Well that’s better.

Responding to a leaked American cable outlining a 2008 conversation with CSIS director Jim Judd and Eliot Cohen, a senior State Department official, Michael Ignatieff said his party stands behind the court-ordered restrictions.

“I’ll just say this: I’m proud of our Charter, I’m proud of our courts. I’m proud of the fact that there are limits on what agencies and our government can do,” Ignatieff said. “That’s always been our position. We’re a country of freedom. We’re a country of democracy.”

A clear statement, a good statement.  Shows respect for the Courts and for Canadians.

But Michael, they’re just words if you don’t back them up with actions.

We're watching.

The war on christmas has been over for a long time

And the christians lost.

It was a bloodless war waged by various groups over centuries, but the final capitulation of any claim christians could have over the holiday took place with the rise of capitalism and the christians’ enthusiastic embracing of the new lords of the holiday.

As people whose sole goal is to accumulate as much money as possible began to recognize the market value of christmas, a very aggressive campaign to take it prisoner began and has never let up.  Sure, the conquerors allow christians to practice their mythology.  Hell, they don’t even mind sticking a few christian images on their goods – if it helps their sales.  But there are certain things that the victors don’t allow.

(picture)

The money men will not let their carefully designed icon be upstaged by the christian one.  Really, a dude in plain, white robes preaching against materialism and greed is hardly going to boost sales in malls, no matter how many children he invites to sit on his lap.  These kids don’t want to wait until they die for their reward, they want it now, dammit, and it better not be some vague feeling of peace and serenity.

The money men will not allow only one superstitious group to claim christmas at the exclusion of all others.  No, no.  All are welcome to celebrate, even the damned atheists.  In fact, all are encouraged to do so,  all are pressured to do so.  Equally.  There is no hell in the new christmas under the conquerors’ regime.  Except, of course, when bills come due.  The money men have not only conquered christmas, they redefined it, expanded it, gave it new, nifty slogans which are all-inclusive.  Happy Holidays!  Happy Holiday Season!

And you christians who get all offended when some people prefer the Happy Holidays slogan , it isn’t strictly your religious celebration anymore.  You are equally complicit in that since you enthusiastically participate in the fevered shopping, in putting up non-christian icons, in turning the entire season into something that has little to do with your religion.

But what’s that saying christians like so much?  An eye for an eye?  What goes around comes around?  You reap what you sow?  It’s not like it was your festival to begin with.

So lighten up.  Practice your superstition all you want, but drop the outrage.  The war was over long ago, and you gladly surrendered.

Why is Ezra Levant still alive?

Because you can’t sue a dead man.

See, that’s a joke.  No one could take it as a threat to the weasel’s life.  No one can say that I am suggesting he be murdered.

On October 29, 2010, Jonah Goldberg, editor-at-large of National Review Online wrote this for the Chicago Tribune:

Why is Assange still alive?

I'd like to ask a simple question: Why isn't Julian Assange dead?

On November 29, 2010, Ezra Levin wrote this:

Why isn’t Julian Assange dead yet?

Goldberg summarizes with this:

Even if the CIA wanted to take him out, they couldn't without massive controversy. That's because assassinating a hipster Australian Web guru as opposed to a Muslim terrorist is the kind of controversy no official dares invite.

That's fine. And it's the law. I don't expect the U.S. government to kill Assange, but I do expect them to try to stop him.

Our Ezra, however, doesn’t let things like laws dictate his proposed course of action:

Why is Assange still alive? Why is he being treated as a journalist or political activist? If someone had published the intimate details of the D-Day plans during the Second World War, he would never have been seen again.

Assange and his colleagues act like spies, not journalists. WikiLeaks could have its assets seized, just like the Taliban has. And U.S. President Barack Obama could do what he’s doing to the Taliban throughout the world.

He doesn’t sue them or catch them. He kills them. Because it’s war.  Obama has even ordered the assassination of an American citizen, Anwar al-Awlaki.  How does Obama see Assange any differently?

When the weasel takes it beyond offering a general opinion on government sanctioned assassination and lays out an argument why a specific person should be murdered, and why it’s not only okey-dokey fine for a government to commit that murder but that the government is reprehensible if it doesn’t, he crosses from generalizations on the topic to promoting a specific course of action – namely murder – to be committed against a specific individual.

Meanwhile, the blubbery, cowardly piece of shit sit in his chair taking statements out of context to justify his bilious verbal vomit, safely ordering someone else to commit murder.  That, Ezra, is why people sue you.

paroxysms of moral outrage to some

justified moral outrage to others.

This is scary shit.  It shows clearly where harper wants to take us, and some of those who back him.

It shows what we stand to lose, and it shows the utter contempt and disregard those people who want to take us there have for our civil rights, human rights, and privacy rights.

At what point will more people start asking what, exactly, are we protecting?  Certainly not our rights, as they are considered small sacrifices for this vague, ever-broadening term called national security.

Just a brief bit from the article which talks about some of what has comme out of Wikileaks this week:

The dispatch goes on to state that Judd "derided" recent Canadian court judgments that threaten foreign governments' intelligence-sharing with Canada. "These judgments posit that Canadian authorities cannot use information that 'may have been' derived from torture, and that any Canadian public official who conveys such information may be subject to criminal prosecution," the cable says.

Guys!  Do you really think there are witches?  Do you really believe all those guys (including her own brother) slept with Anne Boleyn?  Hey, it must all be true.  They confessed, under torture.

Even if these vicious animals who think that torture is just an ok fine tool for us but totally barbaric when others do it, information obtained through torture is unreliable.  So Judd can be as full as contempt as he wants for us bleeding hearts who really believe that when we signed agreements opposing torture, we really meant it.  You can't win hearts and minds by torturing people as part of a plan to stop those you are torturing from...torturing people.

Judd credited Prime Minister Stephen Harper's minority Conservative government for " 'taking it on the chin and pressing ahead' with common sense measures despite court challenges and political knocks from the opposition and interest groups," according to the document.

Sure, let's just ignore a couple of centuries of carefully, thoughtfully  designed law and use that good old fashioned Tim Horton's crowd common sense.  I mean, when your goal is to protect rights, fuck rights, eh?

So I ask again:  what is it that our rights are being sacrificed to protect?

Guess who is back

This guy.

Welcome back, Mentarch.

Way to go, ladies and gents!

sure as hell beats those ridiculous love the tar sands ads.
In the fight to protect the environment, some people can bare just about anything.

Some god you have there

And his followers engage in threats.

A debate over Sunday shopping has led P.E.I.'s transportation minister to suggest God had struck down the leader of the Opposition, who fell and injured herself after introducing a bill to allow Sunday openings year-round.

Oh sure, cause and effect.  What else could it be?

"I'm not what you call a saint, but I believe in God and I believe in [doing] the best I can do. You were at CBC pushing Sunday shopping, were you not? On TV?"  (Transportation Minister Ron MacKinley) asked Crane. "Right after that interview what happened?"

"We had a bit of an accident," Crane responded.

"Does that not tell you something?" said MacKinley.

"Like what?" said Crane.

Yeah, like what? Asks 900ft

"Like the Lord works in mysterious ways, and maybe you should start worrying what's going on here? We are going all the time, we're getting farther and farther away, whether it's prayers in the schools or whatever it is," said MacKinley.

Sounds rather threatening.  I thought it was Thor who wielded a hammer.  But since we’re on the subject of your god’s mysterious ways and how he breaks bones to make a point,  MacKinley, what was he trying to say here, and here, and here, and here?

Wow.  In MacKinley’s world, and that of others like him, we could just dispense with governments altogether and watch for...signs.  Except they do seem a little tricky to interpret.

Harper's War on poverty

Actually, that's a typo.

Should read "Heartless Harper's War on the poor - and seniors." (emphasis mine)

Low-income Canadian seniors could be driven into poverty next summer when they find out Ottawa has cut their federal income support. Some are poised to lose a key part of their monthly income because of a new policy approved by the federal government without public notice, according to internal guidelines obtained by The Globe and Mail.
 
So if a low income senior - who acted responsibly and put money into an RRSP over the years so they would be able to care for themselves - takes out a few thousand for say, medical costs, the funeral of a spouse, to fix a heater, that withdrawal is treated as income making it appear that they are making more that year than they actually did, and they no longer qualify for GIS payments.

I have to sign off now since I'm trying not to use foul language as much on my blog.  But this is so, so obscene.

Update:   Finley announced in the House today the change is on hold, for review because she was "very concerned" by what had been reported.  Sure Diane, except you can't pretend that you had no idea of the impact this would have on seniors -

“I think it’s immoral,” said Gerard Lee, who worked on benefits files for the federal government as a Service Canada client services officer in Corner Brook, Nfld., before retiring this year. Mr. Lee wrote to Human Resources Minister Diane Finley in August saying it was “grossly unfair” of the government to make the change without any public notice or effort to inform seniors.  In a written response last month, Ms. Finley defended the change and said the courts had urged Ottawa to clear up the rules in this area. 

So why the change of whatever it is Diane has in place of a heart?  Probably this - 

Ms. Finley’s office had more to say Thursday when informed The Globe would be writing a story on the issue.“The Minister has instructed the department to urgently review this policy,” said Ryan Sparrow, Ms. Finley’s director of communications. Mr. Lee later said the minister’s pledge was “excellent” news.

Damn those media folks, eh, Diane?

Update on update: we have Gerry Byrne, Liberal, to thank for Finley's sorta heart transplant.  Nice going, Gerry!  Finley still tried to act like this was all news to her, though.

Oh yeah! Sober second thought!

The unelected conservative senate is showing the unelected liberal senate how things are done differently under a pseudo-conservative government, as harper promised.

Nortel employees predicted a bleak future filled with illness, poverty, homelessness and even suicide after the Harper government signalled it will kill legislation aimed at protecting workers from losing their long-term disability benefits.  The 400 disabled employees were distraught Thursday after Conservative senators used their majority on the Senate's banking committee to recommend that the upper house not proceed with the bill.

Think of the time this new senate saves!  Leg breakers for the mob don't debate, they just act.

How do you justify killing such a Bill, a Bill that would give disabled employees the benefits they paid for over many years?

Right.  You just vote it down, no need for debate or justification.  You do it because you can.

However, all is not lost.  CON justice will yet blaze forth, protecting Canadians from those dangerous criminals who...grow five pot plants or more.

Harper just keeps supporting those troops, past and present!

OH look! A Canadian flag at half-mast!  At a CF base!  Quick, grab my photo team!  Round me up some cool tanks and shit for the background.  Roust up some old foggie vet...and don't, for chrissake, forget the damn poppies this time!

Oh...forget it, it's Gagetown.

The Harper government has returned more than $33 million set aside to compensate veterans exposed to the defoliant Agent Orange to government coffers after many veterans failed to meet its strict qualifications for payments. Liberal Senator Percy Downe said the veterans didn't qualify because compensation was narrowly limited to those affected by the chemical spraying at Canadian Forces Base Gagetown between 1966 and 1967.

Right, and even those vets didn't get compensation until they had to take their own government to court for it.

Downe said what concerned him is that the money wasn't returned to Veterans Affairs or used to fund assistance for Canadian veterans and their families as was originally intended when the money was set aside.At the same time, the government has spent nearly $8 million in legal fees fighting those veterans who have launched a lawsuit over the highly restrictive qualifications.

"It would seem that instead of assisting veterans, the unspent $33 million is being used to fight them in court," said Downe.

Well, Flaherty has been telling us we all need to tighten our belts.  Harper's defence funds have to come from somewhere.  Gotta keep extra in that kitty as well, never know what special interest group or fringe group may outrageously take him to court over trivial things like broken promises or human rights.

And there are all those ads to promote oil fields that need funding!  And someone has to pay for those Don Cherry Hearts Fantino appearances!  And...and...ADSCAM!!!!  Surely you haven't forgotten ADSCAM??!!!

Oh yeah...support the troops...and stuff...

Sucks to have limits to your nasty super powers

This -
The U.S. government has notified Ottawa that the WikiLeaks website is preparing to release sensitive U.S. diplomatic files that could damage American relations with allies around the world. U.S. officials say the documents may contain accounts of compromising conversations with political dissidents and friendly politicians as well as activities that could result in the expulsion of U.S. diplomats from foreign postings.
 
May explain this –
The founder and editor of the whistle-blowing website WikiLeaks, Julian Assange, is wanted in Sweden after accusations of rape and molestation, a spokeswoman for the Swedish prosecutor’s office told CNN Saturday.

 
I’m sure that more than one nation would like to see Assange discredited, locked up, on the run…anything that will prevent him from making available “accounts of compromising conversations.”  After all, no lie is ever too big if the goal is to hide the truth from the public.  No individual is too precious to sacrifice in the name of subterfuge.  No value is too worthy to crush in the name of preservation of power for the few.

It’ll be…interesting to read what the US felt it had to warn Cannon about.

Hmmm…rumours today of a big cabinet shuffle…

Maybe it’s a Zen thing

Buddhists say "be thankful for your enemies because they help teach patience and caring."

Because it's damn hard to account for this (emphasis mine)-

The poll (which has the CONs in the lead) suggests that Conservatives continue to garner support among seniors, men, those born in Canada and those with middle levels of socioeconomic status. Meanwhile, Liberals continue to get support from the university-educated, non-Canadian born and Ontario residents.

It must be because the CONs have done such a bang-up job improving the lives of seniors, right?

The number of seniors living below the low-income cutoff, Statistics Canada’s basic measure of poverty, jumped nearly 25 per cent between 2007 and 2008, to 250,000 from 204,000, according to figures released on Wednesday by Campaign 2000. It’s the largest increase among any group, and as the first cohort of baby boomers turns 65 next year, could place increased pressure on families supporting elderly parents.

 
Oh...I guess it isn't that...

Maybe the CONs have made plans to fight this devastating trend.

The Harper government has rejected all 74 recommendations in a sweeping Senate report to combat homelessness and poverty.  The official Conservative response this week to the 300-page report was a 20-page list of existing programs and a promise to take the committee’s recommendations "under advisement" in the future.
 
Not that either.

Must be all those great senior appointments.  Yeah, that must be it.

Priorities

I heard someone on CBC news this morning say it would be better for the climate change conference in Mexico if Canada stayed away from the table.  Didn't catch who said it, but I get their meaning.

They haven't just been investing in $56,000 advertisements and op-ed pieces. The governments of Canada and Alberta are also engaged in something much more insidious: a concerted effort to weaken climate policies in other countries, with the aim of ensuring that no impediments exist to Canada’s filthy tar sands.

Well, our current government has only so much money, you know.  Fiscally conservative, and all that.

A Canadian climate-change research foundation is celebrating its 10th anniversary, but has already begun winding down its operations after failing to get new funding from the Harper government.   The budget crunch at the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Sciences comes on the heels of revelations that the government is leasing out the Amundsen, a coast guard icebreaker equipped to monitor climate change in the North, to a pair of fossil-fuel companies for oil exploration in the region.

Sometimes the good guys win

I add my congratulations to that of others on Canadian Cynic's success in holding Patrick of Nexus of Assholery to account for unrelenting, vicious, malicious attacks.

Blogs are a terrific way for anyone who has access to the Net to voice their opinion, share information, push a cause dear to them.  None of us want to see this freedom curtailed.

We all share a responsibility to keep this venue open and as unimpeded by limiting laws as possible.  And that isn't terribly hard to do.  Common sense tells us that what you can't do in other public places applies as well to the Net.

Many of us use outrageous humour to get a point across, but when what we say is treated as fact, it had damn well better be true, and legally substantiated. 

If anyone dares to say that suing someone for the type of thing Patrick did is an act against free speech, then they are Morans.  And the proof is in the fact that they can't see the difference between vicious lies spread with the intent to cause harm, and obvious satire, sarcasm, or humour.

I hope CC returns soon to keep giving us his excellent examples of the latter.

Sure, I see the similarities

(picture)
Stephen Harper is being hailed as a modern-day “Abraham” for his defence of Israel in a recent speech to a conference on combating anti-Semitism.

Sure!

Harper takes his orders from an invisible sky monster demanding that we simply follow along, as did Abraham.
  
Harper is opportunistic, as was Abraham. 

Harper lies, gives the orders, then hides because he’s a coward, putting others in the line of fire and treating the innocent as criminals, as did Abraham. 

Harper casts women into the wilderness to fend for themselves when they are no longer useful to him, as did Abraham. 

Harper is willing to send those he is supposed to protect to their deaths just to suck up to power in the hopes of benefiting personally from the sacrifices, as did Abraham.

Have to admit, the bit about the great, virtuous Abraham marrying his own half sister  (Gen:20:12)  is not like harper.  He’d be more inclined to marry his clone.

Gods and other monsters…even today some people continue to praise the most vile as virtuous.

Canadians Defending Democracy

Go read Dammit Janet!

Then act.

I know where my canceled political donation is going.

Toward a national security state

This excellent but alarming Hill Times article by Murray Dobbin ties in with several posts we have seen lately conncerning free trade, the undermining of democracy and free speech, Canada's shifting image and role militarily, and the use of fear to control citizens.

Dobbin explains how the harper government in particular has been effectivley moving our country toward a security state - Its most familiar elements are privatization, deregulation, so called "free trade," tax cuts for the wealthy and corporations and massive cuts to social spending.

But in order for our budding security state to protect itself - as conditions worsen, as wages and living standards fall, as personal insecurity increases, and as the social safety net frays, (all which result from a security state) the threat of a radical response becomes real.

Any one not clouded by absolute love for the Master Strategist knows what that means: protesters are re-branded by the ruling government as criminals, more prisons are built to house them, access to information is reduced to near nothing, freedom of speech and the press is severely curtailed by whatever means available - imprisonment, false charges, threats, smear campaigns.

The national security state is intended to protect the gains made through free market policies, and at the same time, gradually redefine what government means to the citizenry. We have in Harper a prime minister who virtually never refers to medicare, education, social protection, the environment, poverty reduction or indeed any of the issues that the vast majority of Canadians say they care about.

How does he get away with this when polls consistently show most of us are at odds with the priorities of the current government?

Massive campaings meant to distract us.

Fear campaigns: fear of criminals, fear of socialists, fear of terrorists, fear of environmentalist who threaten good, old fashioned entrepreneurship, fear of whatever other country they can paint as a threat.  This allows the government not only to keep us distracted, but to boost military spending, to give greater powers to the military, policing forces, security forces.  It allows the government to invade our privacy and curtail our freedoms, all in the name of security, a security that in reality is nowhere near as threatened as they lead us to believe.

Divide the population: citizens will fight more between each other than with the government; division provides more fodder for distractive campaigns; division allows the government justification for cutting programs; division encourages fear; division allows the government to portay certain groups they seek to undermine as unsavoury, as threats to democracy.

Dumb down and simplify messages:  repeatedly portraying issues as good or evil allows the government to toss issues into one camp or another and to offer simplistic, false solutions.  It also alters the way citizens perceive issues or disseminate information , if done long enough.  Show us only black and white long enough, we begin to lose the ability to even look for shades of grey.

Cut social spending:  not only is the population less educated, then, it is so focused on simple survival that it has little time to devote to figuring out how to fight their own government, how to get information, or even to simply attend protests.  It has little interest in much more than meeting basic needs for them and their families, and when there is a little time and energy at the end of the day, they turn to non-productive activities so that they don't have to think about how rough things are.

Eventually, though, the pressure becomes to much and there is rebellion.  Bloody rebellion because it isn't well planned, and by then the security state is well entrenched to subdue its very citizens through force.

Dobbing lists several recent examples of how our civil rights are being altered: G20 arrests and violations of rights, the Montebello fiasco with undercover cops trying to create trouble so they can justify a crack-down, the harassment of anti-Olympic protesters...

Each time these outrages go unchallenged by federal opposition politicians, the national security state clicks one notch further forward and normal gets a bit worse. When tough on crime bills sail through almost without comment even when crime is declining, and when we are spending billions and billions on defence when we have no enemies, there is something terribly wrong with the body politic.  The country is changing before our eyes, and federal opposition parties are letting it happen.

And so are we, when we see the opposition fail at controlling a vicious, undemocratic minority government that has been systematically leading us toward a security state.  We are letting it happen when we continue to support these parties, offering little more than e-mails voicing our discontent.  We need to make those parties realize they will lose our vote, our financial support, and our public voices.

We will never convince harper to protect our rights and freedoms, so wee need to put pressure on opposition parties to do what they were elected to do.  Represent us and oppose what  the harper government does that undermines our collective welfare.

We need to be as critical of the parties we tend to support as we are of harper & co because they are failing us, and we need to get it through our heads that we can't compromise on fundamental issues related to rights and freedom.   When we refuse to accept the trading off of our right for temporary political gain and quit supporting the opposition parties when they do these things, they may start listening to us and act accordingly.

No backbone = no vote, no donation, no support.
No backbone = stark criticism

Sure, the box looks all pretty to some...

...until you release the contents and realize in shock you can’t put them back.

When even hard core right-wingers no longer see the glitter, you know it ain’t good.

Norman Spector asks “why would anybody give any credence to the latest warning (issued by harper)?”

Join the 2/3rds of Canadians who have been saying this for years, Norm.

Sure, but can we build it before it strikes twelve?

Margaret Atwood thinks Canada needs to set up a dictat-o-meter.

Similar to the famous clock that counted down the seconds to nuclear Armageddon, this clock would grade how close Canada creeps toward a dictatorship...

Because we’re just about there.

We had very early indicators of where harper was headed when he did not appoint a deputy prime minister. 

One oddly common trait among dictatorships: The dictator almost never has a named successor. Most democracies have something like a vice president, to take over if the president dies. Dictators don't want their opponents to know who would succeed them.

Since becoming PM, harper has wasted no time in establishing a totalitarian, dictatorship type of control.  Dictatorships limit freedom of speech, freedom of the press, freedom of opposition political parties, independence of courts, free and regular elections.

Since harper took power, he has been focused on one thing - getting all of it, with no chance of effective opposition.

He has been replacing key people in the public service, the courts, the military, and oversight agencies.

He has limited access to information.

He has divided the country, causing us to fight each other rather than his undermining of democracy.

He has encouraged an us-and-them mentality between police forces and the public, and the military and the public, causing a shift from serve and protect the public to viewing the public as the enemy, potential criminals who rather than be protected must be constrained.

He has limited freedom of speech by treating peaceful protesters as criminals, harassing and smearing people who speak out, punishing civil servants who speak the truth.

The more time he has to erode systems which are meant to protect our rights, the more difficult it will be to reverse that damage. 

If we think harper thumbs his nose at our laws, rights, and Parliamentary system now, give him a little more time and not all of our shock and anger will be of avail because we’ll have no effective way of expressing it.  Not through protests, not through our vote which will become useless, not through our rights which will have been so altered that they will be weapons to control us rather than protect us.

We have to get this guy out.  Now.

Stockwell does math...poorly

Nearly $1.7-billion in promised cuts to government spending will come almost entirely from attrition in the public service, suggesting a relatively pain-free opening round as Ottawa begins to trim its record deficit.

Uh-huh.  Didn’t believe it in March, don’t believe it now.  Neither does Carleton University economics professor Frances Woolley.

“I think [the federal government] is being optimistic in saying they’re going to be able to make it through attrition," she said.

And this is why -

Treasury Board President Stockwell Day...said about 11,000 public servants vacate positions each year – mainly through retirement – and not hiring replacements will be Ottawa’s main source of savings.

Even if exactly 11,000 jobs were left unfilled, finding $1.7-billion in savings assumes the average compensation of the departing workers is $155,000, which she said is high. (No kidding!!!  The average is 68,000.00 and that includes executives) Further, pension obligations mean a retired public servant is not off the books. Internal transfers will also be a challenge, she said, because retirees are often leaving senior positions while cuts will likely affect more junior workers.

But hey, it’s a good excuse for harper to butcher his favourite kicking dog. 

And this affects non-public servants as well.  By not replacing 11,000 retiring workers, services, quality, and even efficiency will suffer through lack of sufficient staffing.  Like here.

Damn, Lilley, have another cup of coffee.

Lilley is still trying to...what?  Something to do with one of his most recent kicks, employment equity in the public service.  Maybe he wants to revive those few weeks where a flurry of articles and letters to the editor resulted from his big exposé on how white, stay-at-home mothers with little education are just treated sooooo unfairly in the federal government hiring process. 

Except this latest article is so lacking in cohesion and coherence that it’s at times difficult to understand what point he is trying to make.  We are left to assume he’s saying employment equity is bad, hmm-kay?  Simply because that has been his stance since he started writing about this issue.

He starts by mentioning the US which is a mistake to begin with since they have affirmative action to address inequities, something quite different from our employment equity legislation.
But hey, let’s read on and see where he’s going.

In 1776, as the United States headed towards independence, Thomas Jefferson wrote the immortal words: “We hold these truths to be self evident, that all men are created equal.”  While America has struggled to live up to those words at times, there is no doubt that they have acted as a clarion call, a shining ideal for the nation to live up to.  

OK...nice words, but they aren’t exactly respected in the US.

Regrettably, in Canada, we have no such thing.

WTF????  Lilley himself says a paragraph or so later:

Gender identity and gender expression would, of course, not be the only areas where you are prohibited from discrimination; there is also race, national or ethnic origin, colour, religion, age, sex, sexual orientation, marital status, family status, disability, or conviction for an offence for which a pardon has been granted. That’s already in the Human Rights Act.

Maybe Lilley skipped his morning coffee, or maybe he’s drinking decaf which just doesn’t have that kick, because he then abandons the US for a bit and does some more name dropping -

While once we would have looked to our British heritage as our source of liberty and equality before the law, today Canada is a country that grants differing levels of rights and freedoms based on who you are, your ethnicity, your religion, your gender or what you think your gender is.

WTFx2?????  So...what are you saying, Brian?  We should return to the days of British colonialism?  Granting equal rights since then is a bad thing?  Shall we go for strike three?

A bill before Parliament, which seems likely to pass, would add gender identity and gender expression to the prohibited grounds of discrimination protected under the criminal code and Human Rights Act.  The idea is to give greater protection to transgendered and transsexual citizens.  Whatever happened to the idea that all are equal before the law?

WTFx3?????  Is there some connection between those three sentences?  How does an attempt to include recently recognized groups who have until now faced discrimination indicate in any way that this results in the death of the belief that all are created equal before the law?

The criminal code provisions are currently shorter, but opposition parties and several activist groups want to expand them.  In 2008, the Liberals promised in their campaign platform, “an amendment to the Criminal Code to include ‘gender’ in the hate propaganda provisions to help end societal acceptance for those who would incite hatred against women.”

And that’s bad because...?

It was revealed this past summer that the federal government was setting aside jobs for certain groups.

Oh. I see.  All that undecipherable nonsense was just an attempt to make the old EE story from June look like it’s something new.

Some jobs were only open to aboriginals, some only to visible minorities, and some to women or the disabled. The government reviewed the process and declared while preference could be given to the protected groups no one should be denied the chance to apply for a job based on their race or gender.  Hiring, the government said, should be based on merit.  

OK.  We heard that.  From here on, I begin to suspect that Lilley added something to his coffee that’s usually reserved for experimenting on how far from reality you can project your thinking.

For some reason, the government has been accused of racism for advocating that everyone should be treated the same.

For some reason...sure, let’s just pretend this twisting of the truth hasn’t already been addressed.  No, Brian - and please take notes, I don’t want to have to repeat this in three months when you again try to revive this nonsense - the government hasn’t been accused of racism, it has been criticized for wanting to kill legislation that has been effective (but still is needed) in providing proportional representation in the public service.

You offered the US as a “clarion call” as though having fine words about equality enshrined in historical documents automatically translates to action, but your own “shining ideal” shows us every day that words aren’t enough to change the way people think or to eradicate their prejudices.  What might be self-evident to some is not embraced willingly by all.

While the Charter of Rights and Freedoms and the Bill of Rights before that say citizens of Canada shall be treated equally “without discrimination” based on issues such as race, religion or sex, the new regime says you will be treated differently based on those very same criteria.

No, no, no!  First off, there is no new regime, Brian.  There has been a re-examination and clarification of EE legislation and Ms. Barrados, President of the Public Service Commission explains - again (emphasis mine)-

The Public Service Employment Act (PSEA) sets the framework for staffing in the federal public service. It specifically provides for limiting the area of selection to employment equity groups where there are identified gaps. It is the view of the Public Service Commission that delegated departments and agencies have this statutory option, in addition to other tools, to address areas of under-representation.

Ms. Barrados added, “The core values of merit and non-partisanship are the cornerstones of all appointments to and within the public service. This applies to appointments of employment equity groups.” For merit to be met, the appointee must be qualified.

If a department determines that it's staff is not representative of the population, it may give preference to whatever minority group is not represented well, but if no qualified people in that group apply or pass the tests, then people outside that group are hired.

A true equality, one in the best Canadian tradition, would simply state that all people are created equal and should be treated equally before the law.    It would do away with all those special privileges and would re-establish a unique standard for all Canadians.

Sure, Brian, just like Jefferson saying it in the US automatically made everyone act according to those words, eh?  Virtually wiped out discrimination, did it?

Listen, Brian, everyone is created equal.  We shouldn’t even have to point that out.  But because not everyone - even today - believes that statement, we need laws to protect people from discrimination and change actions as well as attitudes.

Your intentionally obtuse words and repetitious tripe doesn’t help.  Denying that racism is still a big problem in Canada (except, of course, those who agree with you on this tend to be the same ones who constantly rant about anti-semitism being rampant throughout the world and Canada in particular) allows it to continue.

And just two more things because empty, vague phrases really, really bug me - what the hell does “a true equality, one in the best Canadian tradition” mean?  What does “re-establish a unique standard for all Canadians” mean?  You see, you can’t toss around words like “best Canadian tradition” and “unique standard” without explaining what those are and how they are relevant to what you are saying.

Seriously, couple of good, strong cups of coffee first thing in the morning - clears out the fog and confusion.

Or you can try writing about something else.  Like real travesties of democracy.

Nice. Now don’t back down

Carleton University's student association said Thursday it will vote in December on whether to change its policies and allow an anti-abortion group to register as a club.

Carleton Lifeline, an anti-abortion group on campus at the Ottawa university, said this week its club status had been revoked as part of the student association's policy against discrimination, which specifically bans any group that opposes a woman's right to have an abortion.

Some defenders of free speech are saying this is an infringement on the right to express differing views, but the foetus fetishists can still post their foetus porn in public areas since the group will continue to be offered public space and tables on campus which is consistent with the university's practice with respect to other student groups.

The Lifeline group wants the legitimacy a club would give them, I think, as well as the funding for clubs, of course. 

They aren't being prevented from speaking, but the student association is right in this case because funding the group would show support for their efforts, and that means they would be supporting a group that is attempting to take away some of women's rights.

Going to watch this one.

Thugs in the shadows

In the town I came from, there was a man who wanted to buy a corner gas station from another fellow. The gas station owner wouldn't sell it, not for any money, and not after many threats.

Eventually, he did sell it for far less than what it was worth. Too bad, because he probably could have used the money since he ended up in a wheelchair, put there by thugs sent to force him to sell.

Mr. Money flattens the station and turns the whole corner into a family fun centre. Even though many people in the town knew what had happened, the place was always busy and the man still walks around that town as though he isn't a brutal criminal.

I thought of that story yesterday after we found out how harper sent word to the conservative senators to kill Bill C-311 without debate
.
Harper couldn't get his way through proper channels of legislation, so he got his pretend senators - who we can see are really his bag-boys, leg-breakers, hit-men, errand-boys to do the job. Loyal to their Big Boss, they didn't let the fact that they are there for all Canadians - and paid by taxpayers as well - give them even a momentary pause, but followed orders.

Harper promissed to reform the Senate. He has. It is now a highly paid group of people, half of which have no power being overrun as they are by harper's thugs. The thugs hide in the shadows of the Senate chambers and rules presenting the illusion of legitimacy but are nothing more than illegitimate muscle for harper who gets to pretend his hands are clean.

There are what - 52 conservative senators? Fifty-two people who are where they are because our democracy paved the way for them. Fifty-two people who in one act, undermined that same democracy. Men and women, who are supposed to be so exemplary that they can represent us and act on the interests of all Canadians but who instead take our money and give us a big fuck you.

What they have done by enabling harper is neuter the votes of elected opposition reps in the House which is what harper wanted. And even if the Liberals get in with a minority in the future, the unelected conservative senate can kill Bills.

Worse than useless senate. Worse because it doesn't just sit there and do noting, it is now a compliant, ass-licking extension of the PMO. Paid for by us to make our voices even less influential.

And for the rest of us...

Because what do you suppose happens to those who aren't part of that powerful club?

Pioneered by the North American Free Trade Agreement between the U.S., Canada and Mexico in 1994, the only "freedom" they bestow is to investors through investor rights clauses that empower corporations to trump the democratic rights of citizens and their governments to enact laws and policies for the public good.

Investor rights clauses are reminiscent of colonialism, says Osgoode Hall Law School associate professor Gus Van Harten.

Corporations will count on (and can count on) the masses being too wrapped up in -  wondering how to pay their electricity bill or if they can ever get electricity; how to keep their kids off drugs, or how to get their next fix; how to hold back the relentless push of extremists who want to turn the clock back 100 years or how to push that tide of extremism forward - to fight these anti-democratic trade agreements.  But this will only last a short while.

Unlike colonial times, more people have had a taste of equal rights, more are at least aware of them, and more have access to vast amounts of information they can check and cross reference.  We are more aware this time around that our rights are being trumped, and many can communicate with each other instantly, with a few key strokes.

This time around, the masses viewed by the corporations and compliant governments as meek sheep will not have to go through centuries of education to know they are entitled to certain fundamental rights, and they will push back.  However, having little money or positional power to effectively fight back against corporations and governments who have positioned themselves to be relatively untouchable, there will be spontaneous and simultaneous outbursts of violence all over the globe.

We are seeing some of these already in the protests in Greece, Spain, England, and France.  Cornered, desperate people who bear the anger of injustice as a flag don't act rationally.  They are driven by powerful emotion, drawing in others as their rumblings grow to thunderous roars.  Then it's a self-powered tsunami that only exhausts itself after a great deal of bloodshed.

Chaos reigns.

What year is this?

Holy fucking KKKops!!!!

(image)

A judge has condemned a handful of Ottawa police officers for a strip search in which a young woman had her shirt and bra cut off, and was left half-naked in a jail cell for three hours. Moments before Stacy Bonds -- a 27-year-old with no criminal record -- was stripped of her clothes, she was also the victim of "two extremely violent knee hits in the back ... and has her hair pulled back and her face shoved forward," Justice Richard Lajoie said in an Oct. 27 oral ruling made after he reviewed the police station videotape that captured the events of Sept. 26, 2008.

Now before any of you people who defend cops every damn time without bothering to hear the facts say  "there's more tah this story.  She musta dun somethin'," read on -

...The incident began when Ms. Bonds was stopped by police in downtown Ottawa. After running her name and coming up with nothing, they told the young, black makeup artist to keep walking on home. But after a few steps, she turned back and asked why Ottawa Police bothered to stop her in the first place.

That's when things took a rapid turn. They arrested her for public intoxication -- which Judge Lajoie deemed unlawful because she was not drunk -- and cuffed her. Once Ms. Bonds was taken to Ottawa Police headquarters, the judge noted that she was anything but "violent or aggressive."...When Ms. Bonds was brought into the room, Judge Lajoie noted that she had "no hint of violence and no hint of being aggressive," describing her as "co-operative."

So for asking those who are paid to serve and protect why they had stopped her, they made up a false charge and - "Sgt. Steve Desjourdy cut off the woman's shirt and bra with scissors after she was forced to the floor with a plastic riot shield in the police department's booking room." - by three cops.  Who hung around as her clothing was cut from her.  I'd say that's sexual assault.

Good for Stacy Bonds for asking for answers, though I'm sorry for the brutality she suffered as a result.

The Judge stayed the charge against Ms. Bonds, saying he didn't want to be part of the "travesty."

Good for him, and thanks for his strong words.

And our fine, Ottawa KKKops?

Ottawa Police Chief Vern White said Tuesday that his force has launched an internal investigation into the case.

Oh, right, an internal investigation...sure, heads will roll, yeah, I feel safer already.




The press should publish the cops' photos.  We innocent people who occasionally take walks at night would like to be able to recognize the criminals cops should they be inclined to assault and frame serve and protect us so that we can protect ourselves thank them.

What? More cahoots going on?

Better get on that, Pat.    After all,

"There's a rumour that's gaining traction, the Bloc have struck a deal with Stephen Harper," NDP MP Pat Martin (Winnipeg Centre, Man.) told The Hill Times. "They'll be their dancing partner until 2012."

Well, if rumours are to be treated like fact, then there will be some partner swapping and cutting in going on.

(McVety) has accused the federal Conservatives of helping to fast-track an NDP bill that would extend human-rights protection to people who identify themselves as belonging to the sex they were not assigned by biology. 

The most surprising aspect of private member’s Bill C-398, Mr. McVety said, is the apparent willingness of the Conservatives, who fought against same-sex marriage as recently as 2006, to allow it to pass unimpeded through the House of Commons...“They rushed it through. I can’t divulge the person, but we have word from someone in the government who said there was a deal made with the NDP,” Mr. McVety said.

I think we need a Bill banning cahooting.  And a glossary of terms to explain to readers the difference between rumour and fact.  And politicians who don't toss both around as though they are interchangeable.  And a pony.  And a flying pig...

If both rumours are true and both the pot and kettle have been in cahoots with the Master Strategist, it's understandable that especially in a minority government deals have to be made or few Bills will pass.  These deals should be done in the open however, so we can know if our elected reps are acting responsibly on our behalf or just whoring themselves off by selling off on professed party stances for the political gain of their party.

Besides, if I suddenly had a lobotomy and was going to cahoot with the CONs, I'd want witnesses.  Lots and lots of witnesses.  And a contract signed in blood.  With the most horrifying of curses attached should the contract be violated.  And titanium body armor, extra thick in the back.

See, that's a mistake

One of the things I like about Dion is that he has vision, foresight.  Too bad too few Liberals share that vision.

Seems they are out of touch with voters, as well.

Once leader, Dion toyed with the notion of parting ways with the government on the Afghan file but was persuaded that he could not win the anti-war argument in the rest of Canada in the face of former Liberal deputy prime minister John Manley's recommendation for another mission extension.

The Libs assumed voters would simply buy Manley's recommendations, which few of us have, and as though insulting our intelligence and drastically underestimating our concern for our troops by assuming we would not take the Afghan issue seriously enough to examine the report were not enough, they shut their ears to the many, many polls that show the majority of Canadians want the soldiers home.  They ignored our posts, our letters, our calls.

The latest sequel in the Afghan debate finds Rae and Ignatieff at cross-purposes with a section of their own caucus on a foreign policy issue for the second time this year.

Well, try listening to us and at the very least, engage the CONs in open, in-depth debate on any extension, allow a vote, and don't head into it with your minds already made up.  Dion knew Canada's involvement with Afghanistan had to be re-examined because circumstances change.  And when lives are at risk, all of you who are elected and paid to represent Canadians better damn well study those changes and act accordingly.