The Laying on of Unholy Hands

My argument yesterday for an inclusive online-telephone vote is with respect to choosing a permanent, not an interim, Liberal leader should the Executive-Caucus choose that option. But it would seem choosing an interim leader through the constitutional route of a Caucus recommendation to Executive is the option the Party prefers to exercise. Because of Iggy's commanding support in the caucus, however, that route obviously favours Iggy. But it also favours him because, once installed as interim leader by the Executive, he would be hard to remove come May no matter who his competition might be. It would be in effect a full anointing, not just a confirmation, and certainly not a fully open and democratic process. The proverbial deck would be stacked.

This interim leader process, despite its apparent reasonableness, the Liberal constitution, and the urgency to resolve the leadership issue, thus strikes me as nevertheless manipulative and elitist. It does not sit well in my craw because it obviates meaningful input from the rank and file of the Party. Having an endorsement added from the riding presidents to complement the Executive-Caucus decision does not solve the democratic deficit either both since many members of a given association do not necessarily agree with their president and since there’s hardly time for any president to get meaningful feedback from his or her members in time for tonight’s conference call. Sure, I can write an email to Caucus and the Executive – even phone them and my president up -- but those actions are not the same as the power of a vote either directly or by way of an elected delegate. Better to go with a permanent leader and fully consultative process to elect that leader during the next two to three weeks.

Change is a Comin"

Looks like a leadership change is coming for the Liberals sooner than later, and so two questions arise: should an interim or permanent leader be installed now, and if the latter, what is the most acceptable process for choosing a permanent leader under these unusual circumstances? Although I wouldn't necessarily support Bob Rae since he still carries his Ontario premiership around in a bag -- even if it's neither a knapsack nor a carpetbag -- his suggestion of an inclusive combined telephone-online vote involving all members of the Party would insure that no one in the Party would feel disenfranchised in the process. Favouring Iggy, who, despite what's he's learned the past two years, is still a problematic candidate, a Party Executive-Caucus appointment would appear elitist. For a Party presumably intent on rebuilding its grassroots support, such a unilateral decision would be disastrous. Be prudent, mes amis.

Reality Check for both Harperites and Liberals

As Joanne Chianello, summarizing pollsters on the recent national surveys, reminds us in today's Ottawa Citizen, three-quarters of Canadians are more concerned about the current economic crisis than they are about the political game in Ottawa as such. Polls also reveal that voters would prefer another election over having Liberal leader Stephane Dion as prime minister. What these figures suggest, then, is not an endorsement of Harper and his regime, as the Harperites would have us believe, but rather that Harper's gains in popularity this past week result from "Mr. Dion's staggering unpopularity, as well as the public's insecurity with this legal, but unprecedented coalition." Given the perceived instability of the coalition under Dion's helm, legal or not, were the coalition to defeat the government on a budget bill, whether reasonable or otherwise, it is highly improbable that the GG would invite the coalition to assume the reins of power. The choice, mes amis, will be between voting for the government budget or an election. Either outcome requires a new Liberal leader for the credibility of the Party.

Liberals: Between a Nasty Rock and a Ridiculous Hard Place

As I suggested yesterday, Harper's real strategy here would seem to be to manipulate us into another election to extricate himself from the current mess since he does indeed know that the House will now never fundamentally trust him again. To retain sustained power, he needs a majority. Given his political blunders in general and his alienating of Quebec in particular, that outcome would seem unlikely without some massive redemptive turnaround. But he also knows he has placed the Liberals firmly between a rock and a hard place.

What will Liberals do if in fact Harper and the Conservatives do reach out to the Party and do deliver a reasonable budget in the process that indeed might stimulate the economy? Would defeating such a budget allow Harper to use the Liberals' rejection of it as a serious wedge in any forthcoming election campaign? Wouldn't any defeat of a reasonable budget, by either Liberals on their own or in the coalition should it stay in place, play even more than it currently does as pure politics under these circumstances? If the Liberals do indeed back down, however, how will that play? As prudent diplomacy or abject weakness? The answer to this last question depends, mes amis, quite simply on who will be leading the Liberal Party on January 26. In that regard, John Manley’s argument in today’s Globe is more than persuasive. It’s mandatory reading for Liberals.

A YouTube Video for Your Viewing Pleasure

A Youtube Video for Your Delectation

Resignations Required

A postscript to my post of yesterday:

In today's Ottawa Citizen, two columnists, Dan Gardner and Susan Riley, concur with the suggestion that Harper's should resign as a potential solution to our current political crisis, and both mention Jim Prentice as a viable alternative. Today's editorial in the Globe also calls for Harper's resignation, and all three items implicitly if not explicitly call for Dion to be replaced as well. But Susan Riley makes an important point about the difference between these two men: "Dion's flaws centre on his competence, not his character. With Harper, it is the opposite." Rick Salutin in today's Globe also sees Harper's character as the source of all our woe.

But because of that nature, don't expect such a resignation to be forthcoming. Harper's real strategy here, as David Herle points out, is to manipulate us into another election to extricate himself from the current mess since he does indeed know, whether the January budget is approved by the House or not, that the House will never trust him again. To retain power, he needs a majority, and he knows it. Hence the all out air war. The Liberal's best hope is thus a new leader in place by the end of January, something the Party Executive in consultation with the caucus could in fact bring about, reserving the May convention for an endorsement of that choice, difficult as it might be. The survival of the Party as a viable option for Canadian voters depends, in my judgment, on this immediate action.

Brazen in Every Way

I'm sure Jean was pressured if not -- given Harper's perpetual modus operandi-- bullied into proroguing Parliament. But regardless of that decision, regardless of whatever efforts Harper might now make to seek amends with the opposition parties, and regardless of whatever lack of public confidence in the opposition coalition there might be, especially because of Dion at the helm -- justified or not -- the fact will remain that the House has loss confidence in the government and, in particular, trust in its leader. The most satisfactory way out of this political mess would be Harper's resignation, replacing him with a Conservative, say, Jim Prentice, who might command both some respect and trust from the opposition -- someone who is a Conservative, in other words, not a Harperite -- at least temporarily.

But, hey, who am I kidding? No way "hair in the fridge" is ever going to resign, though, it's true, he has taken his marbles home before on other occasions when he's not gotten his way. I suspect, as always, he'll just brazen it out. And Dion has done his party no favour by staying around after his appalling responsibility for the devastating losses in the last election. He too, I suspect, will brazen it out.

And so it is, in reality, about politics, not policy, and certainly not about either Canadian people or the Canadian economy, though it will affect both profoundly.

Postscript to Season Greetings

See Chantel Hebert's recent summary of Dion and Co.'s woes:

Dion's Crisis

Seasons Greetings! Harperite Majority Likely

Now that sovereignty is effectively off the table for the PQ because of their poor performance in the last provincial election, a retraction thus skewering if not unhinging the political focus of their BQ cousins in Ottawa, what good reason do soft Quebec nationalists have to vote BQ in the coming election? Not much. And since sovereignty is indeed comfortably recessed, what political relevance do the Liberals then have as the “natural governing” party of Canadian unity opposing sovereignty in Quebec? As the recent bi-elections made clear, once again not much.

Add to this set of conditions the internecine squabble in the Liberal Party that swirls around the question of leadership and party organization not to mention the palpable undermining perception of disarray in the party, and we surely have a potential recipe for a Harperite majority providing they stick to their centralist policy positions: most if not all of the centralist soft and swing votes will likely go to the Harperites with their flexible and thus politically attractive nationalist position on Quebec -- a shift that will increase the Harperities’ number of seats in Quebec significantly -- and many committed left-of-centre votes that would have normally gone to the BQ will likely go to the NDP. That increase in Conservative seats, providing the numbers remain relatively stable for the rest of the country, should be enough for Harper to achieve a majority. Because both the BQ and the Liberals want a fall election and for the same reason – to clean house and begin anew – we may be looking forward, with trepidation if not outright dismay, to a Harper majority and all that will bring with it in December.

Seasons greetings!

Harper and his Bobbleheads

Yeah, I know: it's been a while.

In travelling across the country for the past few months, I couldn't help but notice that even in the four Western provinces, the current Harper government is referred to as Tories. Now each time I hear that term applied to the current regime, I wince if not cringe, especially because on these occasions I also hear the unmistakable turning of a former acquaintance of mine, Dalton Camp, in his New Brunswick grave. Harper and his bobbleheads are certainly not Progressive Conservatives, and I would argue not even Conservatives in a strict traditional political sense. They are, as even the mainstream media would seem to know, Reformers and Alliance in sheep's clothing for the most part, flirting provocatively with the centre in order to maintain power: for the moment only, politics trumps policy. But, given their leader's penchant for absolute control, Harperites might be the most appropriate term, though I must say Jeffrey Simpson's exquisite phrasing is tempting to use on a regular basis: "Harper and his bobbleheads."

Iraq:A failure in generalship

A must read: US Lt. Col. Paul Yingling an active duty officer in the US Army penned this astute essay and blistering attack on the crisis in leadership within the US Military. It has been published in the recent issue of the Armed Forces Journal and in yesterday's Washington Post.

The essay discusses the systemic lack of intellectual leadership and moral courage plaguing the US Armed Forces, it's causes (e.g. a system of promotion based on institutional conformity over measures of creative intelligence, and moral prowess) and effects (e.g. failures in Viet Nam and Iraq), and its remedies.

Canadian political and military leaders/scholars would be doing their country and their respective constituencies a great service by reflecting upon the wise words of Lt. Col. Paul Yingling in this essay, as it relates to our state of leadership both at home and in our mission in Afghanistan.

About the author: ARMY LT. COL. PAUL YINGLING is deputy commander, 3rd Armored Calvary Regiment. He has served two tours in Iraq, another in Bosnia and a fourth in Operation Desert Storm. He holds a master's degree in political science from the University of Chicago. The views expressed here are the author's and do not necessarily reflect those of the Army or the Defense Department.

Principle vs. Politics

Both the media and the TV pundits' response to Dion's stance on preemptive arrests and investigative hearings, I gotta say, have really surprised me. Susan Bonner's rough questioning of Navdeep Bains, Mike Duffy's obvious bias in favour of the defenders of these controversial clauses, and Robin's Sears' assault on Dion-- once again, may I remind everyone -- are the examples of which I am thinking. Not many seem to be looking at Dion's position as a principled one, but rather as some sort of test of his leadership or as pure failed political maneuvering.

In some sense, it is indeed a test of his leadership, a test he has passed with flying colours because he has taken the high moral ground. That morally unassailable position, in the end, will have profound political effects come the next election because, in terms of politics, if one is going to fall into the binary trap of thinking this is an either-or situation, either security or civil rights -- it isn't -- unlike Robin Sears, I think the Canadian people are far more concerned about the rights of all of us before the law -- that is, assuring that people are treated fairly and presumed innocent until proven otherwise in a legitimate court of law -- than in national security as such. Besides, anyone with a brain can see that Dion and his Liberal supporters are not abandoning national security. They are, as Ralph Goodale has explained several times, simply saying, rightly, that these clauses, without a thorough reworking, a significant re-contextualizing, and the time to discuss and debate properly any such reworking, should be sunset. As Goodale has also suggested, if the RCMP really did wish to take advantage of these clauses in their investigation of the Air India disaster -- one specious reason given for renewing them -- why have they not invoked them during their 5-year life?

And, given the pressure from the Harperites, what time was there for parliamentarians to look at the Senate Report on this issue, and why did the Harperites not point to the 5-month old Commons report as a viable opportunity to begin a reworking process? I'll tell you why, mes amis -- because they were the ones playing politics in their recognition of this renewal motion as a potential wedge issue, as an opportunity to promote their law-and-order, tough-on-terrorism propaganda while attacking Dion and company as "soft" on terrorism. Unfortunately, some Liberals allowed themselves to be sucker-punched by supporting the Harperites on the motion, either by speaking out against the Liberal position -- Bob Rae -- or absenting themselves from the vote -- Irwin Cotler. Even though such free speech is an example that differences of opinions are alive and well in the Liberal Party, I rejoice in the fact that Count Michael was not among these wayward folks.

Quote of the Day: Conceit and Connivance

"...there is an image growing of a conceited and conniving man, and he [Harper] better get to the polls early before Mr. Dion's innate integrity has time to hit home with the public."
--Lawrence Martin, G&M, February 22
________________________________________________________________

Nowhere do we see that conceit --some might call it pure arrogance -- and connivance more clearly on display than yesterday in the House when Steve, under the immunity of Parliament -- we can't really call it privilege anymore -- unleashed a vicious and profoundly disturbing assault on Navdeep Bains, thereby associating Navdeep and his family directly with terrorism and, specifically, the Air India Bombing. If this kind of malignant accusation can happen in Parliament, just think of the possibilities under preventative arrests and investigative hearings. These clauses were sunset for good reason. It's not a question of balance between security and civil rights, as some have argued, including a number of misguided Liberals. It's a question of treating all people justly and humanely -- even those under suspicion.

February 24 Postscript: You see? The Supreme Court of Canada (9-0) knows how important it is to treat people justly and humanely. Whether under suspicion or not, everyone has rights before the law. To suspend such civil liberties in any criminal investigation, terrorist in tone or not, merely indicates a failure in the investigators themselves and their inability to use their own lawful procedures effectively. If we are about anything in this country, it is the Charter of Rights. Kudos to M. Dion for taking the high road.

One More Stealth Assault on Canada's Heritage

Should Ottawa area Liberals begin pressuring the Harperites and their minions to retain ownership of the federal properties on Wellington Street and Sussex Drive? Indeed they should. As both John Leaning and Julian Smith have argued (see February 2nd's Citizen), this array of magnificent architectural achievement should not be viewed as mere mortar and bricks. These buildings are in fact of great cultural and historical value, and, as such, they are national treasures that should be preserved for posterity. Once they've been sold to private enterprise, whether leased back to governement or not, there is of course no guarantee of their preservation unless they already have declared heritage status. And, should it ever wish to do so, the government may never be able to recover ownership on behalf of the citizens of Canada. The move to dump these historical heritage properites for a short term cash gain is of course characteristic of the Conservative's general indifference to matters cultural or artistic unless some monetary or political value can be attached to them. Those of us who care should seek the intervention of all the Oppostion Parties on this matter, not just the Liberals.

Note: Don't be surprised to see the government's contribution to the Canadian Television Fund, the cable fund that supports Canadian television programming (albeit what little we have of it) disappear after next year -- another subtle component in the "stealth" unification of North America, a process in which the Harperites have been participating for some time, as some of you know, and about which Maud Barlow and so many others have lamented.

Quote of the Day:"Three in Ten"

‘ Harper’s Canadians’: a hard- core three in 10

"Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s political coalition is predominantly male, they prefer a Tim Hortons double- double over a Starbucks latte, are less likely to watch CBC than other Canadians, see Don Cherry as a “ national icon” rather than an embarrassment, watch more sports, and are most likely to fear a terrorist attack, according to a new poll.

The sub- set of voters, representing about three of every 10 voters and dubbed “ Harper’s Canadians” by the pollster, are financially a little better off than most citizens, care relatively less about the environment, hate the gun registry and are typically uncomfortable with gay marriage, take a tougher approach to crime, and mostly don’t view Canada’s social safety net as a “ sacred trust.
...

The issues that unite the swing group with core Tories, and separate it from the anti- Tory group, are crime, the economy, Canada’s relationship with the U. S., and ethics — all issues where Mr. Harper gets strong ratings."

-- PETER O’NEIL THE VANCOUVER SUN
_________________________________________________________

So pointless to mention to this crowd that global warming is the crisis of our lifetime, no use talking about the principles of equality and social justice inherent in a support position for same-sex marriage, no point in chatting about the necessity for guns of all sorts to be registered to aid our police forces in their investigations of crimes committed with such weapons, no need to point out that most if not all people working with and within our law courts agree that tougher sentencing for either young offenders or career criminals is not a deterrent, and just a waste of breath arguing that a caring government should be concerned to help all of its citizens, old and young, wealthy or poor, through its social programs. And what could we possibly say about the economy, our relationship to the U.S., or the ethics of politicians that wouldn't offend this essentially white bread male group who seem to think Harper and his bobbleheads are doing just fine in these areas? Not much, sad to say.

These people walk among us, and they probably watch CNN if not Fox News regularly. We could forgive them for that, but how can we possibly forgive them for their perverse adoration of Don Cherry and their foregoing of the pleasures of a Starbucks latte?

By their tv watching and coffee drinking, if not their beer, shall ye know them.

Should Liberals be Worried?

Well, a new parliamentary session has begun, and two things are obvious. One, it turns out Harper and his bobbleheads are not all about policy, as they claim, but all about politics and spin as evidenced by the Harper Cabinet shuffle, the launch of the pre-emptive TV attack ads attempting to define Dion before he and the Liberals do, and the introduction of a series of recycled, modified Liberal initiatives on the environment. And, two both Count Michael and Dion have immensly improved in their media performances on CBC and CTV.

Would one could say the same about their performances in the House. Dion looks awful as Leader of the Oppostion in the House. There's simply no sense of presence in the image, as we say in the film game. It's just not part of the man's tonal range to be a boisterous, yappy attack dog (with apologies to Kyoto). He should ask one simple straightforward question and then turn the attacks over to other front benchers who are better equipped rhetorically and tonally to do the heavy oral pushing. He needs much more time to develop a from the hip, non-notes assault strategy both because he isn't totally comfortable with his new role yet or with the necessity to articulate so frequently en anglais.

And if we don't get a clear and differentiating complete policy platform statement on global warming and the environment soon, I'm afraid the Liberals will begin to lose significant ground to the Harperites, on the one hand, and the Greenies, on the other. I count the NDP and Block out in this particular political shell game. So I, for one, am worried.

Note: And (with apologies to my blogging colleagues) can we please stop calling the Conservatives Tories? As any real Tory knows -- because s/he has been hearing Dalton turning over and over in his grave for at least two years now -- the revised Reform-Alliance Party is not a Progressive Conservative one.

A thought on Conservative Middlemen

I might trust a saleman to sell me an existing house but I sure as hell would not trust one to build me a home, nor to design or build on an addition. Canada, our home is still under construction and expansion. If the Tory's are just going to simply recycle and re-announce NDP, Green and Liberal programs and ideas on the environment, why not cut out the middleman?

Going to the Wall for Bush

Bush's Final Surge: Shortly before President Bush’s Iraq surge speech on January 10th, the U.S. Navy dispatched an additional carrier strike force to the Persian Gulf. During the speech the president assailed Iran and Syria, blaming them for the failures in Iraq. Within hours of the speech, U.S. troops invaded the Iranian consulate* in Arbil, Iraq and arrested six Iranian nationals. The same day, the US began to freeze the assets of Sepa, the oldest and 5th largest Iranian bank. Before the US Congress could consider approval of the president's request for funding of additional troops in Iraq, 4000 of the 17,500 requested for Baghdad had already arrived in Iraq's capital.

On January 11th, China, the number one importer of Iran's gas and oil, is alleged to have successfully used an ant-satellite missile to destroy a 4 foot wide weather satellite orbiting at 530 miles above the earth. Whether or not China was firing a warning shot across the bow of forces that may be seeking to provoke further destabilization of the oil-rich regions, the Chinese incident and its timing appear to have caught the Americans by surprise. There are mainstream news reports that the US, UK, Canada, Japan and Australia governments have voiced their objections to China about the resulting space litter, and weapons potenial. Curiously, there are no official statements or press releases on any of the Canadian government websites.

As tensions in the Middle East continue to escalate, the prospects of a larger regional war loom louder, Canadians would be wise to consider whether our new Prime Minister might follow George Bush's lead into another ill-conceived, illegal and more deadly adventure.

Lest you forget: Former Alliance MP Stephen Harper was outraged when then Prime Minister Chrétien refused to have Canada join the Iraq war. On March 28, 2003, six days after the illegal invasion had begun, MP Harper and MP Stockwell took to the Wall Street Journal's editorial page to publicly admonish Prime Minister Chrétien's decision, and to swear their allegiance to the American cause:

Wall Street Journal, March 28, 2003

Canadians Stand With You By STEPHEN HARPER and STOCKWELL DAY

Today, the world is at war. A coalition of countries under the leadership of the U.K. and the U.S. is leading a military intervention to disarm Saddam Hussein. Yet Prime Minister Jean Chrétien has left Canada outside this multilateral coalition of nations.

This is a serious mistake. For the first time in history, the Canadian government has not stood beside its key British and American allies in their time of need. The Canadian Alliance -- the official opposition in parliament -- supports the American and British position because we share their concerns, their worries about the future if Iraq is left unattended to, and their fundamental vision of civilization and human values.

Disarming Iraq is necessary for the long-term security of the world, and for the collective interests of our key historic allies and therefore manifestly in the national interest of Canada. Make no mistake, as our allies work to end the reign of Saddam and the brutality and aggression that are the foundations of his regime, Canada's largest opposition party, the Canadian Alliance will not be neutral. In our hearts and minds, we will be with our allies and friends. And Canadians will be overwhelmingly with us.

But we will not be with the Canadian government.

Modern Canada was forged in large part by war -- not because it was easy but because it was right. In the great wars of the last century -- against authoritarianism, fascism, and communism -- Canada did not merely stand with the Americans, more often than not we led the way. We did so for freedom, for democracy, for civilization itself. These values continue to be embodied in our allies and their leaders, and scorned by the forces of evil, including Saddam Hussein and the perpetrators of the attacks of Sept. 11, 2001. That is why we will stand -- and I believe most Canadians will stand with us -- for these higher values which shaped our past, and which we will need in an uncertain future.

Messrs. Harper and Day are the leader and shadow foreign minister, respectively, of the Canadian Alliance

----------------------------------
Arbil consulate* - The US claims that the Iran's Arbil office did not have diplomatic status. (Arbil also known as Erbil, and Irbil)
----------------------------------------------------------
Updated Jan 21, 2007 4:30pm
Here's a rather interesting web find regarding China-US relations post-satellite destruction incident:
China delays general's U.S. visit Jan 15, 2007
China's military is delaying the U.S. visit of its strategic nuclear forces commander despite a promise by Chinese President Hu Jintao last year that the general would hold talks with the U.S. Strategic Command leader...

Caroline Bartholomew, chairman of the congressional U.S.-China Economic and Security Review Commission, said Beijing's failure to respond to the U.S. office is a concern. "The commission recommended a [U.S.-China] dialogue on strategic-forces issues to ensure that both China and the United States understand the lines in the sand," she said. "There are certain acts which have traditionally been and will continue to be seen as hostile, such as blinding satellites and threatening a nuclear attack on our cities." more...

Updated Jan 23, 2007 8:30am
China confirms launch of anti-satellite missile test.

Recyle, Re-Khan and Refusal

Harper's New Environmental Plan: Recycle Old Liberal and NDP Ideas
OTTAWA — The federal government is expected to produce a flurry of environment-related announcements in the next week or two, but they won’t necessarily come from the new environment minister...
Some of the imminent programs could resemble Liberal programs cancelled over the past year, and given new names. [The Chronicle Herald, Jan 16, 2007]

Unaware: Harper Bought a Lemon
After the disclosure that former Liberal Wajid Khan lent his own election campaign and his riding association $268,000 over two elections through his Toronto car dealership, a top Liberal official said the association has almost no money and will likely be unable to repay the money it owes Mr. Khan.
If the money is not repaid -- and a Conservative source said the outstanding debt to Mr. Khan is rumoured to be between $60,000 and $70,000 -- the loan would be considered a contribution and likely ruled illegal because it exceeds the Elections Act donation limit. [Ottawa Citizen, Jan 16, 2007]

Refusal to Release the Khan Report
JERUSALEM, OTTAWA -- Prominent Muslims voiced frustration yesterday at the Prime Minister's refusal to release a report written by his special adviser to the Middle East. With the document under lock and key, the president of the Canadian Arab Federation went as far as to suggest Wajid Khan's tour last fall may have been nothing more than a sham. "We are now suspicious that this whole thing was a charade," Khaled Mouammar said.
The Globe and Mail has begun to paint a fuller picture of the meetings, which were conducted in six countries over an 18-day period last September. [Globe and Mail, Jan 16, 2007]

Update:
January 16, 2007 - Liberal MP Albina Guarnieri formally demanded the Foreign Affairs Committee call Conservative MP Wajid Khan to present and discuss his report on the Middle East. [Liberal.ca News Release]

Arbil and Iraq's Thin Line

Did the Arbil office in Iraq office have diplomatic status?

The President of the Kurdistan region claims YES, it did have diplomatic status. Iran says Yes. Russia says Yes. The U.S. says No.

The Iraq Foreign Minister says "we are treading a thin line".[1]

Thus the answer to a secondary and more important question -- "Has the US broken another international law?", at this point depends on who you believe and how well you read betwixt the lines. [See He Said, She Said below]

Don't hold your breath waiting for the main stream media or the UN to answer the question of whether or not the Arbil/Irbil/Erbil office had diplomatic status. Whether the office has diplomatic status or not, by failing to notify or involve the Kurdistan government of the office raid, Bush has single handedly poked a stick in the eyes of the Kurds. Perhaps that was his plan all along -- piss off the Kurds so they too can become active in destabilizating of Iraq, ergo the region.

Defiant he began, Defiant he remains
Bush: "Congress can't stop surge". While the Senate and Congress debate whether or not to support Bush's request for an additional 21,000 troops, someone should let the good folks in Washington know that 4,000 US troops arrived in Iraq today

As long as American forces occupy Iraq there is little hope for democracy in Iraq, and peace in the Middle East. As long as Bush is in the Decider-In-Chief there is NO hope.


------------------------------------------------

A Game of He said, She said

Iraq/Kurdistan
The Official statement by the Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) on the US Raid on Consulate of Iran: [2]

11 January 2007 The Presidency and the Kurdistan Regional Government express their dismay and condemnation of the American action against the official consulate of the Islamic Republic of Iran in Erbil, capital of the Kurdistan Region of Iraq.

The consulate was opened by agreement between the governments of Iraq and the Islamic Republic of Iran, and enjoys immunity and protection under the 1963 Vienna Convention on Consular Relations. Unlike other parts of Iraq, the Kurdistan Region enjoys safety, security, stability and the rule of law. The US action does not conform to the policy of attempting to spread security and stability throughout all of Iraq. No military action should be taken in the Kurdistan Region without consultations with security authorities here.

The people of the Kurdistan Region protest against and reject this action which violates our internal sovereignty. We do not accept that disputes with our neighbouring countries should be brought onto our soil. We call for the immediate release of those arrested.

Iraqi foreign minister, Russia defend detained Iranians, Associated Press, Januray 12, 2007 ...Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari (a Kurd) said the building where the Iranians were detained Thursday had operated with Iraqi government approval for 10 years. "We are now in the process of changing these offices to consulates," he said. "It is not a new office. This liaison office has been there for a long time." He also echoed concerns the United States and Iran were dragging Iraq into their fight."We don't want Iraq to be a battleground for settling scores with other countries," Zebari, a Kurd, told CNN....

Iraq Asks US to Release Five Iranians, Focus News Agency, Januray 15, 2007 Iraq has asked the United States to release five Iranians arrested last week Iraq on suspicion they were involved in Iraq's insurgency, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari told CNN on Sunday, as cited by AFP News Agency."We have communicated with the US Embassy and the command of the multinational forces seeking their release if they are found not guilty," Zebari told CNN's "Late Edition with Wolf Blitzer." He stressed, however, that Iraq was "not a party" to the investigation of the detainees by US forces. On Thursday, the US military arrested the five Iranians at an office in the northern city of Arbil, suspecting them of being agents for the Iranian government who had been arming militias and inciting anti-American attacks in Iraq. The arrests triggered a diplomatic row, with Tehran accusing the US force of violating the building's diplomatic status. Zebari, repeating his explanation of the incident he gave in Baghdad on Friday, said the Iranians were working out of a "liaison office," which for many years both Baghdad and Kurdish regional authorities had been aware of. The office, he said, has been providing "consular service for the local people ... But recently in fact we asked the (Iranian) embassy to transfer this entity into the consulate so there would be a formal recognition of their status." He said the detainees were members of Iran's Revolutionary Guards, which "is part of the Iranian political system" and "very effective and very influential in running (Iran's) foreign policy. That is the reality of Iranian politics."
[Murphy's Point Comment : It might come as a shock, but there are active and ex-US military personnel in the US Congress, the Senate, and the US Diplomatic Corps, some of whom have been known to run for the presidency of the USA.

When Rice et al premise their defence of the attack on the Iranian office with "they have ties to the Revolutionary Guard" think --Yes, they might have, as the Revolutionary Guard was (and is) part and parcel of Iran's Armed Forces. ]

Russia
Russia has denounced the U.S. attack on the Iranian consulate in Iraq as an "unacceptable" and gross breach of international law. "It is absolutely unacceptable for (U.S.) soldiers to storm a foreign country's consular institution on the territory of a third country," Russian Foreign Ministry spokesman Mikhail Kamynin said on Friday. "It is the crudest possible violation of the Vienna Convention on Consular Relations."

Iran and the US are currently engaged in a war of words.
Both countries have dispatched diplomatic staff to surrounding countries to plead their respective cases.

----------------------------
Related:
About Arbil From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
Arbil (also written Erbil or Irbil; BGN: Arbīl; Arabic: اربيل‎, Arbīl; Kurdish: هه‌ولێر, Hewlêr; Syriac: ܐܪܒܠܐ, Arbela) is believed by many to be the oldest continuously-inhabited city in the world and is one of the larger cities in Iraq. The city lies eighty kilometres (fifty miles) east of Mosul. In 2005, its estimated population was 990,000 inhabitants. The city is the capital of the Kurdistan Regional Government.

The Revolutionary Guards are back, The Economist , Jun 17th 2004 TEHRAN

Iran's Parliament

Beneath the Headlines, Beyond Reproach, and Above the law

Embassies and International Treaties Under Siege

The headline language used by The Age, an Australian news site, illustrates the hypocrisy and biased reporting rampant in the mainstream media. Since Bush's surge speech on Jan 10th at least three embassies have come under attack. The Russian and Iranian embassies in Iraq were fired upon on Jan 11th, and this morning the US embassy in Greece was attacked.

While The Age does not report at all on the Russian embassy incident in Iraq, its headlines concerning the US and Iranian embassies were: 'Terrorists' attack US embassy in Athens and US forces raid Iranian office in Iraq. As intended, the headlines suggest a barbaric violation of the law versus an act enforcing the law. The choice of words is revealing since no injuries were reported, nor hostages taken in any of the attacks, EXCEPT in the case of U.S. assault on the Iranian embassy, in which 6 Iranian embassy staff were taken hostage by US forces.

Why didn't the second headline read "US Terrorists attack Iranian embassy in Iraq, hostages seized"? (Nevermind, I know the answer.)

Headlines aside, what about the rule of law? Did the U.S. president not breach yet another international treaty, specifically Article 31 of Vienna Convention of Consular Relations in its attack and seizure of the Iranian embassy, or is it "just goddamned piece of paper" like the US constitution, that someone above the law can ignore at a time and place of his choosing?

In the past, the United States has used the Vienna Convention to protect its citizens abroad. After 52 American hostages were taken in Iran in 1979, the United States sued Iran in the World Court using the protocol, and the court ruled in favor of the United States.

When will this president be held accountable? Before, or after it is too late?

Update: Jan 12, 2006 1:30pm
US Forces release one of the hostages taken from Iranian consulate, Jan 12, 2007
Yesterday embassy is today's "liason office" (Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari ). How quaint ... I should have seen that coming. When cornered, change the definition. Problem solved. The UN, the Iranians, and the rest of the world can relax, an embassy was not attacked. Nor were hostages taken -- they have been invited over for tea by U.S. coercive interrogators vacationing in Iraq.

Just hours before Saddam was executed, Iraqi Foreign Minister Hoshyar Zebari denied reports of the custody transfer and said there was "no definite timeline for the execution". Zebari said "He has not been handed over to the Iraqi authorities".
---------------------------------------------
References
Russia’s Embassy in Baghdad Twice Under Fire, Jan 11, 2007
Russia’s Embassy in Baghdad was twice under small-arms fire January 10, according to the official web-site of the foreign policy authority of Russia. No injuries reported. A spokesman of the U.S. Embassy was told that, under the mandate of the UN Security Council, the U.S.-led Multinational Force in Iraq is directly responsible for ensuring safety of the diplomatic corps there.

'Terrorists' attack US embassy in Athens, Jan 12, 2007, The Age, Australia
An explosion that rocked the U.S. Embassy in Athens early Friday was an "act of terrorism" caused by a rocket that was fired into the front of the building, a senior police official said. The US Embassy in Athens came under attack this morning. Greek police believe a rocket the outside of the building, causing minimal damage and no injuries.

US forces raid Iranian office in Iraq, Jan 11, 2007, The Age, Australia
US forces stormed an Iranian government representative's office in the northern Iraqi city of Arbil early and arrested five people, including diplomats and staff, Iranian officials say.

Bush's "Don't quit five minutes before the miracle" Surge

My better half likes to claim the ignoble position of having been the last person to buy Nortel stock at its peak ($123) during the summer of 2000. The pico-second after the transaction was confirmed by the on-line trading web site, we could see the share price begin its steep descent to a penny stock. While we did not acquire additional Nortel shares after that summer, we never sold the disgraced stock. Why? Certainly not because we believed that the Nortel shares would rise like a phoenix from the ashes. No, we needed to preserve the poignant psychological and financial lesson we had learned. We needed a monthly reminder of what not to do with our remaining time on this planet.

The boy-who-couldn't-learn Bush, on the other hand still believes that a miracle awaits him around the corner in Iraq. More disturbing, the learning impaired president appears to be on the verge of waging an all-or-nothing bid by invading both Iran and Syria to over compensate for his losses in Afghanistan and Iraq.

Recommended: Time magazine explores the psychology of a surge

Godless Words from the Teleprompter of GWB

It was billed as the "speech of his life". In a pre-taped address delivered at 9:00 pm last night, the world watched as George Bush read lines from a teleprompter for over 20 minutes. As expected, he requested additional troops -- "more than 20,000". Hmm... "more than"? Lot's of blame was dished out to Iran, and Syria, as were the strategic locations of "carrier strike groups" thus setting the stage for a wider regional conflict. Breaking BBC: US forces storm Iranian consulate in Iraq. [Foreign embassies and diplomatic outposts are legally the foreign soil of the country represented. The US invaded Iran.]

Most memorable line: "There will be no surrender ceremony on the deck of a battleship"

Most notable missing elements: God and values: Not once did Bush mention God or "values" in the address. Has Bush abandoned God, or has God abandoned Bush?

Meanwhile, back in the UK, Tony Blair will announce today that almost 3,000 troops are to be cut from the current total of 7,200 in Iraq.

Related:
Text of Bush's speech
PBS: Bush speech and responses by politicians and retired generals
Dennis Kucinich: Bush setting stage for wide war
A Crisis of Confidence, Howard Fineman
Robert Fisk: Bush's new strategy - the march of folly

LOL great e-mail to Cafferty on the "Surge speech"

CAFFERTY: Wolf, the question this hour is what does President Bush have to say tomorrow night to sell his plan for a troop increase to the American people?

Dave in Shell Beach, California writes: "He would have to say that if it works, he and Cheney will resign. And if it doesn't, he and Cheney will resign. But if it's so-so and hard to tell if it's working, he and Cheney will resign."

Child Fitness Tax Credit: Who Should Be Sweating?

PART 1 - What the government didn't do

As the Expert Panel for the Children's Fitness Tax Credit released its recommendations, its chair, Dr. Kellie Leitch, told a news conference in Ottawa that for the exercise to boost children's fitness, the activity has "got to make them sweat."

A fifty page report entitled "Report of the Expert Panel for the Fitness Tax Credit" was submitted to MP James Flaherty, Minister of Finance in October 2006.

One would think Dr. Leitch should be sweating now in embarrassment as the general public and the tax reviewers at Canada Revenue are called upon to do what Dr. Leitch, as chair of the "Expert Panel" was specifically asked to do and didn't do -- and that was to provide clarity and guidance on what activities would be eligible for tax credits.

The report states -- "the primary purpose of the tax credit was to help get sedentary kids active". The mandate, as requested by MP Flaherty, specifically requested that the panel:

1) review the working definition of an “eligible program of physical activity”
2) provide advice on:

• Whether an eligible program should necessarily include an element of instruction or supervision;


• Whether any changes in the eligibility criteria are required to accommodate programs for children with disabilities; and


• Whether the definition is clear and sufficiently comprehensive to provide guidance for the Canada Revenue Agency in determining the eligibility of specific programs and activities.

Focus on Mandate No. 1 - The Working Definition
The Expert Panel started with: "An ongoing program suitable for children in which substantially all of the activities undertaken include a significant amount of physical activity that contributes to one or more of: cardio-respiratory endurance, muscular strength, muscular endurance, flexibility, and balance."
And ended with: "An ongoing program, suitable for children, in which substantially all of the activities undertaken include a significant amount of physical activity that contribute to cardio-respiratory endurance, plus one or more of: Muscular strength, Muscular, Endurance, Flexibility, and Balance."

Focus on Mandate No. 2 - Provide Advice
The panel solicited advice from hundreds of experts representing organizations with a vested interest in the tax program. (According to the report, 1200 submissions from individuals and groups were received.) Even though the panel's proposed line of questioning to all of the participants in the discussion included the questions which activities should or should not be included, the 50 page report makes absolutely no explicit recommendations. Thus, the "cardio-vascular experts" at Canada Revenue are left to decide who's eligible for the tax credit.

Some implied inclusions in the report:
Dance: "... a dance group that uses the school would be eligible, as would the extracurricular school basketball team."
Golf: "The Expert Panel recommends that membership fees should be eligible for the tax credit. In organizations such as golf clubs or clubs that sponsor more than just physical activities, only the portion of the membership fee that is activities-based would be eligible."... "Lessons or instructions provided by clubs would be eligible, assuming that they meet the other criteria set out in these recommendations."

Some Tax Credit Deductions: If golf is eligible, why not curling? If curling is eligible, why not bowling? If bowling, why not archery... Ahh but the government spokespersons says its all about sweat.
Parents of trumpet players take heart, just submit this photo along with your child's tax receipt for their lessons. And drummers, listen up -- you burn approximately the same number of calories per hour as your golfing buddies.

The report in a nutshell: After three months of study, the Expert Panel altered the working definition of eligible program, nixed the idea of instruction supervision except where "camps" are involved, did a commendable job of accommodating the needs of disabled children but failed miserably in its mandate to provide Revenue Canada with clear guidelines on which programs are eligible. Ya gotta feel for the the private accountants and income tax handlers at Revenue Canada, who now must decide who is eligible.


SOTP Policy
If the chair of the Expert Panel, Dr. Kellie Leitch isn't sweating, then Prime Minister Harper and Finance Minister Flaherty should be.

Indeed, the panel failed its given mandate. But more importantly, Prime Minister Harper and Finance Minister Flaherty failed to develop a sound policy that would have a positive impact on the realities of chilhood obesity. Instead of providing incentive for sedentary kids to get active, the policy provides a $77 carrot to middle-income parents for maintaining the receipts for programs that their child was already enrolled in.

The program is estimated to cost 160 million dollars annually. The program provides no incentive for the children living in poverty, the group most identified as having the highest levels of child obesity. Nor does the policy target the rural areas -- the regions with the greatest prevalence of child obesity. Further, the program does not include nor propose any benchmarks from which one can judge the success or failure of the new program. In short, it would appear that the tax payers money has been squandered on another SOTP (seat of the pants) policy aimed at vote acquisition and not problem solving.

Canadians by and large are very generous beings. They are more than willing to share their good fortunes if it will directly assist those in need. This policy kicks dirt in the face of those who wish for a kinder, gentler, more accountable nation.

Part II - What the New Government Could Have Done cont'd on Friday

-----------------------------

Additional Reading:
Poverty and the extent of child obesity in Canada, Norway and the United States, Department of Economics, Dalhousie, University, Halifax, Nova Scotia, Canada, June 6, 2005

Report of the Expert Panel for the Fitness Tax Credit, October 2006 (pdf file)

Jean-Pierre Kingsley's Surprise Resignation Raises Questions on the Hill

Today, the Hills Times' reporter Berea Vongdouangchanh pieces together many of the facts surrounding the sudden and unexpected resignation of Chief Electoral Officer Jean-Pierre Kingsley during the Christmas break. See Kingsley resignation surprises MPs in likely election year.

While most of the known facts are covered in the Hill's report, the author left out one significant piece of the story:

On October 24, 2006 the Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs was reviewing the C-2 legislation, when conservative Senator Nolin tried to insert this clause in the new FAA bill:

Senator Nolin: I would like to move the following amendment to Bill C-2, at clause 44, by adding after line 36 at page 57 the following:(4) The fee paid by an individual to register at a convention of a registered political party does not constitute a contribution if the cost of organizing the convention is equal or superior to the total of the registration fees paid by all the individual participants. However, if the cost is inferior, the excess, divided by the number of participants having paid registration fees, will constitute a contribution paid by each of those individuals.

Questions:
1.Why did a Conservative Party Senator Nolin attempt to insert a piece of legislation into the Federal Accountability Act that in effect would have legalized the Conservative Party's earlier violations of the Election and Income Tax laws?

2. Precisely, when did the Conservatives submit their amended 2005 Financial Statement to Elections Canada? Before of after the bill received Royal Assent?

3. Why did the government of the day remove the responsibility to prosecute Election Act violations from the Commissioner of Elections Office (Part of Elections Canada), a non-partisan agency and put it in the hands of the government's new partisan agency -- the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)?

4. The Conservative Party of Canada was under active investigation for its 2005 Financial Statement that excluded its March 2005 convention fees. Re-filing the statement would not necessarily bring closure to the investigation. The Federal Accountability Act became effective as of Jan 1, 2007. Does that mean that any violations of the Elections Act under active investigation prior to Royal Assent now must be prosecuted (if at all) by the new partisan agency -- the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)?

Contact your MPs: We need answers to the many questions that have arisen from these so called "unrelated events".
--------------------------------------------------------
Related:
Bill C-2 - FAA:The Fox is in the Hen House , Jan 3, 2006, Murphy's Point

Harper's Battle Against Free and Fair Elections , Dec 30, 2006, Murphy's Point

Tories amend ethics bill they're accused of breaking, Nov 17, 2006, Globe and Mail

Harper's Gotcha Game

To my political pundit friends in the blogosphere and the MSM:

It has become apparent to me that it really doesn't take much to outwit the ol' blogosphere and the main stream media. Any object, it doesn't have to be shiny or even new, just the perception that there may be news is enough to have every raven in the region pecking and sampling in that direction.

So the Conservatives shuffled the chairs on their sinking ship ... meanwhile the issues that could negatively impact you and your country are all but ignored. After two weeks of speculation, which will now undoubtedly be followed by two weeks of "in depth" analysis only to discover that nothing has changed except that you may have taken your eye off the ball.

Ya gotta give Stephen Harper credit for truly understanding the short attention of the media and utilizing that knowledge to the maximum. More accolades to Steve: Nobody on the Hill has a better sense of timing than Stephen Harper: Bad news is to be delivered late on Fridays or during holiday periods while every one is busy with the family. Ideally, bad news should be followed with an event that will draw attention away from any negative publicity. Cabinet changes, trips to visit the troops etc. come in handy on such occasions. Lastly, he understands the medium better than most that:

Press conferences are called to deliver good news or no news

Bad news on the other hand is delivered by press releases only

Any wonder why there have been so few press conferences? Could it be that there is not a lot of good news to share? Surely after his one year in office, the blogosphere and the MSM should be attuned to his tactics. But judging from the lack of coverage and serious analytical thought on the recent significant events over the holiday period, I would say not -- he gotcha good!!!!

Perhaps you think you are too smart to have that feller dupe ya, eh? ... Well then, I invite you to play a little game of Harper Gotcha...

(Score 1 point for each blank filled in or question answered, highest score = 7)

Fill in the blanks: The new Federal Accountability Act transferred powers to prosecute _____ offences from the non-partisan agency ______ to the new partisan Office of ________.

What is David Novak's relationship to Jack Abramoff?

Ok, I'll go easy on you: Who is David Novak?

Trick question: When did the Conservative government submit its amended 2005 financial statement to Elections Canada?

Which conservative Senator tried to inject a clause into the Federal Accountability Act that would get the Conservatives off the hook for its 2005 breach of the Elections and Income Tax acts?
-----------------------------------------
If you scored 4 points or better, I do apologize. The rest of you -- Harper Gotcha!! ... Snap out of it!

Bill C-2 - FAA:The Fox is in the Hen House

Taking the "Count" out of Accountability

Bill C-2 , the Federal Accountability Act (FAA) received Royal Assent on Dec 12, 2006. As of Dec 11, 2006 the Conservative Party was in breach of Federal Elections laws and Income Tax laws for not declaring an estimated 1.7 million to 3 million dollars in revenue from its 2005 convention.

Late on Dec 28, 2006, the Conservative government posted a press release on its website announcing the resignation of Chief Electoral Officer, Jean Pierre Kingsley. It was only thereafter that the general public became aware of two significant events that had unfolded one week earlier:

1) Sometime between Dec 12th and Dec 23rd, Elections Canada posted on it's website the Conservative Party's re-filed 2005 financial statement; The date-time stamp on the controversial statement is marked Dec 12, 2006 08:58.
Exactly when Elections Canada received the re-filed statement is not known: The main stream media on Dec 28th, reports a filing date of Dec 21st or Dec 22nd depending on the source. In fact, it was blogger Jason Cherniak that first reported on the silent re-filing of the Conservative Party's 2005 financial statement in his Dec 23rd posting.

2) On Dec 22nd, after 17 years of dedicated service and with no forewarning, the Chief Electoral Officer Jean-Pierre Kingsley submitted his resignation by letter to Parliament.

The details surrounding these two significant events have not been fully explained by the main stream media. The public deserves to know more about this chain of seemingly related events.

Questions:
Q1: When did the Conservative Party deliver its re-filed financial statements to Elections Canada?

Q2: Why did the Conservative Party, after denying any wrong doing for months, re-file or date/stamp it's financial statements Dec 12th, the morning before the Federal Accountability Act was to receive Royal Assent?

Q3: Why did a Conservative Party Senator Nolin attempt to insert a piece of legislation into the Federal Accountability Act that in effect would have legalized the Conservative Party's earlier violations of laws. [Link]

OTTAWA, Tuesday, October 24, 2006: The Standing Senate Committee on Legal and Constitutional Affairs, to which was referred Bill C-2, providing for conflict of interest rules, restrictions on election financing and measures respecting administrative transparency, oversight and accountability, met this day at 2:30 p.m. to give clause-by-clause consideration to the bill.

Senator Nolin: I would like to move the following amendment to Bill C-2, at clause 44, by adding after line 36 at page 57 the following:
(4) The fee paid by an individual to register at a convention of a registered political party does not constitute a contribution if the cost of organizing the convention is equal or superior to the total of the registration fees paid by all the individual participants. However, if the cost is inferior, the excess, divided by the number of participants having paid registration fees, will constitute a contribution paid by each of those individuals.

Q4: Why did the government of the day remove the responsibility to prosecute Election Act violations from the Commissioner of Elections Office (Part of Elections Canada), a non-partisan agency and put it in the hands of the government's new partisan agency -- the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions (DPP)?

Q5:Why did the opposition parties agree to the flawed FAA, specifically as it relates to the transfer of prosecutorial powers from an independent body to a partisan agency, something that our Senators argued vehemently against?

Q6: Does this new partisan function (DPP) created in the accountability legislation not weaken the very thing it was designed to protect us from?

Q7: Since the Commissioner of Elections has of yet not taken any action to prosecute the Conservative Party of Canada for its alleged election law violations under investigation (wrt. the convention fee revenues), does the decision as to whether or not to prosecute the violations now fall in the hands of the Conservative governments soon to be appointed partisan agency (Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions)?

Q8: The Conservative Party has steadfastly denied all wrong doing with respect to its non-disclosure of millions of dollars in revenue from its March 2005 convention. Yet it has re-filed its financial statement to include some of the revenue acquired via the 2005 convention fees but only after it failed in its attempt to insert a new clause into the Accountability Act that would is essence free the party from further scrutiny and possible litigation over the non-disclosure of conventions fees.
Does the quietly re-filed 2005 financial statement of the Conservative Party of Canada not warrant a full and thorough audit or public inquiry in light of party's reluctance to come clean on its financial reporting practices, its later attempt to retro-fit the law making what was illegal now legal, and finally, its transfer of prosecutorial duties out of the hands of an independent arbiter?

Summary
A fox has clearly been in the hen house before drafting, while drafting and after drafting the legislation on government accountability.

We, the people, demand full accountability on all of the above issues.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Further Reading

• Bill C-2 The Federal Accountability Act (FAA). An Act providing for conflict of interest rules, restrictions on election financing and measures respecting administrative transparency, oversight and accountability. Royal Assent (December 12, 2006)
• Director of Public Prosecutions Act, and the Office of the Director of Public Prosecutions, Administrative Transparency and Disclosure of Wrongdoing (Part of Bill C-2)
• Harper insists law is on party's side, experts and old Tories differ, June 30, 2006, by Joan Bryden and Jennifer Ditchburn, Canadian Press
• Electoral chief asks to see Tory books, June 30, 2006 by Brian Laghi, Globe and Mail
• Conservatives faked delegate donations, July 1, 2006 by Barbara Yaffe, Vancouver Sun
• Elections Canada says Tory's cheque swapping may be a violation of federal law, July 10th, 2006 by Simon Doyle, Hill Times
• Tories unaware of cheque swapping, July 11, 2006 by Peter O'Neil, Vancouver Sun
• Harper, 2 other MPs exceeded donations limit, December 27th, 2006, The Canadian Press
• Entire re-filed 2005 financial statement for the Conservative Party of Canada
• Harper's Battle Against Free and Fair Elections , Dec 30, 2006, Murphy's Point

Harper's Battle Against Free and Fair Elections

Background
On Thursday December 21, 2006 after the parliamentary session was closed for the Christmas break, Stephen Harper's Tories quietly refiled their controversial 2005 financial statement to Elections Canada. One day later, the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada, Jean-Pierre Kingsley resigned, dispatching only a short letter to the Speaker of the House. Prime Minister Harper did not announce Kingsley's resignation until a week later by press release.

While the details surrounding Kingsley's abrupt resignation remain a mystery, Harper's decades-long battles and personal attacks waged against Jean-Pierre Kingsley and the legislation enacted to curb the power and influence of big money in our elections are of public and historic record.

PART 1 - Harper goes to court against Canada

Elections, the Levers of Democracy
The most important levers of democracy are elections -- free, fair and transparent elections. From campaign funding controls, management of voters lists through to vote counting, on a world stage, Canada's professional and technical expertise is election planning and delivery is second to none. Since 1980, Elections Canada has organized some 400 international democratic development missions in 100 countries around the world, the bulk of the missions occurring under the stewardship of Jean Pierre Kingsley, Chief Electoral Officer (CEO) of Elections Canada.

While American political processes over the past few decades have been mired in money, malfeasance and even murder, Canadian political campaigns and elections by contrast have been cited as a shining example of how should funded and conducted. In spite of the recent McCain-Feingold Campaign Finance Reform bill enacted by the US Senate in 2002, loop holes in the American legislation continue provide safe conduits for the transfer of money in exchange for power and influence. Thus money remains king in America's political processes from candidate selection through to vote tabulation. Wealthy corporations, trade unions and individuals continue to own the candidates as they do voter registration drives, and the election machinery that counts the votes.

Canada's Turning Point in Election Reform
In all probability, Canada would have followed a similar path to that of our neighbors to the south had it not been for a clause in the 1920 Dominion Elections Act aimed at terminating the political partisanship and regional disparities with respect to the administration of federal elections. The piece of legislation created a non-partisan federal agency reporting directly to parliament and responsible for the planning and conduct of federal elections. The head of the agency, the Chief Electoral Officer is appointed by Parliament.

While, only Parliament can legislate electoral reforms, the CEO frequently advises, assists and makes recommendations to Parliament.

Free of overt political influence and its proxies, the non-partisan agency is able to methodically work toward more principled goals of inclusiveness, fairness, accountability and transparency in elections.

By contrast, in the US, election administration was and remains largely under the jurisprudence of state and county agencies who's laws vary from state to state, and county to county. In 1975 the Federal Election Commission, a small but independent body, was established to administer and enforce statutes that govern the financing of federal elections. The Commission, which meets about twice a week and is comprised of six commissioners who are appointed by the president and confirmed by the Senate, with no more than three members to be affiliated with one political party. Typically, nominees have been chosen more for their partisan loyalties than for their ability and inclination to enforce the laws passed by Congress. Indeed, one outgoing GOP commissioner, Bradley Smith, routinely advocated the abolition of the very commission of which he was a member, and was against campaign finance restrictions in general.

Who is Jean Pierre Kingsley?
Jean-Pierre Kingsley is the 5th person to serve as Chief Electoral Officer of Canada. In 1990, Mr. Kingsley was nominated for the post of CEO of Elections Canada by Prime Minister Brian Mulroney and unanimously confirmed by the House of Commons of the day.

After 17 years of leadership, and innovation in electoral reform many would call Mr. Kingsley the "Supreme Commander" for free and fair elections at home and abroad -- a true champion of the people. However, to a small but vocal minority with less honourable interests in mind, he was viewed as an obstacle to corporate spending and influence.

"The jackasses at Elections Canada are out of control," Harper wrote in a 2001 letter to raise funds for Paul Bryan of B.C. who was fined for posting election results on the Internet. [Torstar, Dec 30, 2006]

While Mr. Kingsley has been credited with long list of accomplishments that have strengthened our democracy at home, his most important achievement in electoral reform comes by way legislation that aims to minimize the power and influence of money in our elections.

The 30 Year War On Third Party Spending
Few Canadians outside political and corporate circles know of the battles Jean-Pierre Kingsley and his predecessor (J.L Hamel) have fought and the scars they bore in trying to wrestle away the power and influence of big corporate money on our elections.

The war on money in elections began with a legal blow to the corporate world in 1974 with Election Expenses Act, which prohibited any individual or group other than a candidate or a registered political party – a "third party" – from spending any money to promote or oppose candidates or parties. However a large loop hole in the legislation (ironically called "the good faith" defense) permitted business as usual so no serious challenges to the legislation were mounted at the time. A near decade would pass before legislation (1983, Bill C-169) would close the loop hole and thus awaken the forces that profited from corporate influence.

In the 20 years of legal and legislative wrangling that followed, two distinct opposing forces would duke it out in the Alberta Courts and the Supreme Court of Canada. It was an epic battle of The Corporations versus The People: those that believed in anonymous funding and unlimited spending, led by the National Citizens Coalition (NCC) versus those who wished for strict election transparency, accountability and limits on political spending, inspired by the recommendations Jean-Pierre Kingsley.

The pivotal battles waged against the interests of ordinary Canadians are detailed here and are summarized below:

1983 National Citizens' Coalition Inc. v. Canada (filed in Alberta Court of Queen's Bench)
1993 Somerville v. Canada (filed in Alberta Court of Queen's Bench; David Somerville, then President of the National Citizens Coalition)
2000 Harper v. Canada (filed in Alberta Court of Queen's Bench; Stephen Harper, then President of the National Citizens Coalition)
2004 Harper v. Canada before Supreme Court of Canada

The Peoples Laws - Limiting the Flow of Money into Politics
After 20 years in the courts, the will of the people of Canada prevailed. On May 18, 2004, the Supreme Court of Canada overturned the decision of the Alberta Court of Appeal. The nine-member court ruled that the provisions on third party registration, election advertising and spending limits were indeed constitutional.

According to a 1991 study conducted by the Royal Commission on Electoral Reform and Party Financing, when faced with the choice of having spending limits for all participants, including third parties, or limits for none, 90 percent of Canadians opted for controls. All surveys and polls conducted in the past 15 years reflect similar support for spending caps on political participants in the electoral process.

The intent of the 3rd party Spending and Candidate Spending laws are crystal clear -- keep big money out of our political processes.

While no law can eliminate all corruption, power and influence, the election reform laws introduced by Jean-Pierre Kingsley that Stephen Harper fought so hard against, have undoubtedly diminished the opportunities for abuse and led to greater accountability, fairness and transparency in our democracy.

By RuralOntarioLiberal

Reader's Quiz: Who is the real jackass? Who is the true champion of the people?

Part 2 - Bill C-2 - FAA:The Fox is in the Hen House
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
References
Third Party Expenditures: An Analysis of the 1997 Study by Tony Coulson

Royal Commission on Electoral Reform and Party Financing. According to that study, when faced with the choice of having spending limits for all participants, including third parties, or limits for none, 90 percent of Canadians opted for controls (Blais and Gidengil, RCERPF research volume 17, 1991: 84-89).

Money and Elections: Can Citizens Participate on Fair Terms Amidst Unrestricted Spending? by Janet L. Hiebert
Canadian Journal of Political Science / Revue canadienne de science politique, Vol. 31, No. 1 (Mar., 1998), pp. 91-111

Regulation of Election Activities by "Third Parties": Overview and Statements by the Chief Electoral Officer

Chronology of the Federal Campaign Finance System of Third Parties in Canada;Chronology of the US Campaign Finance System

California Canadian

Twas Christmas eve in Los Angeles
And all was so quiet
Not a sign of an earthquake
A wildfire or riot!

When burst through the fog
A loud jingle and jangle
All of Hollywood looked up,
And thought "What is this angle"?

Just when the skylights
Hit a sleigh and its' reindeer
There was a hush, then applause
And a sound so clear.

HO HO HO Merry Christmas
May you be of good cheer
And keep joy in your hearts
Through the coming year.

With a tug of a long rope
To a huge bag in tow
The soft , white flakes fell
On the people below.

As the sleigh disappeared
You could hear Santa say,
Now that's something new,
A miracle in L.A.

Quote of the Day: Ed Broadbent -- Are You Listening?

"...the Tories have the potential to make the Liberals look like they forswore the pig trough for the Atkins diet." -- Eric Reguly in yesterday's Globe on the Harperites "affection for corporate welfare" during their current reign.

And Harper's Christmas gift to Canada

And "May I call you Steve?"'s Christmas gift to Canada -- a totally neo-con appointed board to oversee stem-cell and fertility research and practices in Canada --conveniently announced while Parliament is not in session and before the Appointments Commission under the new Accountabilty Act comes in to effect on January 1. And who was it who said that Harper and his bobbleheads don't have a neo-con, far right agenda but instead are playing to the middle? Everytime we think we might be hasty in our judgment along comes something disturbing, frightening, like this. Yeah, he's still very scary.

Steve's letter to a private citizen, Sheldon Ehrenworth,explaining his rejection of several of Gomery's recommendations, rather than an announcement to that effect in Pariliament or a courtesy communication sent to Judge Gomery himself, not to mention several other patronage appointments this week, all of which escape the Appointments Commission, suggest with the appointments to this board a pattern of hypocritical disregard for Harper's own legislation and, in their timing, a cynical manipulation of the Holiday Season. A lump of coal for the Harperites.

e

Quote of the Day: "Political Midgets" on Display

"Ministers stand behind the Prime Minister [Steve to his U.S. friends], nodding sagely at all the right moments, like a clutch of bobblehead dolls." --Jeffery Simpson in the Globe today writing of the PM's penchant for photo- and tv-ops.

Harper's Christmas Gift to Afghanistan

Wells, food, medicine, schools for all.
Tens of millions of dollars worth of "super-accurate" weapons.

The Defence Department recently purchased six more 155-mm howitzers . The new "pieces" have the ability to hit targets up to 20 kilometres away using conventional shells.

The army has also purchased GPS-guided Excalibur shells which are able to hit within a 10-metre circle around a target at up to 40 kilometres. This fall, the Defence Department purchased a handful of the experimental shells at bargain basement cost of $150,000 each.

Source: CP Dec 21,2006

Effects of the "so called" green house gases

Dear Diary,

Today I mowed my so-called green grass.
----------------------
30 minutes from Ottawa. (45°24′ N 75°40′ W)

Anxiety and Inclusiveness

I see that I am not alone in my concern about Count Michael's appointment as Deputy Opposition Leader. Susan Reily in the Ottawa Citizen today and others in the Party worry about his potential policy sway, especially on Afghanistan, one of the only files, it should be noted, on which the Count took the time to comment in his remarks on his appointment to the press. His policy statements on Iraq and Afghanistan are of course antithetical to the view of both Dion and Canadians in general. His inexperience, as evidenced in his many gaffs during the leadership campaign, is another worrisome factor for Dion. So, yes, there is indeed a price one pays for Party Unity, and it is called anxiety.

The other severe challenge for Mr. Dion, as today's Globe and Mail editorial points out, is inclusiveness. Given that he has been so front and centre on promoting an increased proportion of women Liberal MPs, Dion now needs to foreground some prominent women in his central organization beyond Martha Hall Findlay and the three office women he has so far appointed. He also has to expand his regional organizational base to reach out beyond Ontario where the "dream team" is centred -- to the West in particular, for obvious political reasons -- to expand his dream and in the process feature some key ethnic minorities. This is tricky business, but I think it can be done with some advice from Mr. Chretien, who during his reign as PM was very astute in his ability to balance factions within the Party. Some prudent choices for the shadow cabinet are absolutely required, and given the tact Dion has shown so far, we feel certain he can rise to the occasion.

Count Michael in Waiting

Is this move tactical or what? What better way to colonize your potential enemies than to welcome them into the tent, weakening, relaxing, their coiled subversiveness by giving them an important job that forces them to work with you rather than against you? In the process you might also potentially bring the warring, resentful factions in the caucus together and soothe the savage souls of Quebec Liberal MPs. Still, Count Michael possessed of so much power is nevertheless a bit scary, wouldn't ya say?
____________________________________________________________________________________
Press Releases
Stéphane Dion Appoints Michael Ignatieff as Deputy Leader
December 18, 2006

QUÉBEC - Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion announced today that fellow former leadership candidate Michael Ignatieff will be the Deputy Leader of the Official Opposition.

"Mr. Ignatieff brings a considerable wealth of knowledge and accomplishment to this new role," said Mr. Dion. "I am delighted to have him join me in leading a united and principled opposition to the minority Conservative government."

The appointment of Mr. Ignatieff as Deputy Leader is the first in a series of new roles within the Liberal organization to be announced in the coming days.

Women MPs: Dion Walks the Talk

Keeping a leadership campaign promise, Stephane Dion has launched a project to increase the number of Liberal women MPs in the commons. In this process, there will be strong pressure to run women candidates not only in ridings where a current MP has said s/he will not run in the next election (such as Outremount) but also in ridings which did not register a Liberal win last time out. (I would imagine that those ridings that have lost two in a row, in 2004 and 2006, of which there are several, will be especially vulnerable.) By establishing search committees, the latter will be encouraged to seek of their own accord a strong woman candidate. While some ridings will welcome the opportunity, seeing virtue in the directive in and of itself, others will, for a variety of reasons -- some acceptable, some not -- resist. In doing so, depending on the reason, the latter no doubt risk having the nomination taken out of their hands completely, in which case a candidate will be forced upon them – not a pleasant prospect, be the candidate male or female. But, as Dion has said, reluctant as he may be to use it, the power to do so is in his “pocket.”

In other words, the weak ridings will be targeted for potential female candidates while freed-up safe ridings will be reserved for star women candidates. All this makes perfect pragmatic sense if we actually want to push up the ratio of potential women MPs. Some Liberals (and of course Liberal opponents) are perforce grumbling, saying it isn't really democratic to foreground women candidates. My answer to such griping is that the nomination process has never been a democratic one. It has always been driven by an old boys machine, backed by money and power. Count Michael’s insertion from on high into Etobicoke-Lakeshore is a classic example, but even smaller potatoes are oiled, to some extent, by the same money-power machines, tools seldom available if ever to women candidates.

The Dion initiative drifts towards quotas, true, but the associations can control the outcome by deciding democratically which women candidates can be brought forward through their search committees, and any failure to come up with a good woman candidate will simply mean that the committee just hasn’t done its work. Why? Because we know there are talented women out there in every riding. And we need this quota-like pressure if we’re going to change things since we still have, as we all know, systemic discrimination against women in politics and elsewhere. The post-feminist myth is just that -- a fable old boys recite to themselves in men's clubs and Liberal backrooms everywhere. Gender, as Stephane Dion knows, is always on the table.

A Crass-Word Puzzle for Canadians & Oil Industry Execs

Oil SL _ _ S : Give me a 5 letter word used by peers in the tobacco and oil industries to describe those who prostitute their expertise for favours rendered.

On Tobacco SL _ _ S, and Oil SL _ _ S: I know its a derogatory term, but it is one that is prevalent in industries where science and product salesmanship have the potential to compromise the truth through oversight, bias and the worse case - collusion.

Credibility is the most important asset in a salesmen's toolkit -- big companies know that, and in fact spend millions of dollars each year trying to figure out how to seduce or borrow that attribute from the pool of scientists that may help boost their sales. Further, millions are dollars if not billions are spent on PR firms hired by large corporations to put the right spin on their product.

Case in point -- The tobacco industry: Credibility was essential to the positive public image the tobacco industry cultivated. The tobacco companies spent billions of dollars preying on researchers, looking for that exception that would be willing to cozy up to the industry by lending his name and more importantly his credibility to the industry. The seducee received all expense paid trips to exotic places, along with generous financial support for research in exchange for favourable talking points about the seducer's product. The industry, propped up by the borrowed credibility publicized study and study refuting the "uncompromised" scientists' claim that tobacco has harmful. For years, the tobacco industry, its PR firms and a few seduced researchers literally got away with _______.

The conflict of interest problem has long been recognized by professional associations and mandatory controls have put in place to guard against flagrant prostitution. Not so with the business associations, where PR remains king.

The oil and gas industry: one of the most profitable industries in Canada (27 billion $ in 2005, receiving the most generous federal subsidies 1.4 billion dollars annually), while causing the most amount of pollution. Fearful of the green revolution and the pressure it will put on the industry to clean up its act, the oil industry has taken to investing heavily in PR firms and individuals who can best enhance their profits, defend their subsidies, and defer any pollution controls. Their PR strategy, borrowed from the success of toccaco industry's playbook, relies heavily on injecting doubt into the debate.

Oil Companies Paging Dr. Tim Ball. The 67-year-old former University of Winnipeg professor has spent much of the past year disputing the overwhelming evidence on the realities of climate change. A colourful speaker and writer, his opinions are frequently sought out and paid for by the businesses and political entities that depend on that vital injection of doubt.

A must read: The Globe and Mail wrote a thorough piece on the PR money trail in Aug 2006 entitled "Nurturing doubt about climate change is big business". Dr. Ball and his kind are heavily featured in this article. For those without a Globe subscription the article is reprinted here.

Other individuals the industry can still count on to seed doubt:
While Cabinet Minister Stockewell Day opening mocks climate change in a letter to his constituents, PM Harper trys to defend his clean air agenda, says "They [the other parties] focus only on so-called greenhouse gases"

On Credibility: Alberta Premier Stelmach, former Peter Lougheed and Preston Manning have recently raised serious concerns about the un-checked growth of the industry and its impact on the environment, and on the wallets of the ordinary citizens of Alberta. Stelmach wonders aloud whther the industry is paying its fair share of taxes, while Albertans carry the burden of inflation and damage to the environment. What do Stelmach, Lougheed and Manning know about management, accountability, sustainability and judgment that Stephen Harper doesn't?

The Harper government that hastily axed the National Day Care program, cut funding to the Status of Women and Court Challenges programs and reversed itself on the Income Trusts issue, refuses to even consider any reduction or review of the annual 1.4 billion dollars in oil& gas industry subsidies. Nor will it consider any further regulations, incentives or technology changes necessary to control the amount of environmental damage, and ensure sustainable growth.

Harper said "accountability" would be a priority. The question is: "Accountable to whom?"

MP Rona Amrose, Minister of the Enviroment, to her credit has put on a brave face, but we all know that it is her PM that carries and controls the purse.
------------------------
Further Reading:

1. Former Premier Lougheed and Reform leader Preston Manning value a greener approach in the oil and gas industry.
Preston Manning Plays the Green Card
2. New minted Alberta Premier Stelmach questions whether the oil and gas industry is paying its fair share of taxes.
3. Albertans Support Carbon Taxes, " Surprisingly, the country's top oil, gas and coal producing regions -- Alberta, British Columbia and Atlantic Canada -- showed the most support for a carbon tax.", Nov 2006 Ipso-Reid Poll
4. Chasing the dollar: why scientists should decline tobacco industry funding , Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health '
5. Climate Change PR Spin busters
   Desmog.com An army of detectives investigating and reporting on climate change PR spin

Principle and Practice

Lawrence Martin suggests in his Globe column this morning that Dion will do well with voters if he just sticks to principle, and he gives Dion a little whack for what he thinks is slippage on principle with Dion's willingness, albeit reluctant, to renounce his french citizenship if that sacrifice were to help him defeat "May I call you Steve?" As I've argued in a previous post, that willingness can be read not as slippage but as a tactical declaration in its implication that Dion would sacrifice the personal for the patriotic.

Where the play on principle will be seen most forcefully is on the upcoming potential Bloc motion to seek the withdrawal of Canadian troops from Afghanistan -- a motion designed simultaneously to play to the latest polling figures in Quebec on Afghanistan and to divide the Liberals who, under Dion's leadership, are clearly gaining ground in Quebec. Many pundits feel the Liberals will be between a rock and a hard place, squeezed between those like Count Michael in the caucus who will want to continue support for "the mission" (whatever that is) and those who will want to seek withdrawal.

While it's important to be right, to be principled, it's even more important to be both right and effective. Recognizing fully our international obligations that come with our deployment in Afghanistan, Dion should stick to his principled position of no withdrawal of Canadian troops without consultation from NATO colleagues and serious collective consideration of a refocused mission. That position of principle would require a whipped vote against any Bloc motion calling for immediate withdrawal from Afghanistan, but in that nuanced yet honourable decision Quebecers and Canadians could easily see the differences between a Harperite "stay the course" and a Bloc "let's get out now" position.
_______________________________________________________________

Footnote: I suppose it goes without saying that the Bloc wouldn't mind an election in early March before Charest calls a provincial one, presumably planned for early Spring, and to forestall any Conservative federal budget that might actually solve the "fiscal imbalance" (whatever that is). In other words, the Bloc non-confidence motion can be construed as an assault on not only the Federal Liberals, but also on the Harperites and the Quebec provincial Liberal government. Every bit as clever as the "nation" motion, one might say.

Harper's "new era in democracy" starts tomorrow

In 2004 Stephen Harper campaigned on incremental senate reform -- including an elected senate. He lost the election. In 2006, moments after Harper was sworn in as PM, he announced that he would appoint longtime conservative Michael Fortier to the Senate.

Would you buy a car one piece at a time?
-----
If you thought MP Bev Oda was saving loonies for some yet-to-be declared charity, checkout the spare-parts math in O'connor's department.

Harper's World: A Defense by "Roger Foster"

Damn! Those driveby posters have done it again! Most people underestimate the valuable service that tap-n-run posters such as "John Foster" provide.

Let's suppose that you received this comment to this post. Would you write the fella Foster off or would you see the remarks as an opportunity?

Dear Mr. Roger Foster,
Thank you for providing the opportunity to set the record straight on the important issues you raised.

Re: Cuts to Womens Voices or in your words "streamlining"
Harper's move to cut 5 million dollars (40% of the operating budget) from the Status of Women,a national organization advocating for women, while refusing to cut any of the annual 1.4 BILLION dollars in tax breaks and subsidies to the oil and gas industry (predominately Alberta), requires no further colour commentary.

Re: Kyoto
Now why do you suppose Harper's anti-Kyoto stance is so popular in Alberta? Could it be that the oil & gas industry above is also on the verge of becoming the single largest producer of green house gases in Canada?

To put these facts in perspective: We have one of the most profitable industries in Canada (27 billion $ in 2005, receiving the most generous federal subsidies, while causing the most amount of pollution.

On your "Afghanistan and WWII/Hitler" comparison:
Hmmm. Where to start? Firstly, I certainly wouldn't have advocated joining WWII -- not on the side of Hitler that is. Keep in mind that both Hitler and Bush initiated pre-emptive wars. Neither Afghanistan nor Iraq invaded America. That is a fact.

While there is much to say on the topic of Afghanistan, I'll limit my focus here to your proposition of "our duty to defend those who can't help themselves".

It is helpful to briefly examine the history of the Afghanistan invasion, the key player/proponents and their respective motives:
The Afghanistan invasion, if you recall, was initiated by GWB as an alleged act of retaliation for 9/11. Putting aside the fact that 15 of the 19 hijackers were from Saudi Arabia and none from Afghanistan, GWB's pre 9/11 plan to "do a makeover" on the Middle East began with a brutal 6-week long aerial bombing campaign of Afghanistan using Tomahawk missiles and cluster-bombs. That it was sold to Americans and other countries as justification for a war on Afghanistan is a topic unto itself. That said, the aerial bombing campaign which mainly targeted the 3 largest cities in Afghanistan, resulted in tens of thousands of citizens being killed or maimed.

The subsequent land attack resulted in hundreds if not thousands of Afghanis (mainly innocent civilians) being rounded up and tortured in detention camps around the world. The Americans installed former Unocal oil adviser Karazai to head the new government. (Dick Cheney is a former CEO of Unocal). Is it a coincidence that the American troops and the bases constructed were geographically situated along the proposed oil& gas pipelines routes? While an estimated 4-5 million are starving in Afghanistan, and most of the entire population are without electricity, there is no shortage of American funds for oil research in northern Afghanistan (see huge oil reserve found Mar 2006)

Thus, as a Canadian citizen, I have many questions about Afghanistan that I would like honest answers to. For starters:

• Why did the Bush/Blair administrations invade Afghanistan in 2001?
• Why did Canada agree to send troops in 2002?
• What did we agree to initially?
• Has our mission changed? If so, what is our current mission?
• Is our mission consistent with our policies in Foreign Affairs?
• Are we defending lives or destroying lives in Afghanistan now? Or both?
• How do we measure whether we are achieving our stated mission?
• Are there enough troops in Afghanistan to secure the entire country? If not, do we plan on decreasing the perimeter of protection or increasing the number of troops?
• Does the Afghanistan mission prevent us from conducting other missions of importance?
• Why did PM Harper force an extension of the mission without debate in the HoC?
• Why does the mission continue to be shrouded in secrecy? Why are there no monthly reports on progress made?

Afghanistan has one of the globe's lowest life expectancies: 44.5 years. A fifth of the children die before age 5. Clean water and sanitation reach only a quarter of the people. Fewer than 6 percent have electricity. Abandoned explosives kill or injure up to 100 people monthly. Malnutrition stands at 70 percent, the world's highest level, and illiteracy at 80 percent.

The Bush Administration has all but abandoned Afghanistan to pursue other goals in Iraq, leaving the NATO forces to clean up its mess. There are clearly not enough troops in Afghanistan to secure the entire country. Why does the ISAF continue to act as if it does ?

The lion's share (99%) of the estimated 1 billion dollar annual Canadian contribution to the Afghanistan cause is being used to track down and kill a few dozen suspected Taliban per month, while several hundred times more civilians are dying from neglect. Who are we helping besides the military industrial complex? Canadians and Afghanis deserve more than what we are currently offering and its starts with our leaders telling the truth.

To date, PM Harper has dodged the hard questions about our role in Afghanistan and the real costs and risks associated with it. Opposition leaders have a duty to press the PM for an open debate or full disclosure on all aspects of the Afghanistan mission.

Thanks for popping by Mr. Foster, I needed a gentle reminder of just how badly we are failing our own citizens, our soldiers and those we claim to be defending.

Yours sincerely
Rural Ontario Liberal

----------------------------------------------------
Further Reading:

The Dark Magic of Oil Sands
An Economist’s Case Against an Interventionist Foreign Policy
Afghanistan mission offers surprizing range of opportunties, Ottawa Business Journal
Being Economical with the Truth, CBC News Oct 2006
Peace Operations Monitor: Afghanistan
Women protest Status of Women funding cuts CTV, Dec 2006
Rookie Mistakes Pile Up: Globe and Mail Dec 2006
Forgotten Victims

What Dion,May,Harper, Layton, and Duceppe Want for Christmas

Stephane Dion would like to do more -- he would like more Canadians to know what he is all about. Ditto for Elizabeth May.

PM Stephen Harper Jack Layton and Gilles Duceppe would like a do-over as the polls are not moving in their favour.

Stephen Harper's sudden cuts to womens voices, the Court Challenges program, national child care program, the extension of Afghanistan mission without a debate; his retreat on Kyoto commitments combined with non-delivery of a sound replacement plan, a surprise Nation-granting motion, and staged drama for the benefit of his pro-diff-sex marriage base have left many Canadians wondering what happened to his stated priorities, and worried about what future surprises he has left to deliver. The PM's US-style communications strategy of orchestrated public appearances and Q&A sessions has stifled his own voice. Harper's 1 year legacy: 5 Priorities. Surprise. Surprise. Surprise.

Jack Layton's performance in the past two years has been a disappointment for the switch hitters of whom the NDP depends. His role in bringing down the previous government may have won him a few extra votes at the time. But the voters that "lent" Jack their vote must feel a tinge of quilt now for serving up the Harper agenda. Further, his call for an abrupt withdraw from Afghanistan is viewed as unreasonable and naive. Jack's 1 year legacy: Conservative Enabler

Gilles Duceppe. If it wasn't for that "pesky separatist thingy", BQ leader would enjoy substantial respect from many Canadians. However, the methodical and strategic player once reknowned for his focus on social issues, made a near-fatal tactical error in trying to take advantage of liberal leadership candidate Michael Ignatieff's bumbling proposal to declare "Quebec is a nation" and enshrine it in the constitution. Ironically, the counter motions by Harper that followed Duceppe's motion ignited a backlash across Canada leaving Duceppe looking both blood-thirsty and silly, and Harper looking somewhat reckless. Ignatieff lost the leadership to a nation-unencumbered. Duceppe's 1 year legacy: Dion looks like Captain Canada (a kind and gentle one at that) to Ontario, BC and the Quebec federalists.

Alas, in politics there are no do-overs.

What the boys want for Christmas: Their second choice
Sensing a steady erosion of support, Duceppe and Layton would like an election sooner rather than later. Dion's clarity, content and tone is threatening their base. Harper would like more time. Time to win back the trust he lost, time to buy a few votes with a spring budget; and time to figure out how to poke a hole in the squeaky clean fabric shrouding Dion. Harper's and Layton's questioning of Dion's loyalty was a pin-prick that failed to unravel the patriot's cloth. And, in fact the Harper/Layton "karl-rovian" maneuver may have hurt them in Quebec and in communities of multi-cultural heritage.

It is not clear what Stephane Dion or Elizabeth May want for Christmas -- I suspect it is something green.

What do Grass Roots Canadians want for Christmas?
Stronger leadership on the environment issues, security in the universality of our healthcare system, less secrecy and more clarification on the Afghanistan mission objectives, an end to divisive political chicanery, more women and fewer frat boys in the House of Commons.

Ah, but as stated before, pundits proselytize (incl. the pip-squeakers here), pollsters prognositicate:

Recent public opinion surveys suggest that the NDP, the Bloc and the Conservatives are on a steep downward decline.

Jack and Gilles are falling down the Hill and Steve is clinging to a next-budget rafter.

Ontario, Quebec and BC make up over 70% of the voting public. Quebec and Ontario alone constitute > 59% of the vote. The above surveys are not "happy polls" to any political camp outside of the green ones.

A motion of non-confidence aimed at defeating the conservatives (and halting the Bloc losses) will be tabled by the Bloc using its (and the NDP's) last tether to reality -- the Afghanistan mission.

Question of the day: Will the Conservatives and Liberals respond to the motion with free votes or whipped votes?

Polling Notes:
Ipso-Reid/CanWest poll of 1,004 adult Canadians, conducted Dec. 5-7 Link
Leges poll conducted Dec 4-5 of 602 Quebec adults Link
EKOS Poll conducted Dec 5-6 on 1022 adult Canadians Link & Pdf Graphic
-- Data not available or not applicable

Judgment - A must have for any politician

Comedy acts not to follow: Lysiane Gagnon's piece on "How not to become a PQ Leader" (Globe & Mail) correctly states that André Boisclair, a man who wants to be Quebec's premier — "can't act like a college frat boy and must comport himself with a minimum of dignity. What's worse is that the blunder reinforced Mr. Boisclair's reputation as an immature and irresponsible politician."

Boisclair's stunt grants him a free 4 year membership in the exclusive Canadian club "Frat Boys Unfit To Lead". MP Peter Mackay (of potato and canine fame) life president of FBUTL, could not be reached for comment. Although, he is rumoured to have said "Steph, camon, yer makin' us look bad". [Steph Dion??? Now what did he do?]

Canada, Your Grass Roots Are Showing

Grass roots Canadians far and wide are fed up with the dirty tricks, abuses, name calling, faux motions in our House of Commons and the manufactured controversies.

On Faux Motions
Politics in 2006, like baseball in 1919 has just suffered through a dark period of deceit and deception. Charles Gordon, in the Edmonton Journal reminds us of baseball's moment of shame and compares it with the recent "fix" in the House of Commons. See "Say it ain't so",

You can imagine the shock of politics fans everywhere when it was revealed that Stephen Harper was playing to lose on the all-important same-sex marriage vote. There hasn't been such a scandal since Shoeless Joe Jackson and the Chicago White Sox threw the World Series in 1919...

On Manufactured Controversies
The boys (Ezra , Steve and Jack ) tell us that Dion's inherited dual citizenship is something Canadians should be concerned about. We are happy to report that adult sentient Canadians think otherwise:

A poll conducted this week for CanWest News Service revealed:

49% said Dion should not have to give up his French citizenship.
29% said he should relinquish his French citizenship
22% had no opinion

Bottom Line: Don't Underestimate Canadians and their Preferences...
Leave that to the professional political pundits.
It was a bad year for pundits... woefully out of touch and out to lunch (literally) on most issues of importance to ordinary Canadians.

Murphy's Point Remedy: Instead of sipping martinis with the elite between Blackberry exchanges, have a beer in real time with grass roots Canadians, eh? Let's see how many of the ailing pundits rebound from their diseased state in the new year. Will they sober up before the next election?

Ordinary Canadians say in the latest EKOS Poll; (See The Star article and the more detailed graphic)

Libs 40% Cons 33% NDP 10% Bloc 8% Green 8% ... stir yer martini with that stick,eh!

Getting to know a leader: The Video Collection Part 1

Wading through the distortions and hype surrounding a leader can be both challenging and time consuming for even the most discerning listener and fact checker. While we now know through intense investigative journalism that Stephen Harper does not eat kittens, new Liberal leader Stephane Dion remains an unknown quantity to many.

As the first in a series, Murphy's Point offers up "Stephane Dion -- In His Own Words", a collection of videos from which you can judge whether or not this man has the potential to put our country back on track.

Stephane Dion - Unscripted...
------------------------------------------
CBC's Mansbridge interviews Stephane Dion. Questions provided by ordinary Canadian viewers. Topics covered: Rhetoric versus Action, Afghanistan, Vision for Western Canada; Nation Issue;Income Trusts; Dual Citizenship.
Date: 7-Dec-06
Length: 53:00 min; Start at 22:15 min
Source: CBC Format: Video WMP
Murphy's Choice ****
-------------------------------------------
Rex Murphy interviews Stephane Dion.
Topic: understanding Quebec as a nation
Date: 27-Nov-06 Length: 5:25 min
Source: Youtube Format: Video WMP
-------------------------------------------
First half of interview of Stephane Dion on Revue Politique
Date: 2-Nov-06 Length: 8:46 min
Source: Youtube Format: Video WMP
-------------------------------------------
Stephane Dion: Hot or cold, ya gotta love his genuine enthusiasm
Date: 2-Dec-06 Length: 00:33 min
Source: Youtube Format: Video WMP
-------------------------------------------

In addition to the unscripted videos above, there is a large collection of short videos on his campaign web site that cover a range of topics from policy to dogs . Dogs? Did someone mention Dogs?...
Murphy's Choice: Dion On Dogs (the last video of his campaign web site collection)

Harper Facilitates One Final Gay Bashing

This C38- bride cannot wait for this public festival of bigotry to end. Expect more vicious attacks from Harper's conservative ranks before the day is over.

It is humiliating to sit on the sofa with your mother-in-law watching the CPAC's broadcast of the Same-Gender Marriage debate. While we sit in silence, absorbing the cheap hate-filled blows of elected members of our hallowed House of Commons debate my fitness and suitability as contributing human beings on this planet.

It helps to imagine what inner strength and courage the pre-1920 Canadian women may have summoned to deflect the derisive and repugnant comments hurled from the misogynist members of parliament of the day.

It helps to heed the comforting words of my mother-in-law "This day too shall pass".

Post script:
Harper knows this legislation won't pass, but he and his gang of thugs could not resist one last kick at the minorities - He promised his followers that there would be one final gay bashing. He's a man of his word ... hateful and hypocritical.
For a more objective POV on this topic see:
Jeffrey Simpson: He calls it a Meaningless Charade or Rick Mercer: Same Sex Thursday

Why I love Lowell Green and other Right Wing Radio Hosts

Well rehearsed jokes seldom capture my attention, but listening or watching real life comedy unfold entertains me to no end.

I'm old (spiritually!!), so I've got a schedule that I adhere to. My morning delight begins with a 10-minute dose of CFRA's Right Wing Radio talk show host Lowell Green. Trust me, it will do more for your abs than hours of Turbo-Jam.

Now let me be clear, I never call or write in to The Show, I just listen to see what the opposition is up to. (A good habit I picked up as a competitive athlete.)

Today, Lowell's illuminating subject was "Dion's Citizenship" -- I could not stand down, I had to break my very own rules.

I thought an email with a catchy title might arouse the ego of the primordial life form.

To: mornings@cfra.com
Sent: Wednesday, December 06, 2006 11:23 AM
Subject: Lowel, I thank you for bringing Dion's Citizenship up

I had almost forgotten how ill-informed and hypocrisy-filled you and the conservative party are. Further, it gives me great comfort to know that after all your hours and days spent in search of the dirt on Dion, the best that you can come up with is the fact that his mother was born in France. Good work Lowell ... that's real scary stuff!!!.

FYI, Stephane Dion was born in Canada, but as the son of a parent born in France received his citizenship automatically. You may want to inform your viewers that Stephane does *NOT* own a non-Canadian passport, and that the following Conservative members of Parliament by virtue of being born elsewhere do have dual citizenship:

Name, Place of Birth
---------------------------------
- Vic Toews, Paraquay
- Diane Ablonczy, United States
- Tony Clement, England
- Steven Fletcher, Brazil
- Nina Grewal, Japan
- Rahim Jaffer, Uganda
- Inky Mark, China
- Deepak Obhrai, Tanzania
- Daniel Petit, Belgium
- Myron Thompson, United States
- Vic Toews, Paraguay
- John G. Williams, Scotland

I'm surprised that our Minister of Justice, Vic Towes is allowed to have a passport at all given his guilty plea and subsequent conviction in 2005 for election fraud in Manitoba in 1999.

Lowell, now that you know it is Mama Dion that is the real offender (She was born in ...pssst...yes... FRANCE) are you and your gang of thugs going to beat up on her?

Even if you don't try, the imagery of a charitable and kind Madame Dion disarming the roving radio-band of hooligans with cookies and milk is priceless.

Lowell, you are a constant source of entertainment.

Your most loyal listener,
Rural Ontario Liberal
Somewhere in Rural Ontario
--------------------------
Alas, I can not tell you whether Lowell read my letter on the air, as I said, I limit myself to 10 minutes of guffaw per day.

Update: Dec 7, 2006 7:00 am
Be sure to read the attached comments, especially the PM history trivia from Louise Lamontagne.

Dion's Dual Citizenship: How Low Can they go?

How lame? How ridiculously low do Ezra Levant, Jack Layton, and the media have to sink in order to get to Dion? To the bottom of the pit, it seems. Is this tiny, pathetic issue the only so-called liability they can eke out to nail the poor guy? Dion's dual citizenship as a genuine critique of his capabilties or his status as a Leader of the Liberal Party? Give me a break! We all know he is a citizen of France not because he chose to be but because his mother was born in France and is a French citizen. It's not as if we can choose who are parents are let alone what their citizenship should be. Besides, the obvious question should be what kind of a Canadian is he? Stellar is the answer, and everyone knows it. What prompts this silly attack from those who profess to embrace the multicutural characteristics of Canadian society? To score a little, feeble pin-prick of a tick against the growth of a formidable enemy slowly but surely even this week emerging for serious battle. I suggest if cleansing is called for, how about a nice ideological scrub down for Mr. Harper and the gang to wash away all that neo-conservative Republican filth that still clings to their body politic as evidenced in the same-sex motion in the House today?

Pundits proselytize; Polls prognosticate

Know your pundits... the Quiz
During the liberal leadership race, did your favourite pundit try to sell you the equivalent of an extra-small bikini for that upcoming Alaska cruise?

Fill in the blanks:
There was a time when _______, the national political pundit seemed to have her (oh ,what a giveaway!) finger on the pulse of the nation. That was a few years ago, maybe longer.

Yesterday, in her regular column, _____ mourned the loss of front-runner_____ and with it the loss of Quebec liberal support, while the Globe and Mail on the same day reported a new poll that tells us the exact opposite of ______'s predicted gloom and doom.

The poll shows that if an election were held today, the Liberals led by Mr. Dion would garner 37 per cent of the vote, compared with 31 per cent for the Conservatives. The NDP polled 14 per cent, the Bloc Québécois 11 per cent, and the Green Party 7.

Liberal support in the poll is up five percentage points from a Strategic Counsel survey in October. Most of the gain came in Ontario, at the expense of the NDP and the Green Party.

And in a reaction that defies the conventional wisdom of Quebec pundits, 62 per cent of respondents in the province said that Mr. Dion was a good choice for the Liberals, with only 29 per cent saying he was a bad choice. The approval of the Liberals' pick was higher in Quebec than in the rest of the country, where 55 per cent liked the choice.
Has too much time sipping ________ with the _______ elite impaired _____'s view? Or was the pundit simply proselytizing the Quebec national dreams?

______, you need a holiday. You need to clear your head and your heart. You need to let ______ go.

May I suggest Cuba? That would two kill birds with one stone. Stroll down the streets of Havana, chat with the inhabitants, chat with the many Canadians who holiday there during our winter months. Take a lazy stroll along the miles of golden beaches while you ponder one of _______'s last public interviews as head of the ___ Centre for Human Rights:

In 2004, ______, responding to the question on what should be the top US priority from a human rights perspective.

______ replies: "The United States is sitting 90 miles away from one of the really bad human rights violators in the world, Fidel Castro. A lot of left-wingers keep making excuses for him, but he’s an all around bad guy – lots of torture, lots of detention, lots of illegal execution of dissidents. That’s a huge human rights file that any incoming president has to look at honestly. We have to have a Cuba policy that isn’t in hock to the demand of the Cubans, but stands up for peaceful democratic transition in Cuba and that respects Cuban sovereignty and independence. That’s one place. "

That _____ did not mention even mention Darfur, Afghanistan, or Iraq in his response should give one pause. That said, I have to give ____ some credit for mentioning the aids crisis in Africa in his second breath.

I repeat to my Blackberry friend: _____, let _____ go.

The Supporting Data


______, the national pundit said….

Sep 11 - Ignatieff: savior or sorcerer….As for the seven other candidates, they came as political tourists and left as such.

Sep 25 - The only way to address this dysfunction would be to amend the Constitution. But if, as Dion claims, the lack of modern national institutions is not preventing Canada from living up to its full potential, … In a normal world, that should be a concern for those who are vying to lead the country.

Oct 2 - In that province, Dion's score reflects an organization that is much less robust…Polls have shown that Ontarians have largely failed to cotton on to the only Quebec candidate in the race.

Oct 4 - Michael Ignatieff's constitutional gamble has just paid off handsomely in Quebec.

Oct 13 - who is the most electable. In Quebec, that sense has already brought Ignatieff the most support

- only one in 10 outside Quebec supports Stéphane Dion.

Oct 14 the campaign is primarily a two-way contest between Bob Rae and Michael Ignatieff, with Gerard Kennedy and Stéphane Dion making up a somewhat distant second tier.

Nov 17 - Dion comes up trailing his competition. His Quebec prospects are severely limited by his track record on the post-referendum

Dec 1- Ignatieff…Ignatieff…Ignatieff… monopoly, momentum, succeed, serious contender, cemented the lead, secured endorsements, fits the bill on winnability

Stéphane Dion the delegates' second choice, but he is not even the favourite of his native province, let alone any other region of the country.

** Poll conducted by the Strategic Counsel for CTV and The Globe and Mail in the hours after the convention

ps. But hey, don't toss ____ aside; it is wise to know what the _____ camps are up to.

Congratulations Canada on your new Leader

The Little Engine That Could

It is a good day on planet Earth!

Bob Rae's Leadership ...

Bob Rae showed tremendous leadership by choosing NOT to walk to either the Ignatieff or Dion camp, which would have done little to unify the party. Instead he entrusted his delegates to choose based on their individual heartfelt beliefs.

Dion leads Ignatieff by a small margin of 2.5%. While it is possible that Ignatieff could pull off a victory (aka sleeper cells awakened), it is HIGHLY likely that more than 50% of Rae supporters will choose to go Dion. 50% of Rae's delegates is all that Dion needs.

Ignatieff, it seems will take the risk... and roll the dice. Not a surprise that he would take a small chance of winning over unity, this is afterall, the man that bet on the Iraq war.

Dion, the leader, will summon the combined strength of the other leadership contenders to heal thy party wounds.

2nd Ballot Results

	1st	2nd	Diff
Ignatieff	1412	1481	69
Rae	977	1132	155
Stephane Dion	856	974	118
Gerald Kennedy **	854	884	30
Ken Dryden	238	219	-19
Scott Brison *	192
Joe Volpe *	156
Martha Findley *	130
Total	4815	4690	-125
Spoiled	4	5	1
Number required to win	2480	2346	-
* Has withdrawn after the 1st round
** Has withdrawn after the 2nd round

Questions:

12:40 PM

Will Ignatieff recognize the wall a head of him and move his support to Bob Rae?

Its now a Rae vs Dion contest...

The best that Ignatieff can win now is a foreign affairs post under Rae's leadership and guidance.

If Dion wins, Dion will likely choose Bob Rae for Foreign Affairs.

Even if Ignatieff gets behind Rae, there is no guarantee that all of his delegates will follow, but many will.

Dion stands poised to win (unless Ignatieff makes a move before the next vote). Bob will be the best Minister of Foreign Affairs in decades. For Canada and for the party this may be the best possible outcome.

Either way, this is a good day for planet earth.

Update 2:39 pm

Prediction: Steve Harper will not sleep well tonight.

Brison's Noble Act

Brison did something very uncommon last night. Not uncommon for Scott, but uncommon for beings in general. Brison, knowing that he would not be a contender on the final ballot, chose nobly and wisely to use his time slot not to high-light himself, but rather to hammer home the larger more important messages of the Liberal Party -- that we are fighting back; that we are going to put this country back on track; we are going to honour and strengthen the Charter of Rights; we are going to stop the ugly daily assaults on the environment; and we are all going to prosper because of it.

Profound words may be the hallmark of a great politician, but noble deeds are the hallmark of a great man. Brison's powerful, content rich speech, followed by an equally moving video of an environment under siege was nothing short of jaw dropping gutsy teamwork and sacrifice.

In hockey an assist carries the same weight as a goal. Last night Brison made a picture perfect precision pass to one of his team mates. Which of the contenders is in position to put'er in the net?

Update 9:34 -- Looks like Brison has passed the puck to Rae. Oh, what a game!!! The crowd is going wild. Dion is making a charge up centre ice...

Rankings after first ballot

Not official - Taken from the Leadership 2006 Results Viewer.

1st - Ignatieff - 1412 votes

2nd - Rae - 977 votes

3rd - Stephane Dion - 856 votes

4th - Gerald Kennedy - 854 votes

5th - Ken Dryden - 238 votes

6th - Scott Brison - 192 votes

7th - Joe Volpe - 156 votes (Has withdrawn after first round)

8th - Martha Findley - 130 votes

Speechless

On Ignatieff's Speech: "Stick a fork in him, he's done" says Tim Powers, Tory backroom operator, CBC pundit

Murphy's Point of View
Ignatieff - s l o w , low key, nothing new
Kennedy - no kleenex required, not bad, good delivery, needs a better speech writer
Dion - 3 Kleenexes, very intelligent and compassionate, focus on environment
Rae - 4 Keenexes, very moving, honest, sans notes, 'Clintonesque + bonus points for his intro video ... Volpe walked across the conventon floor to join the Rae camp

We missed Dryden's speech as we without power due to the storm, but the pundits say it was very powerful.

Iggy the Saviour

Warning! This post may be construed as either invective or satire.

"None of this would likely have happened if Mr. Ignatieff had not deliberately fanned the embers of Quebec nationalism in his campaign for the Liberal leadership. Without Mr. Ignatieff's publicizing of the issue, it probably would have simmered harmlessly. He is a classic example of the irresponsible intellectual who advocates what seem like good ideas, and only afterwards comes to understand and regret the unintended consequences of the positions he has taken. He did not learn the lessons of his ghastly Iraq folly. After making mistakes that would have humbled and silenced most thoughtful men, Mr. Ignatieff instead chose to bring his carpet bag of ideas back to Canada . Millions pay the price of the Ignatieff ego."

This is the most stinging paragraph in Michael Bliss's piece in the November 25th Post, but confronting Iggy supporters directly with such now frequent critiques does not seem to change their minds one bit or even shift their ground an inch or so, no matter whether the issue is his support for the Iraq war, his voting to extend the "mission" (whatever that is) in Afghanistan, his contradictory take on the Lebanon-Israeli conflict, the Quebec "nation" turmoil we're now in, you name it. I know because I've tried. Of course, perhaps understandably, they immediately become defensive because their egos, not just Iggy's, are on the line when so confronted. Conversation, dialogue, just doesn't seem possible.

Now here's the thing: I have yet to speak to an Iggy supporter, each of whom seems to have come to Iggy early in the campaign before he rolled out his string of gaffs from July on, who says he or she is supporting him because of the practical wisdom of his policies and their radical differences from those of other contenders or the brilliance of his moral and political judgment. The only answer I've ever received is a variation on a classic redemption myth -- that he's the messiah of the Liberal Party, the Chosen One come to redeem us, raise us up from our fallen ways under Martin and Chretien in order to bathe us in the light of his intellect and heal our wounds. This is the ground of Ignatieff's "Politics of Hope." Several of these people have actually told me that the gaffs are little miracles, evidence of his leadership, his courage to be different, to be bold, to speak out on matters of concern to Canadians, whereas the rest of us just see them as evidence of failed moral or political judgment, whether a product of inexperience or not. I'd like to think it is inexperience, but I suspect it's something innate.

What motivates these people in their blind allegiance or faith? St Paul defined faith as the evidence of things unseen, and so we may ask from whence does such faith, such unseen evidence, in Iggy the saviour spring? Only in one thing so far as I can see -- the unseen pungent aroma of power that can be sniffed in the well-oiled Liberal Party Machine of the Ignatieff Campaign Team, those who sought the redeemer out in the first place, those who now swaddle the saviour protectively as he continues his messianic mission on earth in the holy city of Montreal. Unlike that other messiah guy, however, I see little altruism or love in this chosen one. Instead I see just a lean lanky guy with a very large head walking along the road to Ottawa with a baseball cap perched on that huge head beneath his red, hooded warm-up sweatshirt whistling Dixie and carrying a dirty carpet bag. Attached to it is a luggage tag stamped "Property of the U.S.A. If Lost, Return to U.S.A. or U.K," and, as we track in, we begin to see clearly the writing on the baseball cap -- "Unity Bomber."

Quotes From the Convention Floor

From the mouths of babes and beyond...

The Globe and Mail:

More women, please
Dr. Howard Forsyth, 94 years old:
"I'm the oldest delegate at this convention. I worked at the Winnipeg Free Press in 1936 when John Diefenbaker was prime minister. I should be a member of Mensa, but technically I'm not. I'm still alive because I eat about half of what most people do, and I never get drunk. The most important issue today is gender neutrality. I want to see a woman at the top of every organization in the world in the next 10 years. Men are predators."
Dr. Forsyth says this as he exits the delicately titled session, "Bearpit with Bob Rae."

I'll drink to that !

Meanwhile out in the ether:
The bets are off Ignatieff ... he is running a distant 3rd behind Rae, and Dion at Pinnacle's on-line betting site.

Spotlight On Bob Rae's Provincial Record

A response: to a poster's question about whether or not Bob Rae's provincial track record would hurt him in a general election? Did I forget about the Rae Days?

The short answer is NO, the long answer is...

In hind sight, the larger view of Rae's record in Ontario is that:

Of the variables within the controls of a provincial premier, Bob Rae did a very admirable job and did it with tremendous compassion, understanding, respect and equally important, through a lens of greater focal length that leaders that were to follow Rae.

During Rae's era, the whole country was in a deep recession (remember the Canada wide 22% interest rates on bank loans, the real-estate market crash in Alberta) and yet Rae managed to save thousands of public service jobs through his ingenuity i.e. the "Social Contract" and the Rae Days. While the public servants did take a small financial hit by way of a few days of lost pay, they were not shoved heartlessly aside to join the ranks of the permanently unemployed. That was Rae's choice, and he chose wisely and with deep compassion.

The ruthless reign of Harris that followed Rae compassionate leadership, eviscerated the Ontario public service leaving many of its dependents literally on the streets . During the Harris Cruel Days, we lost more than a few days of work:

Lives were taken:
Remember the Walkerton tragedy, after water inspection services were privatized, 9 people died of ecoli poisoning;
Or, remember Dudley George, the unarmed protester killed during the reckless handling of a brewing situation on a First Nations Reserve. On November 28, 2005, former Attorney General Charles Harnick testified before the Dudley George inquiry that Harris had shouted "I want the fucking Indians out of the park" at a meeting with Ontario Provincial Police officer Ron Fox, hours before the shooting occurred;

Safety nets destroyed:
During the Harris year, welfare rolls were reduced while the number of homeless and hungry rose steeply. Ever wonder why food banks burst seemed to pop up over night during that period of time?;

Our Medical System was gutted... nearly destroyed by Harris and his henchmen. Remember all the hospital closures and the severance packages to the nurses? Admittedly, Rae's Minister of Health made some missteps too, but by comparison, Harris government bears the lion's share of bad decision making. In fact, the current medical crisis, primarily a nursing and physician shortage, combined with acute shortage of hospital beds is a direct result of the Harris amputations. More than 6000 nurses were given a pink slip by Premier Harris. Those left behind were asked to carry the burden alone. He ridiculed the once noble nursing profession with tasteless and disrespectful remarks and deeds. Does it surprise anyone, that few young people wish to enter the profession today? It will take years, if not decades to recover what was lost during the Harris years.

I could go on ... but you get the drift.

When you consider the choices made, and the damage done by Premier Mike Harris, Bob Rae looks like the wise and compassionate angel that he was.

While I'm a Dion supporter, and I am also a Rae Supporter...kinda like the Quebecker who is also a Canadian or the Canadian who is also a Quebecker. Either one has my full support.

Neither is perfect, who is? We don't expect any leader to be perfect ...wisdom, compassion and ingenuity is all we ask for.

So ask me again: Do I remember the Rae Days? Yes, yes in a most fond way!

So go a head, put the lights on Bob -- but don't say I didn't warn you...he'll sparkle like a Rae of Sunshine!

Je me souviens indeed

Three leadership candidates voted against the Conservative motion to recognize “Quebecois” (whatever that means) as a “nation” (whatever that means) inside a “united Canada” (whatever that means) the other night in Parliament. Of these three, Joe Volpe has pretty well resigned himself to falling off the ballot early in the race, and rumours from the Convention have it that he will move to Rae and bring several of his delegates with him. So his position on this deeply ambiguous motion has, for the moment at least, very little fallout. But because principle has a way of coming back and biting one in the proverbial a**, I wonder about Kennedy and Dryden. Were either to emerge somehow miraculously as “The One,” the leader of the Liberal Party, at the end of the Convention, how would their voting against the concept of Quebecois as Nation, no matter how unstable the semantics, play in any federal election? Coupled with both men’s crippling deficiencies in french, not well, I’m afraid. As Jeffrey Simpson reminds us in writing about the ramifications of Kennedy’s choice this morning, Quebec’s motto “Je me souviens” is not for nothing, and without substantial support in Quebec, as everyone knows, no federalist party can win sufficient power. Better to be sweet and fuzzy like Rae and Dion if you want a shot at Quebec.

Delegates: la raison avant la passion

"Reason before passion", three words embroidered on a tapestry hung on a wall of the official Prime Minister's residence for many years, as a daily reminder to the occupant that being rational was the most important quality in leadership. For the most part, Trudeau's decisions and deeds were congruent with his motto over his 16 year reign.

The fate of the Liberal Party is now in the hands of 5500 delegates assembled at the Palais des Congres in Montreal to elect the One from the eight contending candidates. The buzz from the convention is already permeating the blogosphere and the main stream media. Delegates armed with cell phones and Blackberries share their nervousness, uncertainty, excitement and yes, final sales pitches in real-time. We the powerless, non-delegates but Liberal Party supporters anxiously await their live passion-filled transmissions. While a more democratic process for electing the leader would have been preferable and in keeping with the party's principles, the fact remains that for this convention, perhaps the last convention of its kind, it will be the 5500 delegates that decide our fate. The delegates will also vote on a motion to democratize the leadership contest, giving each member of the party one vote. Thus ironically, the delegates must decide whether or not they sign their own death certificate... A true test of reason before passion.

Uncertainty will be the hallmark of this convention. There is no clear front runner whether one looks inside or outside the delegate pool. Delegate heavy weight MP Ralph Goodale, voted the best MP in Canada by fellow Members of Parliament recently endorsed the Bob Rae. Tom Axworthy, a former top advisor to Pierre Trudeau, yesterday announced his support for Gerard Kennedy. Delegates beholding to environmental concerns champion Dion. Delegates worried about Canada's role in Afghanistan look to Kennnedy, Rae or Dion. Delegates with a taste for risk and bold moves, follow Ignatieff.

Michael Ignatieff will initially lead the slate of candidates on to the convention floor with approximately 30% of the delegate support, however his campaign appears to have stalled in recent weeks within the delegate ranks. There is no discernable movement a foot toward the Ignatieff camp as judged by a metric of recent high profile endorsements, or by the delegates preferred second ballot choice, where Dion and Rae lead the pack. Perhaps some Ignatieff sleeper cells will reveal themselves once the balloting begins. That said, Michael Ignatieff's campaign team is cash laden, well organized, and feverously devoted -- the pressure put on the delegates of the non-top-tier candidates will be enormous.

Meanwhile, outside in the real world, in the Land of Reason Before Passion, while there is no clear rally around one single candidate, poll after poll illustrates that there is not much appetite for Michael Ignatieff. Ignatieff's perceived lack of judgment, his role in escalating the symbolic word wars over Quebec nation status, have soured public opinion of the contender.

In the final leg of the campaign Canadians were expecting to hear the candidates' positions on the environment, and the mission in Afghanistan, instead they received hints that the country was bound for another round of constitutional talks. That the Green Party candidate Elizabeth May parachuted into the London by-election and finished a very strong second place in a traditional Liberal riding, underlines what is on the minds of ordinary Canadians.

In a Canada wide public opinion survey of real Canadians conducted by Leger Marketing on Nov 16-26, Rae led with 17%, followed by Ignatieff, Dryden and Dion each with approximately 10%. Ah, but the decision of who will become leader of the party rests in the hands of the 5500 delegates. Thus uncertainty shrouds the 2006 Liberal Convention. Competing forces on the outside versus forces on the inside will undoubtedly take their toll on the souls charged with the immense responsibility of choosing a candidate who has the greatest likelihood of winning the next general election -- the end point of this exercise.

The convention of 1968 bore many uncertainties as well.

On the evening of April 6, 1968, in the Ottawa Civic Centre, a smoke filled forum of another era, nearly 2400 delegates assembled to choose one of the nine candidates competing for the prize. Unlike the 2006 public hesitation to endorse one candidate overwhelmingly, in 1968 the public en masse and with great fervor jumped behind a single candidate -- Pierre Elliot Trudeau, the peoples' choice. But Trudeau's victory was by no means certain going into the convention. The delegates' choices were extremely divided as they are today. Four ballots, and seven hours later, the delegates delivered the people's choice, and la raison avant la passion.

Dion's Potential Momentum

The new CTV/Globe poll of delegates released today confirms some pundits' speculation last week about Dion's potential. By a significantly wide margin, more delegates across Canada would choose Dion on their second ballot than any other candidate. Even in Quebec, Dion would garner 32% on the second ballot, only 5% behind Ignatieff. But the outcome nevertheless will depend on the many delegates, ex-officio or not, who remain undecided.

On a related note, Jeffrey Simpson speculates in his Saturday's column that were Ignatieff to win, he will have done so without the backing of any of the other leadership candidates, those still in the race and those who have dropped out. What does this stunning fact, were it to be actulaized, say about Ignatieff's potential as a leader of the Liberal party? Not really a tough question, is it?

Opinions Sought: What does "Québécois" mean?

What does "Québécois" mean in French?

What does "Québécois" mean in English?

Are they the same?

Globe and Mail writer Lysiane Ganon states in her article today that:

Here is an important nuance that went largely unnoticed: By using the French word "Québécois" in English, Mr. Harper makes it clear that the "nation" he refers to, far from being the political territory of the province, is the French Canadian community; in Quebec, the word "Québécois" often stands for "French Canadian.")

Does Lysiane Gagnon mean "French Candians" within the province of Quebec or is she claiming a broader definition that inclues the French Canadians living both inisde and outside Quebec?

Without consulting the numerous on-line dictionary definitions which are often contradictory, what is your interpretation of the word "Québécois"... who does it include?

As a rural Anglophone living outside Quebec, but one whose roots are tied to the the early pioneers of Quebec (via the le patriot Nelson family) I had always assumed the definition word, stands for all "French Canadians" who trace their ancestory back to the early settlers. Many readers have told me otherwise. Now I am very confused about the meaning of this word, as are many Canadians.

From your personal perspective, what do you understand the term "Québécois" to mean?

Don't be shy, tell us... please leave a comment.

===============================
Related posts from Murphy's Point:
To the MSM: Words do Matter (on Quebec)
Nationalism. What is our history? What is our future?

Privilege and Its Implications

Harper's motion clearly privileges the Quebecois nation over any others that might be determined "inside a united Canada." There are those who would argue that the privilege is undeserved and those who see the recognition as worthy on cultural and, especially, historical grounds. All of the written and unwritten constitutional conventions, as Professor Errol Mendes points out, suggest this justified privilege both in terms of nation as state and nation in a sociolgical sense. The recognition is inherent, implicit, in our existing Constitution, in other words. It does not need to be codified by way of signature in any repatriation Act as Ignatieff and others have argued. That's why all three positions of Ignatieff (count 'em) and all three motions -- from the Bloc, from the LPCQ, and from Harper -- are unnecessary. But who can argue this way with persuaiveness now that politics has intervened and events are leading us inexorably towards another political struggle with the PQ? And may I remind everyone again of just who it was that started us down this road. Those other little gaffs seem like angels flirting compared to this monumental error of judgment.

With respect to first nations, one could argue that they too deserve to be recognized as a collective nation in a united Canada. But, unlike the implicit recognition already accorded Quebec and the Quebecois inscribed in our constitutional conventions, such recognition would have to be formalized or, as the LPCQ has it, "officialized." Let's just say for now this would be no easy task.

Lamenting the Absence of Prudence

In response to my post of yesterday, one of my Liberal friends was saying last night that no matter how intriguing the politics of the “nation” issue might be, a state of mourning is more appropriate than one of excitement. He may be right , for there is indeed something to mourn here – the loss of prudence (what Aristotle called practical wisdom) and others call judgment. And, as so many of us, Liberals and bloggers alike, have noted, there is also someone to blame for our mournful condition, a fact in itself which is lamentable.

Like Rae, Kennedy, and Dion, I too hope that the Liberal leadership contest is not going to be hijacked by the "nation" motion as such, a motion that is, after all, merely a symptom of failed judgment -- first on the part of Ignateiff as progenitor and then on the part of the LPCQ as the agent. We can only hope that delegates are slowly but surely coming to the realization that their choice is going to come down fundamentally not to the policies or public personalities of the candidates but to the quality of political judgment that each candidate has demonstrated before and during the campaign and whether the weight of that performance is sufficient to sustain us in any electoral or governing endeavour. This is not exactly the same thing as electoral “winnability,” but it is the only practical foundation on which to build the trust of those who might support a leader who can grow into a “winnable” one. It would be, ironically, a profound error of judgment to back any candidate who time and again exhibits stunning errors of judgment. Personalities can be shaped for public consumption and policies can be developed and tweaked. Judgement comes with the original material.

"Hail to Iggie, the philospher king": A Canadian Response

A Canadian response to UK's Denis MacShane (Labour MP for Rotherham and a former Foreign Office minister) post today in the UK Observer - "Hail to Iggie, the philospher king" :

Oh those Brits... they haven't quite got over the shock of us leaving the home over 140 years ago. I'm sure someone wrote home back in the 80's to tell them that we've moved on, eh?

It must sadden them, that in the absence of their smothering parental ways (they meant well), we have made friends with their enemies, championed 2 languages, embraced many cultures, improved the cuisine, learned to paint (although we still have a tendency to cross the lines), and have found time to both read books and write books (when not shoveling snow).

While MP MacShane would like to see a philosopher King ruling the colony, Canadians en masse, prefer someone who is learned, wise AND experienced with the end of a shovel.

Put that in yer toque, eh?

sincerely,
Another uppity Canadian

To the MSM: Words do Matter (on Quebec)

Many of the MSM (main stream media)are guilty of having distorted Harper's motion on the recognition of the Québécois as a nation within the Canadian context.

They have willfully and recklessly presented the proposal as "Quebec is a nation", and variations thereof.

What is the difference? Can you see a difference?

Harper's exact words were: "The Québécois are a nation within a united Canada" (“les Québécois forment une nation à l’intérieur d’un Canada uni”.)

There are 4 important words in the above statement:

1. Québécois
2. nation
3. united
4. Canada

While there have been many articles penned in the last two days that rely on distortions over fact to meet their print deadlines, for the sake of brevity, and to illustrate my point (Murphy's Point)I direct you to one such article -- "It is what it is" by the learned Michael Harris of the Ottawa Sun.

In this piece, Mr. Harris chose to single out the word "nation" (he mentions it 12 times) and makes absolutely no mention of the word "Québécois", instead he substitutes it with the word "Quebec" 7 times as a good approximation, or uses the conjoined variant "Quebec Nation".

Please understand, that my point is not about word counting, but rather intellectual dishonesty -- purposely construing, through distortion and sly word substitution, thus willfully altering what was actually said to mean something entirely different.

Words do matter, and Mr. Harris left the most important one "Québécois" out of his rant by design.

I'm not a constitutional lawyer (far from it), but I do understand that when they (the lawyers) say a community or sociological entity such as "Québécois is not a legal entity", I interpret that to mean there are no legal powers associated with the entity. So why the fuss?

The initial words, proposed by Harper, in consultation with Dion and other experts in constitutional matters, have tremendous sociological value, and are not burdened by the more politically and geographically weighted term "Quebec". And yet, there are some unsettling overtones in this initial motion that need to be addressed.

If the aim of this new proposal is to recognize the unique sociological entity of the French culture within Canada, then by using the term Québécois, we are excluding the million or more French Canadians living outside of Quebec. That the French culture/sociological entity is concentrated in Quebec, it is entwined geo-spatially, and politically in numerous communities and other provinces throughout most of Canada. Consider the populations of Acadians of (NB, NS, PEI - 300K), the Fransaskois (25k), Franco-Manitobans (55K) and Franco-Ontarians(550K+).

While I certainly would have preferred a more inclusive term that recognized all of the French Canadian peoples -- both inside AND outside of Quebec, I can live with the current sociological term "Québécois", as starter term in Harper's proposal.

Both politicians and ordinary citizens alike, hope that this debate will be swift and will avoid the turbulent waters of constitutional amendments. We look to the wisdom of Dion and Harper to steer this Canadian ship away from the perfect storm.
==========================
==========================
Other points of view.... (Updated Nov 26th 5:50 am)
A-t-on bien lu la motion sur la nation présentée par Stephen Harper?
Un monde sépare les versions anglaise et française
by Pierre Martin Professeur, de science politique à l'Université de Montréal

Paul Wells of Inkless Wells, posts a transcript of Harperss remarks from a Montreal scrum on Nov 24th.

Blackmail and Danger

Turns out Dion had a hand in Harper's motion since the PMO consulted him on Tuesday evening on the wording and substance of the motion. There are those that suggest Dion had no choice in the matter since Ignatieff had opened up the can of worms about Quebec and the Constitution for the leadership candidiates quite some time ago, long before the Ignateiff-backed Quebec Liberal motion, which only exacerbated the situation. (Ignatieff -- as always on again off again -- is now dening that he was gesturing towards opening up the Constitution, but he clearly did invite it.) Dion had to forestall the "officializing" process because of the dangers of opening up "unnecessary" constitutional turmoil. In other words, he had to seek a compromise to ensure that the "sociological" sense of nation prevailed. He was seeking to do this with the other leadership candidates when, all of a sudden, the Bloc's motion forced everyone's hand.

As Rae emphatically recognizes and Dion fully acknowledges, the hand is not yet fully played out. Danger on the horizon can clearly be seen in the PQ's welcoming yesterday of Harper's motion as a first step towards if not forced constitutional change then sovereignty. So, yes, Harper has shifted power away from both the Bloc and the Liberals to the Conservatives on the issue -- that's where the mastery resides -- but in doing so has he not also opened up the possibility of a very dangerous road he and the rest of us might have to travel? Mastery has its time limits.

Hebert Sets The Record Straight on the Harper Nation Motion

Chantal Hebert has written yet another insider and astute piece on the Quebec Nation issue. She enlightens the reader to the lengthy chain of events leading up to Harper's "surprise" announcement.

A look inside Harper's birth of a 'nation'
PM's surprise gambit on Quebec was actually a long time coming
by Chantal Hebert
snip ...

But even as he was keeping many senior Conservatives out of the loop, Harper was bringing others in.

The opposition leadership was consulted and Charest was informed. The PMO also got in touch with Stéphane Dion, to feel him out on the wording of the motion. Dion suggested adding some qualifiers to the word nation, but eventually agreed that he could support the government text.

(But if Conservative strategists assumed that Dion was the leadership candidate most likely to oppose the motion, they were wrong. When interim Liberal leader Bill Graham tried to broker a deal on a Liberal resolution dealing with the same topic on Wednesday morning, it was Bob Rae who proved least amenable to a compromise.)

end snip ...

That Harper consulted initially with Dion, speaks to Harper's courage and belief in a united Canada over personal political gain, and that he chose Dion, above the others (Lib Candidates) speaks to the trust and belief that he has in Dion's knowledge and leadership.

I think it's another proud moment in Canadian history.

Kudos to both Harper and Dion for their courage, wisdom and ability to neutralize divisive forces. Kudos to Chantal for setting the record straight.

See also Globe & Mails Inside Story by Gloria Galloway

It's a real nail biter...

Later that evening, the Prime Minister's staff ran the motion past Stéphane Dion, the former intergovernmental affairs minister and author of the Clarity Act. He was the only Liberal leadership candidate the Conservatives consulted.

=============================

How does Harper's new motion in the House impact the LPQC resolution of the Liberal Leadership Race -- will the Libs be wise and just drop it? Or will it cling like stale back-room tobacco smoke to their corporate jackets -- Read all about it on The What Do I Know Grit's post.

Breaking: Battle for Quebec Nation hood...

Breaking: Bloc Motion to Recognize Quebec Nation next Tuesday
Breaking on the Breaking ....Harper said his party is putting forward a motion to recognize Quebec’s nationhood within Canada in order to supersede a Bloc Quebecois motion that he says would virtually be a vote for separation from the rest of Canada.

Quebec Nation Motion: A Compromise Proposal Worthy of Consideration

Many great minds have been stretched to their limits in trying to resolve the divisive Quebec as a nation motion, and yet the issue remains like an open wound.

Here's a proposal that we believe has tremendous merit:

The Proposal by Lloyd MacIlquham mmac@cicblog.com
Given:

• the importance of this issue;
• the relatively few members of the Liberal Party that will be debating it at the Convention and they will not have been given instructions, nor bound to follow any such, from their respective Riding and other Associations;
• the apparent geographical diversity in opinion;
• my firm belief in what I refer to as my Basic Philosophy (and what I believe to be at the heart of Liberalism in Canada): “To build a great nation where everyone can attain their potential and join together to help those that need help; and protect those that need protection; and, (my) Fundamental Approach: “Informed, open and transparent discussion leading to a truly democratic solution for the good of all Canadians”

It is proposed that:

• Introduction of the resolution at the Convention be postponed so that the issue may be presented to all the members of the Liberal Party to be discussed in an informed, open, transparent fashion leading to a truly democratic principle upon which the Liberal Part may contribute to the building and strengthening of this great nation of ours and then to be voted on by the Membership on an individual basis by mail-in vote (or other such).

------------------------------------------------------

Don't be shy now ... We urge you to comment on whether you find the above proposal worthy of further consideration. A simple anonymous Yeah or Nay would suffice.

Harper: "The Memo"

Harper -- Drop the "Democracy, Freedom et al" Hyperbole
Yesterday, in a press conference regarding his Asian tour (whose sole purpose was to presumably establish a more influential relationship with the Asian country participants), our Prime Minister having suffered an acute attack of ADD, forgot his prime objectives, and with his familiar Harpocrisy-laden punch lines, commenced to publicly dress down the Chinese delegation. [The Star]

"I think Canadians want us to promote our trade relations worldwide, and we do that, but I don't think Canadians want us to sell out important Canadian values - our belief in democracy, freedom, human rights," Harper said. "They don't want us to sell that out to the almighty dollar."

Get off your high horse, Dudley So Right... We don't buy it--not any more.

If it wasn't for the "New" government of the United States' focus on restoring the dignity and civility to government, your bud George W, primo democracy pusher and freedom fighter would be facing impeachment hearings. As such, the talking points on "democracy, freedom, and human rights" have been withdrawn until further notice. Clearly you didn't get the memo:
[Click on image to enlarge]


See Also:

• "There's a better way to improve human rights", Op/ED Globe and Mail, Nov 16

------------------------------------------------------------
Note to our readers: Round 1 Voting for the Canadian Blog Awards is now open. While we at Murphy's Point are dissapointed that we didn't get nominated in the "Best Conservative Blog" category (NOT!!!), we have been nominated in 6 categories.
Round 1 Rules: Voters can submit their choices EACH day until Nov 21.

Watchdog says Britain Top Dog in Snoopy Awards

Civil liberties group Privacy International (PI) in a recent report categorizes the U.S. as an "extensive" surveillance society, just one step below its most extreme category, "endemic" surveillance against the individual.

The report titled "Leading surveillance societies in the EU and the World" is a derivative of PI's annual privacy report which covers 70 countries, runs to almost 1,200 pages and includes about 6,000 footnotes. More than 200 experts from around the world have provided materials and commentary. The country rankings were based on 13 criteria, including: constitutional protections, visual surveillance and phone-tapping, surveillance of travel and financial transactions and more.

Smile, your on UK's camera..."Hi Tony"
With over four million cameras, one for every 14 residents, representing a 300 percent increase in just three years, the average Briton is captured on film about 300 times a day. Britain’s score ranks it #1 in the extreme category of “endemic surveillance society”.

But whot about Canada? you ask:
Canada (in the non-EU class) scored the best marks for civil liberties safeguards . While Germany scored highest within the EU countries surveyed.

Rest yee not Canada, we have work to do...buried in the bowels of the detailed Country reports section are many privacy issues that we should be very concerned about.

Dig In:
PrivacyInternational.Org
Leading Surveillance Societies Privacy International, 2006
Privavcy and Human Rights Global Report, Privacy International, 2006
Britain's Ranking on Surveillance, NYT Nov 15, 2006

Pssst...

US Election Anomalies 2006: Cases Unsolved

Or as we like to call it here at Murphy's Point, "Fun with Numbers"

Every even year, in sync with the US General and Midterm elections, Murphy has got in the habit of donning her tin foil hat. It's not because she wants to ... it's because the election numbers (the vote count, % turnout etc.) command it! With each electoral event, the associated numerical anomalies just seem to get "curious and curiouser".

The 2006 midterm elections were no exception.

Over the next few weeks Murphy's Point will highlight some of the unsolved cases for 2006.

Case#1: The Lamont vs Lieberman US Senate race in Connecticut:

What are the chances that Lieberman's key opponents in his last 2 elections (2000 vs 2006) got exactly the same number of votes (as reported by the MSM outlets)?

In 2000 - Lieberman's opponent, Phil Giordano, got 448,077 votes

• http://www.fec.gov/pubrec/fe2000/2000senate.htm#CT
  

In 2006 - Lieberman's opponent, Ned Lamont, got 448,077 votes

• http://www.cnn.com/ELECTION/2006/pages/results/senate/


• http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/14289273


• http://news.aol.com/elections/senate2006


• http://www.foxnews.com/politics/youdecide2006/tracker/index.html

Now that's one powerful number that 448,077 and its not even prime (although curiously all of its factors 3 x 7 x 19 x 1123 are).

Questions:

• Where did the MSM get its final numbers from?


• Why has the Secretary of State for Connecticut made wholesale revisions of its numbers in the past few days?


• Where is Phil Giordano (the republican candidate of 2000) today? Answer: Dirty Phil is apparently behind bars -- for the next 37 years ... so we can rule him out :-)

Case Status: Open/Active

...And the "Fossil of the Day" Award goes to .... Canada, eh?

It is not the global presence we had in mind but it is the distinction we are deserving of.

The ‘Fossil of the Day’ Award, attempts to shame countries for outlandish claims and unreasonable demands made at the UN Framework Convention on Climate Change (CCC) Conference of Parties (COP). Delegates from 189 nations gathered for the 12th annual Conference of Parties (COP-12) hosted in Nairobi, Kenya.

Each day environmental organizations from around the world unite to elect a country that is being the most active in blocking, stalling or undermining in the climate negotiations.

2006 Awards 1st Place Winners:
Day 1 November 7 Australia, for claiming it is as vulnerable to global warming as Africa and the Pacific.
"Given that Australia is a developed country that has funds (the comparison) is not appropriate," said delegate Julie-Anne Richards of the Climate Action Network ...."I would really hope that the Australian delegation would take note and become more constructive," said Richards, herself an Australian.

Day 2 November 8 Canada for misrepresenting its commitments to reduce its green house gas (GHG) emissions by 45-65% by 2050 without stating the fact that these reductions are based on a 2003 base year and not 1990. It should be noted that between 1990 and 2003 GHG emission in Canada increased by 24%.

One step forward, two steps backward.

In 2005, at the 11th COP held in Montreal and chaired by Stephane Dion, former President Bill Clinton and Canada's Prime Minister Paul Martin delivered keynote addresses. For the 2006 conference, the new government of Canada's Prime Minister Harper, sends his regrets and newly-minted friend of the environment Rona Ambrose.

See Also:
ClimateNetwork.Org What is the Fossil-of-the-Day Award about?
David Suzuki Foundation Nov 14, 2006 News Release

Remembering Tony (F/S A.D. Kall, RCAF)

My father, Tony passed away August 22, 2006 at the ripe old age of 92 ...just as the gypsy fortune teller had predicted 78 years earlier (or so the story goes according to Tony). That he lived to be 92 speaks of his strength for he carried a burden too horrific to share. Now we are left to piece together the remaining fragments of his life.

Tony, a veteran of WWII and former POW never spoke much about the war. The few memories that he did share with us (his children) were for the most part very painful recollections. Painful not because of what he endured in his final flight or survival in the POW camps, but because of the horror and devastation caused by war and his role in the destruction of whole cities, their infrastructure, and most importantly their people. That was his inescapable burden -- his memories, as seen through the tail-gun sights of a Lancaster bomber at high altitude, witness and particpant to the destruction below.

From the online history of 153 Squadron page 47 we learn a few details of Tony's final flight:

The raids against Dortmund (20th Feb) and Duisburg (21st Feb) were linked in that for each it was their final major Bomber Command attack. Because of adverse weather, specific targets at Dortmund were not identifiable, and results were inconclusive. However, night-fighters were very active: among those shot down was NN 785 (P4-2ndD) on only its second operation, which crash-landed at Stefansbogge, near Hasslinghausen, some 10 miles south-west of Dortmund. Four Canadians, including F/Lt Holman the pilot, his navigator, bomb-aimer and rear gunner, survived to become POW's. Four others(three of them RAFVR, including a second pilot, P/O Peter Thorne, whose name appears nowhere else in squadron records) were killed.

The attack on Duisburg firstly concentrated on a synthetic oil plant which, being successful,was switched by the master-bomber to the rail marshalling yard. Fighter flares were seen, but defensive measures were confined to a heavy box barrage.

Unfortunately for Pforzheim, a town on the northern edge of the Black Forest, the 23rd February was a clear night when it received its sole Bomber Command raid. Despite some nigh-tfighter activity, the attack went in at 8,000 feet, resulting in devastatingly accurate bombing; the rail yard was totally destroyed, as was some 80% of the town's built-up area.

See also: [1] Battle of the Ruhr [2]Night-fighter Tactics[3] History of RAF Bomber Command

[Click on photos to enlarge]

Crew Status of Lancaster NN785*, Squadron 153, Operation Dortmund
F/S A.J.Burton RCAF KIA
F/S E.S.Neill RCAF KIA
P/O P.Thorne (P2) KIA
Sgt A.Martin KIA
The survivors (on right)
F/S A.D.Kall RCAF Inj, POW
F/L W.Holman RCAF Inj, POW
F/O R.C.Taylor RCAF Inj, POW
WO2 V.S.Reynolds RCAF Inj,POW
*Shot down by a JU288

Another perspective of Tony's military service history is told through the 60 year-old crew photos he carried in his wallet, and a large collection of artifacts and papers found in his lock box after his death.

153 Squadron Crest

Motto: "Noctividus" ("Seeing by night").Badge: In front of a six-pointed star, a bat. The squadron, having operated both from Northern Ireland and North Africa, wished to commemorate the fact by including in its badge a white star-which appears in the arms of Northern Ireland-and a bat. The bat is indigenous to North Africa and is also a nocturnal predatory animal which is intended to symbolise the unit's night-fighting activities.

His flight log book pictured on the right is opened to it's last 3 operations: Politz-Stettin,Chemitz, and Dortmund. The red ink signifies night operations. His last operation, his 18th mission is dated February 20th, 1945.



Eight days later on Feb 28th, my mother received the telegram on the left informing her that F/Sgt A.D. Kall was missing in action.

The news of Tony's MIA status made its way to the local newspapers.

For my mother, the next several months would be filled with anguish, awaiting word on her husband.

Tony, along with 3 of his 8-member crew escaped death by jumping out of the doomed plane by parachute. It was to be his first and last jump by chute. Being a novice jumper, when he did hit the ground, he injured his back and but was otherwise okay. A few months before he died I managed to coax a few details out of him regarding that fateful day. He said "The plane was on fire, I had to knock the embers off my chute before strapping it on...when I hit the ground, I could think of nothing but -- bury the chute -- I must bury the chute". He was a survivor. He hid in the crevice of a rock formation for 3 days before being apprehended by local German police. Within days he was turned to the military police and eventually wound up in Stalag VIIA.

His POW experience is detailed in a War Claims Commission Form G2- A Statement Concerning Claim for Maltreatment.

On May 19th, 1945 my mother received the most important a telegram of her life -- her husband Tony had been found in one of the prison camps and was now back in the U.K.

Tony had mixed feelings about the medals pinned on him upon his return. But he coveted his membership in the Irwin Caterpillar Club (for the Irwin parachute had saved his life) and the Beaver Club, for it had brought joy to an otherwise troubled period of his life.

Post War:

According to my mother it was many years before Tony slept straight through one whole night without re-living the horrors of his war experience.

For the most part, Tony diffused his pain by immersing himself in a broad spectrum of activities -- building from scratch model airplanes and gliders from bits of balsa wood, drawing, painting, nurturing tender roses through the harsh Canadian winter, carpentry, music and sports.

My father remained relatively silent about his war time memories until recent years. Curiously (or maybe not), the intentions of George W. Bush with respect to Afghanistan and then Iraq touched a very raw nerve in my father. I won't/can't repeat his precise words, but his message was clear ... "war is not a solution"

We will remember Tony, and we will hear the words he could not speak.
RIP, Dad.

2 Minutes of your time

A Pittance Of Time...C'est si peu de Temps From Terry Kelly's web site
On November 11, 1999 Terry Kelly was in a Shoppers Drug Mart store in Dartmouth, Nova Scotia. At 10:55 AM an announcement came over the store’s PA asking customers who would still be on the premises at 11:00 AM to give two minutes of silence in respect to the veterans who have sacrificed so much for us.
When eleven o’clock arrived on that day, an announcement was again made asking for the “two minutes of silence” to commence. All customers, with the exception of a man who was accompanied by his young child, showed their respect.
Terry’s anger towards the father for trying to engage the store’s clerk in conversation and for setting a bad example for his child was channeled into a beautiful piece of work called, “A Pittance of Time”.

Take a few minutes of your time and watch this moving tribute by Terry Kelly.

To Do List for America

Breaking: Rumsfeld Resigning

Rumours on the internets: Rummy's leaving

Talking Points Memo , Crooks and Liars, America Blog

Reign of Error Winds Down

I went to bed late last night with the comfort of knowing that the Dems had at least taken back the House and the Senate was too close to call.

Then I wake up to this...
Breaking on CNN...Britney Spears files for divorce whot...again?, but but but what about the sanctity of marriage? and the children?

In other news, King George's Reign of Error (and yes, Terror too) has been pulverized by the true Patriots of America. Barney, Laura and a half eaten bag of pretzels are all that remain.

The Dems have seized control of Georgie's Palace (House) and have the leading edge in the two hottest Senate races (VA Webb vs Allen, MO Tester vs Burns) . Expect recounts and Republican legal wrangling to delay the inevitable. Worst case scenerio: Georgie's Supreme Court kicks into action as it did in 2000. And we all know how that turned out.

Taking the stay out of "stay the course"...

• Congratulations to Nancy Pelosi, the first female Speaker of the House in America's herstory!
• Arizona becomes the first state to defeat an amendment to ban gay marriage
• "I Am A Patriot." John Hall, ex-rocker, environmental activist and anti-war candidate defeated Republican congressional incumbent Sue Kelly 51%-49% in upstate New York.
• Missouri approved a measure backing stem cell research

Welcome back America ... we missed you !!!!

US Midterms - Morning Precinct Activity

Looks like our friends south of the border on one hell of a ride today...

VotersUnite.org is maintaining an on-line database of reported voting problems. Be sure to check that out! Florida takes the early lead in machine related problems, followed closely by Texas. Hmmm... what's that ol' saying? ..."a (dem) vote in the machine is worth two in the bush (column)".

A report from VoteTrustUSA.org reports that early voting in five states showed that voters' choice are being flipped to the opposite candidate on all four major e-voting machines — Diebold TSx, Sequoia Edge, ES&S iVotronic, and Hart InterCivic eSlate.

The Democratic Underground is reporting moderate to heavy turnout in its UNOFFICIAL VOTER TURNOUT THREAD...
Sample Comments:

• Avon, OH: Polls open at 6:30 with more than 100 people waiting to vote, steady traffic as I was leaving.


• Moderate - Cuyahoga Falls 6:40 am Moderate ID checking and cumbersome ballots seem to be slowing things down.


• District 18, Pennsylvania--Moderate, Opened the polls late, machines didn't work right.
  Pittsburgh, PA: Heavy at 7:30 a.m. I was #64, and there were more streaming in behind me.


• Cuyahoga Falls, Ohio - Moderate @ 7:15 More voters at this time than in 2004. Running relatively smoothly.When we got to our polling place at the Bethany church on 13th Street, someone had spray painted "Soldiers vote GOP, Osama votes Democrat" on the sidewalk outside the church. Reported it both to the church and the county board of elections.


• Davenport, Iowa; 7:30 a.m.; heavy for the time period. I overheard poll workers commenting that they'd never seen so many people at the poll this early.


• Cape May County, NJ. Heavy turn out. Workers reported being very busy already. I'm taking it as a GREAT indication.As long as our votes count... First time with the f'n machines- no paper.


• Coal Valley, IL, 8:30 am, heavy!

For a mid-term election the turnout is indeed heavy by all reports.

US Mid-terms: Will democracy prevail?

Stock up on your favourite vintage, and make sure you have plenty of popcorn on hand cause the US midterms start tomorrow. The last time America staged national elections (in November 2004) they had little in common with a modern democracy and lots in common with an emerging one. "Mis-tabulations" and systemic machine shortchanges in Democrat districts aside (that's fodder for the election sleuths [aka me et al] and the historians to figure out) just look at those voter lineups going into the wee hours of the morning in Ohio...


[Click on photo to enlarge]

If running a punch card operation in over 70% of the Ohio precincts proved challenging [by accident or design] in 2000 for the then Secretary of State Blackwell, and Chairman of the Republican campaign for Ohio, this time Mr. Blackwell will not only retain his SoS title, but will also be running for Governor of Ohio. More importantly he has introduced brand spankin' new "total black box" election technology to record and tabulate the vote.

I was most fortunate to witness the birth of democracy in South Africa in 1994 as part of a Canadian contingent of 5 election experts dispatched to SA 6 months prior to it's due date.

Watching the voting process -- the most essential tool of democracy, corrode to the point of fracture in America has been a painfull experience. I weep for America and for all the promise that has been lost in these few short years.

Stay tuned...

Monday's Lament for Iraq

From the notebook of Riverbend at Baghdad Burning

When All Else Fails...
… Execute the dictator. It’s that simple. When American troops are being killed by the dozen, when the country you are occupying is threatening to break up into smaller countries, when you have militias and death squads roaming the streets and you’ve put a group of Mullahs in power- execute the dictator
...
It’s not about the man- presidents come and go, governments come and go. It’s the frustration of feeling like the whole country and every single Iraqi inside and outside of Iraq is at the mercy of American politics. It is the rage of feeling like a mere chess piece to be moved back and forth at will. It is the aggravation of having a government so blind and uncaring about their peoples needs that they don’t even feel like it’s necessary to go through the motions or put up an act. And it's the deaths. The thousands of dead and dying, with Bush sitting there smirking and lying about progress and winning in a country where every single Iraqi outside of the Green Zone is losing.
....
A final note.
I just read somewhere that some of the families of dead American soldiers are visiting the Iraqi north to see ‘what their sons and daughters died for’. If that’s the goal of the visit, then, “Ladies and gentlemen- to your right is the Iraqi Ministry of Oil, to your left is the Dawry refinery…

And that is what they died for.

from Baghdad Burning

~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
Two words: Silence, Tears.

US our ally, not our model says Dion

"March of Jesus" promoter and human rights demoter Dianne Haskett returns to London by way of Washington...

Both Gerard Kennedy and Stephane Dion took time from their respective campaigns to stump for Liberal candidate Glen Pearson, a London firefighter running in London-North-Centre.

The London Free Press reports:

Dion couldn't resist a dig at Tory candidate Dianne Haskett, who returned from Washington, D.C., where she has lived for six years, to take her party's nomination.

"The Conservative candidate is making the same mistake as (Prime Minister Stephen) Harper," Dion said. "The U.S. is an ally for us, not a model."

Bravo to Gerard and Stephane for lending a hand, and bravo to London blogger Craig Ashbourne for eloquently detailing the hypocrasy of candidate Haskett track record.

See also Red Betty's post "They hate us not for our freedom, but for our hypocrisy "

Bechtel Ends Iraq Rebuilding

With 2 billion dollars in it's pockets, and 52 employees in the ground, Bechtel is pulling up it's stakes in Iraq.

Bechtel Corp says the security situation in Iraq has made it too difficult to continue operating.

The San Franscico Chronicle reports:

But Bechtel -- which charged into Iraq with American "can-do" fervor -- found it tough to keep its engineers and workers alive, much less make progress in piecing Iraq back together.

"Did Iraq come out the way you hoped it would?" asked Cliff Mumm, Bechtel's president for infrastructure work. "I would say, emphatically, no. And it's heartbreaking."

What did Betchel accomplish in Iraq? ... that the company recalls with accounting precision that:

"1,240 schools were refurbished with new paint, fans and in many cases new windows and doors to replace those looters had stolen."

amongst a nebulous collection of repairs to infrastructure destroyed or damaged by the US invasion, says it all.

Alas, the Iraqis can open those new windows and feel the breeze of imperial democracy.

not in our name?

Seymour Hersh, the guy who first broke the story of the My Lai massacre and who first broke the story of Abu Ghraib, is really one of the last real journalists. He gave a talk at McGill the other night in which, among other things, he described atrocities committed by American troops in Iraq:

“Three U.S. armed vehicles, eight soldiers in each, are driving through a village, passing candy out to kids,” he began. “Suddenly the first vehicle explodes, and there are soldiers screaming. Sixteen soldiers come out of the other vehicles, and they do what they’re told to do, which is look for running people.” “Never mind that the bomb was detonated by remote control,” Hersh continued. “[The soldiers] open up fire; [the] cameras show it was a soccer game.” “About ten minutes later, [the soldiers] begin dragging bodies together, and they drop weapons there. It was reported as 20 or 30 insurgents killed that day,” he said. If Americans knew the full extent of U.S. criminal conduct, they would receive returning Iraqi veterans as they did Vietnam veterans, Hersh said. “In Vietnam, our soldiers came back and they were reviled as baby killers, in shame and humiliation,” he said. “It isn’t happening now, but I will tell you – there has never been an [American] army as violent and murderous as our army has been in Iraq.”

Does this mean I believe that all American soldiers are violent criminals? Of course not; they are kids, mostly, trapped in an insane and dangerous situation. But the "shoot first, ask questions later" attitude that flows down from the Bush administration has consequences. Even the cover-up Hersh describes is strongly reminiscent of the Bush technique: something makes you look bad? No problemo...just adjust the "facts" to fit your version of reality (AWOL in Alabama becomes flight suited fighter pilot, etc)...problem is, those involved still know the truth. Just because Bush seems to have no conscience, doesn't mean those soldiers don't.

How long, I wonder, until the attitude of Canada's General Rick "kill the scumbags" Hillier has similar consequences for some young Canadian soldier? I saw first hand how a 92 year old WWII veteran of the Allied bombing campaign was still haunted (sixty-plus years later) by the thought of those his bombs had killed or injured. Who would wish that on anyone?

Just a thought.

Nationalism. What is our history? What is our future?

Nationalism. What is our history? Did it begin with the defeat of on the Plains of Abraham? Was it a revolt by the French against the British? Most historians argue that the original ideas of Canadian nationalism were rooted in a quest for democracy by the under class (the French and the Irish). It was a popular struggle against the tyranny, oppression, injustice of the courts and economic policies of the minority ruling class, a British rule by proxy, a rule by the conservative business elite -- the Clique du Château and their representatives the Parti bureaucrate (Bureaucratic Party, also known as the British Party or the Tory Party).

Thus a reform movement emerged -- le Parti Canadien (renamed Parti Patriote in 1826, later the Liberal Party of Canada) whose primary aim was to bring about a lengthy series of reforms that would lead to a more democratic and responsible form of government in Lower Canada.

Their flag, the Patriote Flag, the longest-lasting indigenous Canadian flag bears a green stripe in honour of the Irish Canadians, a brother and equal partner in the party's revolution of ideas.

The nation of the Patriotes, as they were called, was “la nation canadienne”.

The party's constitutional policy, summed up in the Ninety-Two Resolutions of 1834, called for the election of the legislative and executive councils and an end to: abuse of power and privilege; waste of government revenue; and systematic disenfranchisement (in economics, and power) of the non-elite. It is important to note that the 1st resolution aims to disarm any notion that sovereignty was one of the demands. It was specific changes to the use and abuses of an unelected government that the Patriotes sought.

The Patriote revolution was not about territorial demands nor was it ethno-centric. It was a rebellion against unjust government, greed, and inequality. The patriots fought not for two Canada's but rather an inclusive Canada -- one that embraced the principles of democracy, equality, and civil rights.

Frustrated by it's unrequited demands for a responsible and accountable government, the Parti Patriote led a series of civil protests against the unjust policies of the ruling elite. A boycott of British goods, and mass rallies awakened the colonial rulers to the fear of armed revolution. Tensions flared. The Patriote's leader, Louis-Joseph Papineau; did not call for open revolt, though others, like the Anglo-Canadian Dr. Wolfred Nelson, said that the “time has come to melt our plates and our tin spoons to make bullets.” Thus began a period of armed insurection known as the Rebellions of 1837.

The leaders of the revolution were able to see many of their ideas come to fruition. However, the work started by the Patriotes 170 years ago is not finished -- far from it. We, the ancestors of those brave Patriotes will not take up arms, but we will continue to fight a government that wishes to wage war ... war on foreign nations, war on the impoverished, on the rights to equality for all Canadians, on the sick, and on our environment. While our government enjoys its greatest surpluses in history, the mission in Afghanistan is shrouded in secrecy; our neediest citizens depend on a patch work of food banks to sustain their lives; hate and intolerance of gays and lesbians drive our legislation; the universality of our health care system is perpetually under attack; our environment is assaulted daily by the Clique du Château while the Parti bureaucrate grants them another 50 years to continue the assault unabated. Mes amies, mes Patriotes, our work is not done.

While many of the descendents of those brave patriots live in the province of Quebec, many of our families live beyond the artificial line of provincial separation as our fore fathers had imagined we would. In or outside Quebec, we carry the burden and the ideas of promises and aspirations yet to be fulfilled. The work of le Parti Canadien is not complete. We have much to do.

I urge the Liberal Party, le Parti Patriote, to honour the history, the sacrifices and the intent of our founders, to recognize all of its peoples, not just the people bounded by a provincial border. La nation Quebec is not what our fore fathers Papineau and Nelson fought for. They fought for something much larger -- la nation canadienne and a claim to ideas unbridled, unbordered -- a territory of thought, reason, equality, compassion, inclusion and justice for all.

Sincerely
Rural Ontario Liberal,
Grand daughter of Thomas C. Nelson

Post Script:
Here's a list of some 1200 Patriotes taken captive during the 1837-1838 Rebellions. Perhaps one of your ancestors is on the list.

Democracy is on the march ... er not.

The mail must get through ... well not the hate mail today. Canadian postal workers in Vancouver have walked off the job today in protest over the delivery of hate literature -- homophobic hate mail.

Bravo to those brave and discerning Canadians!