic implications of erasing the border, they noted the political differences between Saskatchewan's long-time New Democrat government and staunchly Tory Alberta may prove to be too much to overcome-- a sentiment echoed by Saskatchewan Premier Lorne Calvert.

Is it just me, or did Emery and Kneebone overlook a fairly strong streak of rugged individualism in Alberta that isn't matched in Saskatchewan? At attitude and way of life that is totally at odds with the social democracy favoured in the latter province?

On a serious note, the "brain drain" out of Saskatchewan is a big problem, as it's the only province that regularly loses more people than it gains, usually to Alberta, mostly due to lack of opportunities for young people.

Saskatoon activist Wayne Eyre, who is an advocate of a single government for all four provinces, said while a merger may not be possible at the moment, many Saskatchewan residents believe the province should adopt Alberta's more business-friendly attitude.

"The NDP didn't get a majority of the popular vote in the last election. We have rich uranium, oil and gas, potash and diamond reserves and lots of abundant, affordable ranchland and there are many thousands of people who say the government should get out of the way and let people rock 'n' roll," Eyre said.

How ya gonna keep 'em down on the farm, after they've seen Calgaree?

(Via Neale News.)

Posted by: Debbye at 03:13 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 517 words, total size 3 kb.

Project Mercury

Nov. 12 - Project Mercury was started by a Canadian soldier, Master Cpl. Russell Storring, who had been deployed in Rwanda in 1994 and had seen all to much suffering there. These days he is a kids' saviour. He enlisited his mother to organize a drive to gather clothes and shoes for orphans in Afghanistan.

In August, [Master Cpl.] Storring, a 29-year-old father of three, started Project Mercury Hope, an initiative to collect clothes, toys and school supplies for orphans in Kabul.

Storring called his mother and asked her to encourage friends and family to donate items for some 1,200 children.

[...]

After her son's initial plea for help, Atkins gathered 26 boxes of supplies and sent them to Kabul. This week, a military flight from CFB Trenton will carry two triwalls of footwear, five with clothes and 1 1/2 each of toys and school supplies overseas.

Storring was born to be a soldier, his mother said. His father, Floyd, who died four years ago, was a World War II veteran.

"Russell was 3 or 4 and he knew he wanted to be in the army. He wanted to be just like dad," Atkins said.

Atkins herself is president of the Canadian Legion in Tamworth, about 50 km northwest of Kingston.

The project is named for Mercury, the Roman messenger god and the symbol of the signal unit of the army.

Most good ideas inspire others, and this one affected Traci Mohamed, a grade 7/8 teacher at Kennedy Public School in Scarborough, who saw a TV interview with Master Cpl. Storring and decided to help, rallying students and teachers in the process. They gathered over 60 boxes of supplies which will be delivered to a local legion this week.

Ah, the underappreciated Legion again! And we thought they only sold poppies once a year and sponsored youth baseball teams!

For more information on the project visit Mercury Hope. Please note that they will not accept money, but do request that monetary donations go to the Red Cross Fund for Afghan Children (website linked at Mercury Hope.)

There are some good people who really do think of the children.

Posted by: Debbye at 05:44 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 357 words, total size 2 kb.

Remembrance Day, but what do they remember?

Nov. 12 - This is a bit of a ramble. These thoughts have been swirling for a few days, and I'm trying to give them coherence and form. I'll probably read this tomorrow and wish I had said things differently or said more or less.

I found it very hard to post yesterday. A couple of Paul's posts had really hit a nerve with me. There was, contained in this post about the CIBC bank, Ikea and other companies who initially refused to allow poppy sales for Remembrance Day the fact there isn't a single Canadian war movie, which, given the well-deserved reputation of Canadian courage and steadfastness in battle, is an appalling lapse.

Sheesh, I learned about the Canadian army's courage at Vimy Ridge and Dieppe in high school in the US, and the current Minister of Defence, John McCallum, didn't know the difference between Vimy [Ridge] and Vichy [government.] The steadfast determination of the Canadian armed forces is such that every Canadian can hold their head high with pride, and I don't get why we would deprive our children of that legacy.

In yesterday's sole entry, I mentioned a hockey rink Canadian soldiers in Korea built which they called Imjin Gardens and the reason the story tickled my fancy was because it reminded me of a MASH episode in which Cpl. Klinger traded food items (fruit cocktail?) with a Canadian soldier and in parting mentioned a future trade involving hockey pucks. I didn't mention it in the original post because it seemed out of place on Remembrance Day, but in retrospect I maybe should have because it was a telling piece of history about Canada and how Canadian soldiers bring bits of home with them that made it into pop culture.

Canada, as does the United States, offers a very unique heritage to her citizens: by virtue of being here, everyone, regardless of birthplace, is entitled to take as their own the past, present and future of this wonderful country. It is by no means mandatory that one should do so, but the offer is there for everyone.

So when I say the same blood flows through all Canadians' veins as flowed on Vimy Ridge and at Dieppe I mean exactly that: it isn't the heritage of a blood line but of a philosphical and heartfelt line, and that can be a very powerful thing simply because it is taken voluntarily.

I guess I shouldn't be surprised that the National War Memorial was vandalised in the early morning hours of Remembrance Day, but it still burns. It is beyond cliche to say that our soldiers fight so that others can protest against the government of the day without fear of reprisal, but to deface a monument dedicated to the brave men and women who were willing to sacrifice all so that we could have cozy, pseduo-intellectual debates about war requires a special kind of arrogance and smugness that I hope I never encounter in the flesh.

Nevertheless, that act of disrespect saddened me beyond any of the memorials that day because it is a danger sign that signifies disrespect not only to those who have served their country but to this country itself, and that is an outrage. In fact, it was almost an act of self-hated.

Freedom is not just another word for nothing left to lose, it's the name we give for everything that is worth fighting for, and once we lose our freedom, we've lost everthing. Canadians have known this in the past, and I believe they know that today. It's just a matter of finding the Canadian way to express it.

Freedom of spirit and of mind are such great gifts, and the thousands that flood our shores every year prove that.

One of my referrals was someone wanting to know how Americans feel about US soldiers who are still in Iraq. Words cannot convey how I feel -- humble, grateful, awed, fearful for them, fiercely proud of them, and all the love and support I can direct towards those who are not my children but are as my children because they are both future and present and every one of them possesses a calling and purpose that makes me feel insignificant. They proceed from a line unbroken before Valley Forge and are a part of me.

I could ask how Canadians feel about their soldiers still in Afghanistan, but I think I know. I think Canadians are far greater and better than the prattling of the mainstream press here would indicate, and I think the Liberal elite that rules Canada is not worthy of her.

I alway try to post whatever I can glean about the Canadian military in Afghanistan and the other coalition forces in both Afghanistan and Iraq because I think it matters.

I think that some day, maybe not tomorrow but some day, our kids and grandkids will demand to know what we did and thought during this historical period and I think we'll all want to be able to answer that we did our best.

In many ways, Canada is in far more a transitional period than the US. I knew what the US would do because I know my people and I know how we think, but I was way off the mark in predicting what Canada would do.

I had thought that, given the history of the FLQ and how many people in Canada today have come as refugees from terrorism, that Canada would stand squarely against allowing terrorism to take root in North America. Then Foreign Affairs Minister John Manley had made some very strong remarks shortly after Sept. 11 but was then demoted up and the fence-sitting began.

But the government's dithering did not affect the Canadian people, and despite what Americans may read in the Canadian media and what Canadian politicians may say, I think that Canadians, like their American brethren, are re-evaluating a great many things including their military, patriotism, political correctness, immigration and judicial systems and, the biggest question of all, asking "What kind of people are we?"

Neither Americans nor Canadians want to lose what they are. We're both just trying to clarify matters a little. Most Americans might reply that we are the same, only more so.

I don't know the answers for Canadians, but I am pretty sure that it will be "Made In Canada" and maybe, finally, it won't be prefaced with "unlike Americans" because it needn't be.

You are all so much better than you realize. There is so much heart and courage in you, and anyone who doubts that should take an honest look at how Canadians play and love hockey, because it's all there: holding the line, heads-up gamesmanship, fierce competitiveness, endurance, taking it to the boards, and never quitting. If Mario Lemieux gets cross-checked, you just know that some gloves will be coming off.

Is it really a surprise that the usual "Canadians aren't flag wavers" mantra is always discarded for Olympic and World Cup hockey events? I think not!

My kids were born and raised in Canada, and my dearest wish for them is to love and revere this wonderful country. That is my wish for all Canadians, because you deserve no less.

Posted by: Debbye at 04:27 PM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 1222 words, total size 7 kb.

Remembrance Day

Nov. 11 - Letter of the Day in the Toronto Sun (one day link):

FOR ME, Nov. 11 has always been a special day. But this year it will be extra special because of a man I knew as "Uncle" Billy. He served with the RAF during WW II.

Assigned to a bomber squadron of equally young strapping airmen, he was shot down no less than three times: In the Irish Sea, North Africa and Poland - the latter being the most significant. At that time, the Soviet Army had the Germans in retreat. Alone and in hostile territory, Uncle Billy survived several days of freezing cold temperatures, feeding mostly on moss. At one point he was hunted by a pack of wolves and found refuge in a tree for a day or two. (The wolves kept vigil at the bottom of the tree, before being used as target practice by retreating German soldiers. Thankfully, the Germans never thought to look up the tree).

Eventually, Billy was taken into Soviet custody. They were not convinced he really was a British airman. In fact, they suspected he was a spy. Subsequently, he was cruelly interrogated and subjected to appalling living conditions.

For several months, even after he was reunited with another member of the bomber's crew and his identity confirmed, he was kept captive with little or no improvements to his living arrangements. Eventually, he was returned home. His family had been told he was dead.

He wrote a fascinating book of his experiences after the war. On the first page he describes the ritual the members of his squadron had before a mission. Nothing more complicated than "So ... See you down the pub later." After a mission, the squadron members would meet at the pub for a pint and take stock of who'd been lost.

Uncle Billy died this past July at the age of 83. Recently, his sister showed me a binder of photographs he had taken himself. The most poignant being the photos of the boys who had not returned, labelled simply with their name, nickname and the date they were killed or went missing. Without exception, the men in these photographs were in the prime of their lives.

Lest we forget. Thank you, boys.

David La Thangue
Oakville

Korean vet Tom Somers related the tale of a hockey arena named Imjin Gardens to Thane Burnett:

"The Imjin Gardens" sign put up there was complete with a maple leaf and Canada insignia in the upper right-hand corner. It started with a ring of sandbags, which gave way to an actual boarded arena.

And like any rink here in Canada, it had a canteen which served hot coffee and doughnuts, and even a heated dressing room. Hundreds of men would watch the games -- trucked in from the trenches.

Two tales, one from WWII and the other from Korea, of men who did their duty to God and country and, like so many others of their kind, saw nothing extraordinary in that.

In Afghanistan today, hundreds of Canadian soldiers stood at attention during a ceremony to unveil a stone memorial to 6 fallen comrades in Afghanistan. The inscription on the plaque reads Dedicated to those Canadians who gave their lives in the service of peace while serving in Afghanistan. So why is Canada in Afghanistan again?

"We're here because we were attacked that day," added [Lt.-Gen. Rick] Hillier, who will take over command of ISAF operations in Afghanistan in February.

"Twenty-seven Canadians, I believe was the total, who died on 11, Sept., '01," he pointed out.

Hillier had a few words of reprobation for people who he believes have forgotten the Canadian lives lost in the 9-11 attacks.

"It's sad that that has not been reflected around our country."

I can add nothing to that.

The troops were treated to fresh pizza after the ceremony courtesy of Mike Cyr of Boston Pizza International Inc. (or hit Ctrl+F, Nov. 7 - Canadians in Afghanistan if link blogspotted.)

Do we detect a pattern here? In first the story, Billy wanted nothing more than to stay free and get home. In the second and third, homesick soldiers have improvised so as to have a bit of home in places as diverse as Korea and Afghanistan.

In all three cases, however, yearning for home didn't mean that the soldiers doubted the value of their presence or of their mission.

So why is military action by Canadians treated like a shameful secret in the education system? Why do television programs about the military refer to the futility of war rather than the futility of life under Hitler, Stalin, Mussolini, the Ottomon Empire, Saddam Hussein, the Taliban . . .

You can visit the Canadian Legion Website and both The Canukistanian and The Essay have posts up on the Legion and its other activities.

Posted by: Debbye at 07:20 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 806 words, total size 5 kb.

A future for Chretien at the U.N.?

Nov. 3 - This is sure to help the United Nations regain some of it's lost credibility and relevance: PM out early for UN post?:

MONTREAL -- Prime Minister Jean Chretien is ready to accept a foreign post with the United Nations which could prompt him to leave office before his February retirement date, a Montreal newspaper reported today. Chretien was offered the job, likely with an African development agency, by UN Secretary General Kofi Annan, according to LaPresse. Annan also asked Chretien to sit on an advisory council to promote institutional reform.

However, a spokesman with the prime minister's office's would neither confirm or deny the report. "His plans will be known when the time is right," Steven Hogue said.

The Liberal government in Canada under Chretien's leadership is a source of unending scandal as millions of dollars have simply disappeared, more millions have been inappropriately spent, conflict of interest charges are affecting the Cabinet, and reports from Auditor-General Sheila Fraser indicate that contracts have been awarded without due process.

The armed forces are using dated and dangerous equipment, but the Prime Minister took money from the Defence budget in order to purchase flying palaces for his own comfort. He's a gem, this Chretien; a real freaking gem.

In a sick, perverted way, Chretien and Africa are a perfect fit. The corruption of African govermments have reduced that continent to horrific levels of famine, poverty and disease. In Canada, Parliamentary powers have been subverted and redirected to the PMO (Prime Minister's Office) under Chretien and he is going to advise on institutional reform? Maybe advice on how to be more despotic?

The boondoggle spending in Canada will be a mere training ground for the opportunities offered by the UN, and there will be little fiscal oversight or accountability!

Today Canada, tomorrow the world! Like I said, a perfect fit.

UPDATE: Dang! Paul reports that rumours of Chretien's early departure are untrue.

Posted by: Debbye at 09:02 AM | No Comments | Add Comment
Post contains 334 words, total size 2 kb.