Canada's lead research agencies have confirmed several cases of scientific misconduct, plagiarism and fraud by scientists and doctors spending federal tax dollars.

In one instance, two Montreal researchers got into such a fight over access to their medical research data federal officials had to step in and freeze funding for their project.

In two cases, researchers have been handed three-year suspensions for "academic dishonesty," according to documents obtained by CanWest News Service. In another, a Canadian post-doctoral student vanished from a foreign university, allegedly taking his taxpayer-financed scholarship with him.

Other researchers -- some of them senior scientists -- have been caught plagiarizing, trying to steal their colleagues' ideas and falsifying result reports.

However, that is about all Canadian taxpayers can expect to learn about the cases from the federal government. Officials at the Canadian Institutes of Health Research (CIHR) and Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council (NSERC) say they cannot, under federal privacy law, identity researchers involved in misconduct.

The councils are reluctant to even divulge names of universities or hospitals where the misconduct occurred or say how much tax money the researchers were given. Nor, are the councils in a hurry to take action on misconduct cases. Some cases have dragged on for years without the councils deciding on "appropriate sanctions."

The two research groups distribute almost $1.4 billion tax dollars a year to close to 16,000 researchers and thousands more graduate students across the country. Council officials like to say they finance world-class research conducted to the highest ethical standard. Their research misconduct cases are also among the most secretive. [. . . . ]

Vancouver, BC - Computerized climate models have very little usefulness in the formation of public policy around climate change, particularly for policy decisions as critical as Canada’s ratification of the Kyoto Protocol, according to a new study The Science Isn't Settled: The Limitations of Global Climate Models released today by The Fraser Institute.

Current global climate models have two significant limitations on their use. Climate trends using any source of observed data, including surface stations weather balloons, and satellites, are uncertain due to the short length of the records and because of the need for adjustments to correct for artificial discontinuities such as instrument or satellite changes.

The second limitation is that future climate trends are projected, not by simply extrapolating recent trends, but by using climate models with deficiencies that make the projected trends very unreliable. [. . . . ]

Green makes several recommendations that will provide a “reality check” on the science of climate modeling:

* Re-examine the science of climate change and stop grounding policy in the output of computer models of limited utility.

* Redirect some resources from greenhouse gas reduction efforts towards research efforts to improve the state of weather and climate forecasting.

* Acknowledge that published scenarios of future greenhouse gas concentrations are skewed toward unlikely high growth in emissions and, therefore, climate models using these scenarios will tend to project unrealistically large warming. [. . . . ]

Canada's spy agency warns that eastern European crime groups could jeopardize the North's emerging diamond industry by slipping foreign stones tainted through bloody conflicts onto the market.

The lucrative new business also presents an "inviting opportunity for criminal elements bent on theft and the laundering of illicit funds," with the greatest threat coming from syndicates in eastern Europe, says a Canadian Security Intelligence Service report obtained by The Canadian Press.

[. . . . ] The March intelligence report, Threat Posed by Eastern European Organized Crime to the Canadian Diamond Industry, was released under the federal Access to Information Act.

[. . . . ] Individuals allegedly connected to eastern European crime groups were implicated in a diamonds-for-arms trade with African rebel groups in the early 1990s. In November 2000, police arrested 63 people in Yellowknife linked to two organized crime rings involved in weapons and drug smuggling.

[. . . . ] My colleague Marina Jimenez, in her series on the legacy of the Vietnamese boat people that comes to a climax in today's paper, has drawn some of the most astounding of these tales of entry into an important look at the role in Canadian culture played by those who have the most impoverished and difficult backgrounds.
In the process, she has shown us what a serious mistake Ottawa is making in its immigration policies today -- a mistake that could have terrible repercussions in the next generation.

It is very clear from such stories, and from a good volume of academic work, that the poorest of newcomers have the largest numbers of children, and that those children are among the most entrepreneurial and successful Canadians. [. . . . ]
The poor and desperate contribute the most. But has Canada learned this lesson? Obviously not: The Immigration and Refugee Board, a loathsome and often corruption-riddled bureaucracy established in the 1980s with the apparent purpose of humiliating and deterring poor entrants to Canada, now turns away 40 per cent of applicants -- because, as The Globe and Mail recently put it, "more people are seeking asylum from countries without civil strife, such as Costa Rica, Mexico, Hungary and Argentina."

These people are merely poor, undereducated and desperate to join Canadian society. Other countries, such as the United States and Great Britain, are benefiting hugely from the labour, fecundity and entrepreneurship of Mexicans and Hungarians; we're turning them away. If you come from those countries and hope to enter Canada, current rules require you to be wealthy and well-educated. This is a serious mistake.

Husky Energy Inc. is going hunting for oil in an Atlantic Ocean basin that hasn't seen drilling for 17 years, the lone near-term hope for a new energy discovery off the coast of Newfoundland.

Armed with new seismic data that detail the geology of the South Whale Basin, Husky is hoping that modern mapping and innovative drilling techniques will yield a gusher.

[. . . . ] Husky, controlled by Hong Kong billionaire Li Ka-shing, is targeting what it hopes will be oil reserves of between 250 million and 300 million barrels based on geological studies. [link inserted by me -- and it leads to several other links]

The upper end of that range would place Lewis Hill as the fourth-largest oil field off Newfoundland, ahead of the Husky-led White Rose joint venture in the Jeanne d'Arc Basin, 350 kilometres east of St. John's.

Husky, which wholly owns the Lewis Hill project, plans to drill in the South Whale Basin's relatively shallow waters of 90 metres.
[. . . . ] White Rose, led by Husky and minority-owned by Petro-Canada, is scheduled to begin oil production by early 2006. Husky also has a 12.5-per-cent stake in the Petrocan-led Terra Nova project, which started producing oil in early 2002.

Husky Energy (Husky), in which the Group owns 34.7% interest, is a Canadian-based energy and energy-related company headquartered in Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Husky operates in Western Canada, offshore the East Coast of Canada and holds interests in the South China and East China Sea, and Indonesia. Husky employs approximately 3,000 people and has a book value of CAD$12 billion. [. . . . ] ["the Group"?]

Canada's East Coast

Husky is a major player on the Grand Banks of Newfoundland with interests in 12 Significant Discovery Areas, nine Exploration Licenses and one Production License. Husky has a 12.51 percent interest in Terra Nova and is the operator with a 72.5 percent interest in White Rose.

International

Internationally, Husky has interests in China and Indonesia. Offshore China, Husky has a 40 percent interest in the Wenchang 13/1 and 13/2 fields. [. . . . ]

The TruckSpeaker is published in the free enterprise market with no grants or subsidies
The government spent $133-billion in the past year on grants and subsidies to business. There are currently 650 different types of financial assistance programs offered by both the Federal and BC governments. This gives these businesses unfair advantage over their competition.

An Ontario Judge has ordered the Federal Government to pay more than $70 million dollars to a bankrupt trucking company. The Ontario Judge ruled that scheming and lying Canadian bureaucrats destroyed the Company and defrauded the US Government and engaged in "shocking behaviour that would cause the reasonably informed person to lose confidence in a Crown corporation and a department of the Federal Government".

In a 198 page decision, Mr. Justice John O’Driscoll expressed his shock at the conduct the bureaucrats including an email where a bureaucrat said ("as I see it here, this is our chance to sink the suckers in bankruptcy. They are out on the plank. Lets keep them walking"). Judge O’Dricoll also had scathing comments for the "auditors" Deloitte Touche, who were hired by the Department of Public Works to conduct "an objective, independent and comprehensive review" and the Judge found that the Deliotte Touche review was a farce and a whitewash done to curry favour with the bureaucrats for future business.The lesson to all of us is that Government through its civil service can be very dangerous and is not to be trusted, but rather, should be feared. [. . . . ]

[. . . . ] Ship bottoms are not the only option available to international drug smugglers. Border chief Chris Argue says it’s not unusual to find drugs in the wing of an aircraft.

Officials seized illegal drugs hidden in the wing of a commercial aircraft that landed this week at the Vancouver International Airport. One brick of hashish weighing 369 grams and two bricks of cocaine weighing 706 grams, with all three bricks taped to the inside of the aircraft’s fuel panel in the port side wing were confiscated. The Boeing 767 that arrived in Vancouver on a flight from Sydney, Australia had made one stop in Honolulu.

The World FactBook identifies Canada as an "illicit producer of cannabis for the domestic drug market and export to U.S.; use of hydroponics technology permits growers to plant large quantities of high quality marijuana indoors; transit point for heroine and cocaine entering the U.S. market; vulnerable to narcotics money laundering because of its mature financial services sector." [. . . . ]

BOGOTA, Colombia (AP) - Luis Hernando Bustamante, a leader of Colombia's largest drug cartel that is suspected of smuggling more than $10 billion worth of cocaine into the United States, has been captured in Cuba, Colombia's police chief said Friday.

The Cuban government informed Colombian authorities that Bustamante, better known by his alias Rasguno, was detained July 2 after entering Cuba on a false Venezuelan passport, Gen. Jorge Daniel Castro told reporters.
"At this moment he is being held by the attorney general in Cuba," the police chief said. "He is one of the biggest Colombian narco-traffickers." [. . . . ]

I think we are going to have to get past French manufactured U.A.V.'s powered by Bombardier snowmobile engines if we want to have any success in this field.

[...] After four accidents and several other technical holdups, the French-made unmanned aerial vehicle, or UAV, just seemed to be hitting its stride when the launcher, a 10-metre-long, compressed-air catapult, failed May 8.

The launcher was borrowed from the French army in January after the first one failed and was returned to the manufacturer for study. Like virtually every other snag, the problem is the environment in which it's operating.[. . . . ]

The three-metre plane, powered by a Canadian-made Bombardier snowmobile engine, managed to stay aloft after its slingshot-style launch, but technicians have been awaiting replacement parts for the truck-mounted unit.

My question is..."Why are we buying them from France when we can build better right here in Canada?"

Why are we continuing to supply our troops with junk when we can do far better?

Canada, the United States and other Western nations yesterday rejected a world court ruling that declared Israel's 700-kilometre-long security fence in the West Bank illegal.

The "advisory opinion" from the International Court of Justice at The Hague, which carries no legal weight, drew praise from Palestinian and Arab spokesmen and condemnation from other countries that said the United Nations' highest court had no mandate to rule on the issue.

[. . . . ] The International Court of Justice ruled 14-1 that the barrier, a network of electric fencing, barbed wire and concrete walls that is still under construction, violates international law and that parts of it should be torn down.

"The construction of such a wall accordingly constitutes breaches by Israel of various of its obligations under the applicable international humanitarian law and human rights instruments," said presiding judge Shi Jiuyong, of China.

The court said the security fence "gravely infringes a number of rights of Palestinians residing in the occupied area" and called for Israel to pay compensation for damage caused by its construction, parts of which cut deep into Palestinian areas of the West Bank. [Yes, I copied it correctly! NJC]

The only dissenting vote was cast by U.S. Judge Thomas Buergenthal, who wrote the court should have taken more note of Israel's security concerns.

"The nature of these ... [terrorist] attacks and their impact on Israel and its population are never really seriously examined by the court," he wrote. "Without this examination the findings made are not legally well founded." [. . . . ]

If you want to understand the absurdity and one-sidedness of the International Court of Justice's ruling yesterday against Israel's security barrier around the West Bank, just remember these 10 little words from Jonathan Peled, a spokesman for Israel's Foreign Ministry: "If there were no terror, there would be no fence."

The judicial popinjays of the ICJ -- who come from such human rights hall-of-fame countries as China, Egypt, Madagascar, Venezuela and Sierra Leone, and such pro-Palestinian countries as Jordan, France and Russia -- raked Israel over the coals for violating farmers', shop owners', students', workers' and families' freedom. Israel's wall, the court decreed, is "illegal" and must be dismantled "forthwith" because it impedes Palestinians' rights to mobility, livelihood, health care, education and self-determination. It prevents Palestinians from travelling freely to their fields and orchards, their businesses, schools, jobs and relatives.

(Of course, it also prevents the fanatics they harbour in their midst from travelling freely to crowded Israeli cafes, malls, clubs and buses with 20 kilos of plastique strapped to their bodies, but that point seems to have evaded the court.) [. . . . ]

As the court decision acknowledges, the United Nations Charter supports each country's "inherent right of individual ... self-defence" to "an armed attack." Why, then, does this not apply to Israel, which has been subjected to more violent attacks on its civilian population in the past four years than all other countries put together?

The court came up with the novel theory that the right of self-defence applies only when the attack comes from a state. Put aside the irony that most members of the UN do recognize Palestine as a state. If one is to take the court's logic seriously, the whole basis of the war on terrorism, or indeed any measure to counter terrorism seriously, is undermined. (Al-Qaeda, recall, is not a "state.")

This strange principle would apply even if a terror attack were sponsored by a state, as is the case with groups such as Hamas and Hezbollah, which have been funded by Iran, Syria and pre-war Iraq. [. . . . ]

So now the key to success for the new Conservatives is to become more "moderate!" Ah, yes, the hallmark of all the world's greatest historic leaders -- moderation.

Please. Canadians can't have it both ways. The same people who are so outraged at a nine- month sentence for child abusers and the release (albeit short-lived) of a psychopath are no doubt the same hypocrites who seek more moderation. Isn't that special!

Richard Scott,
Mississauga, Ont.

Prime Minister Paul Martin’s former employers at Montreal-based Power Corp. brokered the release of Michael Moore’s Fahrenheit 9/11 for Canadian viewing days before the June 28 federal election.

Forensic economist David Hawkins alleges that "Privy councilors and Carlyle group advisers, Paul Desmarais and Frank McKenna appear to have arranged the release of Fahrenheit 9/11 by Lion’s Gate during the last days of the election as a propaganda weapon to frighten Canadians away from the pro-American position of the new Canadian Conservative Party," in an email sent to prominent Canadian federal election analysts. [. . . . ]

An Ontario-based conservative group is petitioning Parliament to charge Michael Moore with attempting to influence last month's federal election, after the left-wing U.S. filmmaker urged Canadians not to vote for Stephen Harper.
At a Toronto screening of his film Fahrenheit 9/11, an indictment of the administration of U.S. President George W. Bush, Mr. Moore said Mr. Harper "has a big pair of scissors in his hands and wants to snip away at the social safety net that distinguishes [Canada] from [the United States]."

He suggested a Conservative victory in the June 28 election would "be such a blow to those of us trying to get rid of Bush."
As far as Kasra Nejatian, a 21-year-old Queen's University student, is concerned, Mr. Moore broke the law. Specifically, the Canada Elections Act, which states "[no] person who does not reside in Canada shall, during an election period, in any way induce electors to vote or refrain from voting or vote or refrain from voting for a particular candidate" unless the person is a Canadian citizen or a permanent resident.

Mr. Nejatian has set up a Web site, chargemoore.com and is asking Canadians to sign his petition -- which he wants to present to Elections Canada, along with a formal complaint. Should Elections Canada pursue the complaint against Mr. Moore, it would be the first time a non-Canadian would be charged under the Elections Act. [. . . . ]

Part 11, Division 9, section 331 of the Canada Elections Act, it is an offence for "[Any] person who does not reside in Canada [to], during an election period, in any way induce electors to vote or refrain from voting for a particular candidate unless the person is (a) a Canadian citizen; or (b) a permanent resident."

Also according to Section 500 (3) of the same Act "Every person who is guilty of an offence is liable on summary conviction to a fine of not more than $2,000 or to imprisonment for a term of not more than six months, or to both."

[. . . . ] This brings us to two questions. Why do Canadians have this smug anti-American attitude about eschewing markets and promoting government? And what can be done about it? I don’t know the answer to the first question, except to point out what seems obvious. Surely some of Canadians’ attitude comes from the relative sizes of the two countries, the smaller one feeling it necessary to look down on the larger in the hope of making up for its own glaring irrelevance.

If anybody out there has a more thorough explanation, feel free to write a letter to the editor.

On the second question, however, I think I have an idea. I’m not a big fan of government subsidies, but here’s one I just might support. Take the hundreds of millions of dollars annually that Canadian governments spend on industrial subsidies and other corporate welfare programs and use the money to subsidize young Canadians who wish to live in the United States for two years. This may sound insane, but it will have one very desirable effect for Canada. Those young Canadians will return with refined views of Canada and how it differs from the United States.

They will surely dislike some of what they see in the United States, and that’s fine — like all countries, the United States has lots of problems. But if they retain an open mind they will also come to admire some things about America. These young Canadian travellers may even come to recognize that they are not so different than their American cousins.

Whatever their views upon returning to Canada, they will be based on real experience rather than on an inherited Canadian bias. This might finally put an end to the anti-American, anti-market smugness that so infects public discourse in this country. Maybe then some of the market-based reforms that may solve some of our largest policy problems could be seriously debated.

For more than 30 years now, all we've heard from the federal Liberals is that they're the party that stands for the compassionate Canada - the Canada that takes care of the poor, that won't let staggering health bills cripple families, that believes in fairness and equality.

What a load of utter garbage.

Compassionate Canada is great if you're a faceless statistic who fits into a pre-ordained program slot that's funded by taxpayers dollars.

[. . . . ] Miller, of course, is the victim of a savage beating four years ago at the hands of Leo Teskey, a career criminal - a product of the federal government's so-called justice system, in other words. Miller was beaten into a state of near-paralysis.

And, as his wife, Lesley, pointed out the other day, he's now a political hot potato, while the unpaid balance in Dougald's account for his facility fees has climbed to $16,244.87. Teskey, of course, being the criminal here, gets all his expenses paid for by the government - by taxpayers. [. . . . ]

OTTAWA -- Federal employees - including frequent flyers like Canada's prisons boss Lucie McClung - are racking up huge air mile points thanks to a government policy change. For years, Treasury Board rules forbade civil servants from collecting airline loyalty reward points - a policy designed to prevent bureaucratic waste and ensure workers weren't personally benefiting at the public's expense.

But the guidelines were quietly reversed in June 2001.

That means McClung, the Correctional Service of Canada commissioner who claimed $142,000 in travel expenses for trips to the Barbados, Brazil, New Zealand, Europe and three trips to Hong Kong between 2001 and 2003, would be eligible to reap big bonus points for personal travel.

An internal Correctional Service of Canada memo obtained by Sun Media reveals that McClung is signing off on a six-month personal leave to "pursue world travels that will bring her and her new husband to four continents" this fall.
"Whether or not the commissioner decides to use her travel points for personal travel is personal information," she said.
The ability to use air mile points accrued through work for personal flights is a taxable benefit. [. . . . ]

Government officials should ante up air miles points to help cash-strapped victims of crime get to parole board hearings, according to a national victims' advocacy group. Steve Sullivan, president of the Canadian Resource Centre for Victims of Crime, made the pitch after learning civil servants can rack up airline loyalty reward points and use them for personal vacations. Points could be put to better use assisting victims who can't afford to attend important hearings, he said. [. . . . ]

[. . . . ] But according to figures released in the United States today, North Americans are reading fewer books all the time.

In fact, the report by the National Endowment for the Arts says the number of non-reading adults increased by more than 17 million between 1992 and 2002 in the U.S.

A full 40 per cent of Americans said they had not read a book in the past calendar year.

And this comes in a time when Harry Potter was/is incredibly popular and the Lord of the Rings trilogy has enjoyed a print renaissance thanks to the big-screen versions. These books alone attracted many non-routine readers to the library and bookstores, yet the figures still show cause for concern.

Not surprisingly, those analysing the report blame three specific factors: TV, Internet and movies. [. . . . ]

[. . . . ] The NEA's endoresement of John Kerry and criticism of the Bush administration adds perspective to two recent symposia published by Insight.

The first asked: Is phonics-rich instruction, as pushed by the White House, needed in U.S. classrooms?

C. Bradley Thompson answered, Yes: The whole-language fad has led to widespread illiteracy among U.S. students.

Ken Goodman responded, No: The whole-language method works and has led to a golden age of children's literature.

Also read the Associated Press story, "Report Shows Big Drop in Reading in U.S."
The second symposium posed the question: Are the tests required by No Child Left Behind making schools more accountable?

Education Secretary Rod Paige argued, "Yes: Testing has raised students' expectations, and progress is evident.

NEA President Reg Weaver countered, "No: The goals set for public schools are unrealistic, arbitrary and frequently unfair.

THUNDER BAY, ONT. - After months of talks, Ontario's Metis reached a deal with the provincial government Wednesday that will allow them to hunt and fish more freely.

From now on, the Ministry of Natural Resources will recognize the use of Métis licences known as "harvester certificates," which will prevent hunters from being charged or having their game or weapons confiscated during a hunt.
They will not be able to sell the game they catch, however.

Similar rules will apply to Metis who fish for their own use, even out of season.

The Metis Nation of Ontario will issue no more than 1,250 of the certificates over the course of the two-year interim project to provincial residents of mixed native and European descent. [When did the Metis become a "nation"?]

Tony Belcourt, president of the Metis Nation of Ontario, said the deal was reached after an eleventh-hour phone call from provincial Natural Resources Minister David Ramsay.

The Metis group had been ready to announce a plan to defy provincial authorities and launch a round of unapproved hunting and fishing this fall, after months of talks bogged down. Belcourt said the agreement will put an end to the harassment Metis people have experienced for years. [. . . . ]

MOSCOW (AP) - The American editor of Forbes Magazine's Russian edition and author of a book about tycoon Boris Berezovsky was shot to death late Friday, the magazine said.

Paul Klebnikov, 41, was hit four times outside the magazine's office and died in a rescue-squad vehicle, Russian news reports said. The radio station Ekho Moskvy said shells of two different calibre were found at the scene, indicating at least two assailants.

[. . . . ] In May, Forbes attracted wide attention by publishing a list of Russia's wealthiest people, claiming that Moscow had more billionaires who worked there or amassed their fortunes there than any other city in the world.

"Here people fly and fall with staggering speed," Klebnikov said at a news conference when the list was released.
His 2000 book "Godfather of the Kremlin: Boris Berezovsky and the Looting of Russia" described how Berezovsky, now living in exile in Britain, allegedly siphoned hundreds of millions of dollars out of Russia. [. . . . ]

The Supreme Court ruled in Rasul v. Bush that federal courts will conduct habeas corpus review of alien enemy combatants' detentions outside the United States to ensure the detainee is really an enemy combatant. In Hamdi v. Rumsfeld, the justices held that U.S. citizens detained in the war have the right to a lawyer and a fair hearing before a neutral judge. The court's rulings -- quite rational, legally defensible, and moderate at the philosophical level -- are a disaster at the practical level.

Well-respected conservative commentators stress these decisions are not a body blow to the Bush administration's war against terrorism. Instead, they argue that the court showed appropriate deference to the executive branch in national security and military affairs, affirming the president's right to detain enemy combatants.

They argue not to overreact to granting the federal judiciary the power to decide whether it agrees with the president's contention that someone is an enemy combatant, because Congress can step in to define the procedures of review with things such as -- per Justice Sandra Day O'Connor's suggestion -- a presumption in favor of the government that could only be rebutted by evidence more persuasive than the government's.

The reality is that I would be perfectly comfortable to grant enemy combatants all the due process they could possibly want, with fries on the side, if I actually trusted the judiciary to decide cases according to the law and the facts. But too many judges have proved time and again in the habeas corpus death-penalty arena that, because they oppose the death penalty on moral grounds, they will find endless, previously unknown procedures that were "not quite" done to their satisfaction. They find endless hypothetical possibilities of innocence even though the non-hypothetical evidence is to the contrary. They find endless chances for the petitioners to look for, and present, new evidence, even though guilt is not in doubt.

These judges are expert at disguising their opinions as somehow within what "due process" requires or what the evidence shows, but only the intentionally naïve refuse to see that the motivating factor is their view that the death penalty is immoral, which they are therefore morally obligated to oppose by any means available.

The same thing is going to happen in the war on terrorism, with every judge who disagrees with the president's war policy. [. . . . ]