Jean Carle is the Smoking Gun -- or the apple bumping the tree on its fall?
When the Gomery Commission got Jean Carle to admit that he had set up a phoney accounting system for hiding the sponsorship pay-offs the die was cast. Carle, who was appointed by Chretien as Vice President of Marketing for the federal Business Development Bank, used the bank to pull off the scam. When Judge Gomery likened that tactic to how drug smugglers do their money laundering, Carle admitted the judge was not wrong.His furious lawyer tried to suggest that Gomery's comparison was "inappropriate". What he really wanted to say was, "How could my client be so stupid as to agree with the judge's assessment!"
Next up in the witness box will be two practiced l**** / 'misspeakers', Chretien and Martin. Their testimony, since there will be big contradictions, should be very entertaining -- especially Chretien's, as he often told people that Jean Carle was like a son to him. Well, Chretien better hope that people don't remember that old saying: "The apple doesn't fall far from the tree."
Revisiting an old Government Scandal--Keep the Airborne Regiment, Disband the Liberals
After the case of the murder of a Somalian looter and the "mistreatment" of other looters, the Liberals began a commission to investigate the entire airborne regiment. Out of it came the army's harsh way of dealing with looters of military provisions. This treatment became velcroed to the single murder by one soldier. To top it up, the bleeding hearts on the commission and in government were shocked and appalled to discover that part of the airborne's training was an initiation that was also harsh. The video produced also showed a female soldier undergoing it. Now we supposedly had misogyny added to the mishmash of evidence. Of course, if women hadn't been given equal treatment to the men, that would have been 'sexism'. In short, the army could not win for losing. To make their case for disbanding the regiment, Collonnette, the Defense Minister, and his minions, resolutely refused to take testimony from lower rank officiers. The government couldn't spin their line of a regiment going to the dark side--veritable neo-Nazis--if the commission dragged on, so the Liberal government closed it down. That futile exercise cost the Canadian taxpayer $14 million in 1994 dollars. The millions more for the legal fees for the senior officiers' testimony and "the liaison team" from the DND was never revealed. The estimated total cost would be around $50 million in today's dollars.
The entire affair infuriated the military and ended up being attached to Kim Campbell, under whom the commission had been birthed. Still, it was the Liberals who pulled the plug on the regiment.
Basically, the tough warrior ethics of an elite regiment didn't jive with the Liberals' idea of tin soldiers holding up "Give peace a chance signs". Fortunately they had lots of time to live down their scandalous final decision. And you wonder why the military tends to vote against the Liberals, despite the last minute election attempts to buy their allegiance?
Clinton was profiled by Robert Sam Anson in Vanity Fair (June, 2004) and the picture wasn't very flattering. The article, "Bill and his shadow", shows that Clinton has never really adjusted to his lost position. He attends parties and has to be gently ushed out, long after the other guests have left. He is a monologist, (motormouth?) who has zero interest in what others think or feel. A classic case of, "Well, I've talked enough about myself; now why don't you talk about me?" Friends are driven crazy by his middle of the night phone calls that can go on for hours. The fact that the recipient might have to go to the office at eight is of no concern.
He also seems blind to his past errors as President. Despite being up-dated regularily about the Rwandan genocide, he still maintains that he was never informed. Also the four separate chances he had to get Osama Bin Laden, before Bin Laden made it to Afghanistan and infamy, are not acknowledged. "The Sudanese never intended to turn him over to us," is his spin on that. However, the former U.S. ambassador to Sudan claims that statement is false, and that to improve relations with the U.S., the Sudanese not only would have given up Bin Laden, but also given the list of African al-Queda members, the ones who later carried out the embassy bombings in Kenya and Tanzania. Clinton also refused to give the order to kill Osama in the Afghan desert when the CIA had tracked him down. The ostensible reason was that Bin Laden was hosting a hunting party that contained United Emirate sheiks. Mustn't upset the oil barrel.
Nor, according to Anson's research, has Bill mended his wandering ways. He hobnobs with billionaires, who in turn hobnob with harems of pretty young things. At his worse, he actually pesters young women, even if they are with their boyfriends. His Secret Service detail then has to step in to avoid assault on a former President. In terms of non-sexual morality, Clinton doesn't come across much better. He has taken large sums of money from people who have very dubious financial pasts. Only after criticism about his taking an office in mid-town Manhattan that rented for $800,000 a year, did he move his show up to Haarlem. It was the same sense of entitlement we saw in his looting of the White House upon vacating it. Hillary was said to have been the mastermind behind the heist, but Bill never stopped her. Perhaps his lowest point in this regard came when he pardoned Marc Rich, a big-time tax cheat and traitorous American. That was as a favour to Rich's wife, who was a generous contributor to Clinton's campaigns. Despite a chorus of negative comments from Democratic pols about the pardon--"Contemptible", "disgraceful" and "brain-dead" were the kinder ones--Clinton always saw it as nothing more than a political mistake which would harm his reputation.
Anson shows how Clinton became a pariah to his fellow Democrats. During this year's senate and gubernatorial races, some candidates refused his offer to help get out the vote. Janet Reno, his former Attorney-General, wouldn't even put his name in her campaign biography. Where he did help, the Democrats lost five out of six gubernatorial races. In the Senate races, they watched the Republicans clean up. Clinton had predicted the Democrats would pick up 12 to 15 new seats. His comment on the losses, "So we lost a few elections. Big deal!" Lately, Clinton has decided that he will be the "Mandela" of the fight against AIDS. He brushes off criticism about his lack of interest in the disease while he was President. Unfortunately, his attack plan was centered on drugs to keep AIDS's victim alive longer. The drug companies and other AIDS activists say that prevention is the only long term solution. Giving irresponsible African AIDS carriers greater longevity simply allows them to infect more people, thus spreading the disease into new areas. But staying on focus was never Bill's strong suit, so now he spreads his time between numerous enthusiasms. Besides which, Bush's pledge to spend $15 billion on AIDS has shifted the spotlight away from Bill, and Bill hates that. So you will see his name pop up from time to time connected with this or that cause of the moment. His handlers and biographers are afraid to open the papers every day because they fear his cause de jour might be another version of Monica Lewinsky. Meanwhile as his presidential poll ratings continue to drop, Clinton wanders in the political twilight, trying to figure out how it all ended so poorly.
Isn't a laudable intellect a terrible thing to waste? The problem for Bill was that his mind started in his nether regions and, when subsequently, he exercised it, it tended to move back to the starting point -- perhaps his need to be loved above all else -- but then, marriage to that harridan would cause most men's minds to wander south -- to warmer climes, I suspect. Is that too . . . coming from a woman? NJC
A few Nasty Credit Card Facts
PBS' Frontline presented an expose on how the credit card companies trick you into becoming debtors. My first eye-opener was to realize that the industry's term for me was "deadbeat". In the perverse world of credit, someone who faithfully pays of his balance is given this term of approbation. The "winners' therefore must be the saps who pay off only the monthly minimum, thus condemning themselves to punitive charges. A $200 purchase paid off with only the minimum payment each month would take 35 years to clear. The PBS interviewer talked to Carl Crahn, the guru of the credit business. He was the guy who introduced "zero credit charges" for a set period. The ploy was to get people to run up huge charges, then slap them with 18.7% interest. Typically, they couldn't pay it all off, so then and now, they are on debt the merry-go-round. Also if they don't pay off the full balance after a period, their interest rate gets jacked up to 25%.
The entire program was filled with chilling factoids. For instance, if you allow debt to pile up on your Mastercard, that can affect your interest rate on your Visa. Even store credit card debt is taken into consideration. And forget about trying to understand the four page agreement you sign upon getting a card. A professional accountant, with her degree from Harvard, admitted that she didn't understand it, even after hours of scrutiny. None of the major card companies would grant an interview with PBS, but a few insiders did. They admitted that it seemed foolish to give cards to college kids, who were already in debt for their studies and had no proven track record of gainful employment. However it is worth the risk of some of them defaulting, so that the rest got used to using (and hopefully, misusing) plastic. Get them while they are most irresponsible and possibly have parents that will cover for them. One bright light, don't despair if you file for bankruptcy and are told you're cut off all future cards. They don't really mean it. Sooner or later they will be sending you applications for new cards--albeit, maybe with a lower credit limit. You, unlike me, have proven that you are not a "deadbeat".
I found Bud's information on credit cards shocking. Does your child attend university or other post high school training and has a credit card been issued to him/her? Act, before your child is caught in this cycle. Rip up the blinking card while showing what Bud wrote.
Credit -- the modern opiate of the masses. Keep 'em in debt. Remember, to paraphrase someone I know, 'when you've got them by the glassies, their hearts and minds will follow'. No wonder governments love debt; it keeps citizens from thinking about other infringements on their lives and other pressing concerns such as security and whether our government has spent government money in Canadians' interest -- or in their own. NJC
Eason Jordan is building a resumé conservatives love to hate.
First, CNN gained the reputation as the Clinton News Network. Then one month after coalition forces went into Iraq in 2003, Eason Jordan confessed that CNN's reporting from Iraq had been less than complete:
I came to know several Iraqi officials well enough that they confided in me that Saddam Hussein was a maniac who had to be removed. One Foreign Ministry officer told me of a colleague who, finding out his brother had been executed by the regime, was forced, as a test of loyalty, to write a letter of congratulations on the act to Saddam Hussein. An aide to Uday once told me why he had no front teeth: henchmen had ripped them out with pliers and told him never to wear dentures, so he would always remember the price to be paid for upsetting his boss. Again, we could not broadcast anything these men said to us.
Just last year, a Pew Research Center report found that CNN was the Democrats' news channel: [. . . . ]
CBC: Some Beliefs More Politically Correct than Others?
CHARLOTTETOWN – The Maritime Christian College in Charlottetown is upset that CBC TV won't play one of its commercials.
The public broadcaster turned away the business saying it violates the CBC's ad policy.
College officials wanted to promote an upcoming lecture. [. . . . ]
Fred Osborne, president of the college, said his commercial, and the lecture, are about the problems all families face, and not just Christian families.
Imagine the outrage if a media outlet refused to sell an ad to a minority group -- say Jews, or Muslims, or even gays. Well, no need to imagine, actually -- Canada has plenty of human rights decisions punishing any such media, even if they are privately owned media.
So where is the peep of protest when the CBC refuses to run an ad for a lecture about families, held at a Christian college? The ad makes no reference to Christianity. It's not a missionary event -- it's a lecture. But the CBC refused it.
[. . . . ] Well, I do believe the CBC is endorsing a certain religion: militant secular humanism, utterly intolerant of anyone who dares hold conservative religious views, especially Christians.
The Knights and the lesbians: Exhibit A in same-sex uproar -- when a religious group's rights come up against the currently favoured minority group. . .
It is the same thing with businesses. Remember the printer and his refusal to print gay material?
[. . . . ] Prime Minister Paul Martin defended the bill, insisting that no religious organization will be forced to perform homosexual marriages if their teaching is opposed to them. But he also said that "Canada is a country where minorities are protected" -- a claim the Tories sought to turn against him by saying the debate on same-sex marriage will be all about protecting Canadians' religious freedoms.
The B.C. Human Rights Tribunal has just finished hearing Ms. Chymyshyn and Ms. Smith's claim that the Knights, a Roman Catholic men's fraternal and philanthropic society, discriminated against the couple by refusing to rent the hall to them after learning it was for a same-sex wedding reception. [. . . . ]
Knights' lawyer George Macintosh said the Catholic Church owns the hall, and membership in the Knights is limited to practising Catholics.
"If it's lawful to say no to [performing] a same-sex marriage, it's lawful to say no to celebrating the event. To celebrate an event against your religious belief is the same as conducting the event yourself." [. . . . ]
Guess which protected group lost? I believe I caught that in some news program but I do not have a reference. Check this. Oh, it was the religious group that lost -- but you knew that, didn't you?
But Western media and governments are also handicapped in dealing with Iraq by a peculiar double standard regarding the very status of the Iraqi Arab Sunnis as a formerly-ruling, and oppressive, minority. Twenty years ago, nobody would have listened to the argument that dismantling of the apartheid regime in South Africa and the holding of elections there should be blocked out of fairness to the white minority in that country. Few today listen to those who declare that fair elections and the forging of a new political system in Northern Ireland should be delayed out of concern for the feelings of the Protestant minority. [. . . . ]
Condolezza Rice left this morning to visit all countries that were with us in the Iraq war. She should be back in -- oh, about half an hour. . .
Thanks to JK in California.
Canadian Flags Will no Longer be Made in China -- "The federal Liberals are the Trailer Park Boys of Ottawa"
The government was caught -- Does anyone remember a story posted on this site (I don't remember the exact date) concerning a BC company that was paid to make Canadian flags or pins but none had to produced--just accept the contract? Who was currying favour with ***** to further business? To whose benefit?
[. . . . ] New Democrat MP Charlie Angus . . . . complained Wednesday that Canadian flag lapel pins bought for MPs and senators to give out were made in China. He demanded that future contracts be awarded to a Canadian supplier.
Public Works Minister Scott Brison seemed flustered by the question
Brison announced Friday that all new flag pins will be made in Canada. [. . . ]
. . . Those stately Parliament buildings sometimes seem like just another trailer park to Conservative MP Tom Lukiwski.
He told the Commons on Friday that he's discovered an interesting trend in recent issues such as favours for strippers, taxpayer subsidized tattoos for convicts and decriminalization of marijuana.
"The federal Liberals are the Trailer Park Boys of Ottawa," he said. [. . . . ]
Ottawa prepares final report on uranium mine that created Village of Widows -- Nuclear Shadow -- and Canada will be mining uranium again -- uranium mining contract-China-PM's recent business partnerships trip
"Gaudet estimates cancer kills someone in his tightly-knit village of 650 nearly every six months and has done so for two decades."
Think about this and then the contract with the Chinese to develop uranium mining that has been inked -- Paul Martin's 'partnerships' tour to China / tsunami tour to Tamil Tiger territory and . . .
(CP) - The dark, nuclear shadow . . . . Great Bear Lake. The harmonious community of Port Radium built around a government-owned mine. . . .
But then Betsidea learned that the dusty gunnysacks she and her sister played with had once been full of radioactive uranium ore, that the sandbox she dug in was filled with ground-up mine tailings.
Then her father, who used to barge that ore down the Mackenzie River to nuclear programs in the United States and Canada, died of cancer. Her sister, her aunts and her cousins met the same fate.
Finally, her new home of Deline, N.W.T., across the lake on the ore transport route, lost so many of its men to the same disease it became known as the Village of Widows.
[. . . . ] A report due this spring will outline options for healing the land. Closing the mine's entrances and removing the tailings could cost up to $10 million.
[. . . ] nuclear shadow. . . . cancer . . . . there's always this lingering fear."
Uranium mining at Port Radium . . . . weapons development. . . . [. . . . ]
IMET's law-order spectacle puts Bay St. on notice: we mean business
TORONTO (CP) - In a rarefied world of pinstripes and Porsches, it had all the subtlety of a brick through a Bay Street boardroom window: a refitted 12-metre RV emblazoned with RCMP logos and brimming with stone-faced cops, lawyers and forensic accountants.
Armed with a 60-day search warrant, they marched into the corporate headquarters of Bank of Nova Scotia and began collecting more than eight years worth of data central to an ongoing probe of troubled plastics maker Royal Group Technologies Ltd.
It was a high-profile coming out of sorts for a $30-million-a-year initiative the federal Liberal government launched in November 2003 to boost global confidence in Canadian financial markets in the wake of prominent U.S. flameouts like WorldCom and Enron.
They were members of an Integrated Market Enforcement Team, crack detachments of law enforcement officials and securities experts now in place in four cities across Canada with a mandate from Ottawa to sniff out corporate fraudsters.
Once investigators had commandeered a boardroom, changed the locks and swept for listening devices, the "mobile command post" pulled out after it spent two days parked directly in front of Canada's second-largest bank.
[. . . . ] "It's good politics for the government to be against (corporate fraud), because everybody is," he said. [. . . . ]
Indonesia: Kissing vs Jihadi Violence -- No Contest for the Mullahs
[. . . . ] But they would also impose penalties on unwed couples who kiss in public, while permitting police raids on the homes of those suspected of living together out of wedlock.
Pornography and public displays of "certain sensual body parts" would be outlawed and media, movies and songs censored.
Penalties for law breakers would range from fines as high as 300 million rupiah, or about $40,000 Cdn, to up to 10 years imprisonment, according to the daily. [. . . . ]
No details about which body parts -- but it appears to be an effort to end Hollywood's influence through movie/videos. I hate much of what Hollywood produces, particularly the violence and the unnecessary prurience, but still, I would rather see kissing--evem more--than ever live under mullah rule and threats of jihadi violence.
That is one of the problems with rules and regulations -- curtailment of personal freedom over actions. Kissing is not in itself harmful to society, and certainly it beats Al-Jazeera's Al Qaeda propaganda and dwelling over / publicizing images of fanatical Islamist carnage. I do think all of us should demand that the Hollywood film industry curb the excess of sexuality and violence. Somehow, though, I think that is not the mullahs' real point; their efforts are designed to tighten mullah rule. Another Muslim state down the tube?
Shamil Basayev, the Chechnyan Islamic fascist who masterminded the Beslan child massacre, says all Russians are legitimate targets under shari’a law, and promises there will be more atrocities like Beslan: [. . . . ]
For reference as to what the government is really accomplishing on entry to Canada of guns and terrorists see Feb. 3 and 4 Hansard. The Tamil Tigers is only one terrorist group that the present government is soft on. Their entry means other terrorists may enter in the same way. The guns? If you are a law-abiding citizen where would you find the greatest number of guns to protect yourself? Check a criminal or a terrorist. They don't register.
At tough times in my life, with the landlord tossing my clothes and record collection out on to the street, I could have used an aunt like Benon Sevan's. Asked to account for the appearance in his bank account of a certain $160,000, Mr Sevan, executive director of the UN Oil-for-Food programme, said it was a gift from his aunt. Lucky Sevan, eh? None of my aunts ever had that much of the folding stuff on tap.
And nor, it seems, did Mr Sevan's. She lived in a modest two-room flat back in Cyprus and her own bank accounts gave no indication of spare six-figure sums. Nonetheless, if a respected UN diplomat says he got 160,000 bucks from Auntie, we'll just have to take his word for it. Paul Volcker's committee of investigation did plan to ask the old lady to confirm her nephew's version of events, but, before they could, she fell down an elevator shaft and died.
If you're a UN bigshot, or the son of Kofi Annan, or the cousin of Boutros Boutros-Ghali, or any of the other well-connected guys on the Oil-for-Fraud payroll, $160,000 is pretty small beer. But, if you're a starving kid in Ramadi or Nasariyah, it would go quite a long way. Instead, the starving-kid money went a long way in the opposite direction, to the Swiss bank accounts of Saddam's apologists. "The Secretary-General is shocked by what the report has to say about Mr Sevan," declared Kofi Annan's chief of staff, Britain's own Mark Malloch Brown. [. . . . ]
Greg Weston: Liberal Sponsorship Scam "The juicy stuff is yet to come"
If Judy Sgro had any brains she would cut her losses and withdraw her civil suit. Unlike selling out her office, being an intelligent and competent Minister of the Crown has never been an allegation made against the York West MP. She runs the risk of having more disturbing details of her come out while she defends herself from allegations that never should have had to be taken seriously in the first place.
Judy Sgro was the author of her own misfortune. It’s about time that she realized this. [. . . . ]
If more details are likely to come out, do keep that lawsuit going, Judy -- unless it costs Canadian taxpayers. Ah, forget it. She doesn't have to spend her own money for this, I'll bet.
Canada - a country where the police are shackled and the crooks are armed. -- It is a good thing the gun registry is working so well -- scroll down.
It's almost more firepower than Toronto Police can bring to bear and it was seized from a car any thief could have easily made off with, cops said yesterday. "This is better armament than we have as a police service," Chief Julian Fantino said as the 30 sub-machineguns, high-powered rifles, semi-automatic handguns and shotguns were laid out on display before him.
"This is what our men and women face on a daily basis and it's unconscionable, it's unacceptable. It shows you just how vulnerable we are. "
[. . . . ] Tak Kwong Chan, 39, is charged with fraud and weapons-related offences. [. . . . ]
Link to see what they found. Then look at related articles:
Salim Mansur: "This moment of freedom in Shiite and Iraqi history was long awaited. That it was delivered by American soldiers opens a remarkable new chapter in Arab-American history."
And therein lies the rub for the EU, the UN, Canada's Liberal government and all those who wanted Saddam to remain in power -- some for the $$$ through UNSCAM, others to prove they weren't pro-American. Decidedly embarrassing for JC, PM and all the rest.
Among the pictures from Iraq's historic election this week, the most revealing were those of Iraqi women patiently waiting in lines to vote, then coming out with their stained index fingers after voting. [a badge of courage]
Iraqis were warned repeatedly -- by hooded men with bombs and bullets -- against participating in an election. The pontiffs of terrorism declared that election and democracy represented American values of unbelief in opposition to their version of Islam.
In the Sunni triangle around Baghdad, their slogan was "from the box into the box" -- i.e., from the ballot box into the coffin.
But the women of Iraq, like their Afghan sisters, understood instinctively -- without any aid from United Nations experts -- what freedom means for themselves and for their families.
They understood freedom as purging of fear that made their lives for so long an unbroken narrative of tears. [. . . . ]
Anybody who writes like this can't be bad -- The Diplomad via Power Line
In light of the "no Jews allowed" global anti-terror conference that kicked off today in Riyadh -- attended by Iran, the Muslim World Council, and the United States -- I had intended to send out an APB for The Diplomad to weigh in this morning. What is the Diplomad? [. . . . A few of his words follow:]
We've likewise bemoaned the destruction of the once-valiant nation of Red Ensign Canada (no Maple Leaf at this house!) by those who seem ashamed of their country's honorable and courageous role in defending the West and freedom, and now want it to be an anti-American sharia-besotted Botswana with snow. [. . . . ]
Evan Coyne Maloney argues that the University of Colorado should not fire [Ward Churchill] for his comment that the victims of 9/11 got what they deserved for being little Adolph Eichmanns. Says Maloney,
Creating an environment where tenured professors can be fired for controversial remarks is a dangerous precedent to set. [. . . . ]
HINDROCKET adds: I think the whole tenure system needs to be rethought. It doesn't make any sense to cover all misdeeds with the blanket of "controversy," and say that because a professor is "controversial"--regardless of whether that means he's a Republican or a pederast--he is protected. The taxpayers of Colorado are paying Professor Churchill's salary, and they and others pay tuition so that their children can be competently educated. Churchill is obviously not a competent educator. There is no reason in the world why taxpayers and parents should be compelled to pay his salary in perpetuity, no matter how much of an idiot he is. If it requires a change in the tenure system to inject a modicum of common sense into our universities, let's reform the tenure system.
Some will say: but that will leave our universities susceptible to currents of politics or fashion. To which I answer: Really? You think? As opposed to what--the situation we have now, in which any scholar who admits to conservative or Republican tendencies is less likely to be hired as a professor than I am to play in the NBA? Cry me a river.
Diplomad: Supergeritolman vs Staypuffedmarshmellowbeings: Castro Creams the EU
It is suicidal for the EU to draw on Europe's worst political traditions, the common denominator of which is the idea that evil must be appeased and that the best way to achieve peace is through indifference to the freedom of others. [. . . . ]
How are Diplomads so in the know about all this global-warming business you might be asking yourselves. Well, the answer is:
WE were there at the creation (almost). No, not when the earth's crust cooled, or even when our Neanderthal forebearers were lighting big fires to prevent themselves from freezing to death. But we were there at the Earth Summit in Rio de Janeiro in 1992 -- which was the bar mitzvah, the confirmation, the rite of passage for what has grown up to be today's truly rabid Global Warming Cult. [. . . . ]
Obviously, the Diplomad should continue blogging.
Hanson: Why the world’s elites gnash their teeth.
There is something else to this shrillness of the global throng besides the obvious fact of hypocrisy . . . . Davos after all, is not quite central Bolivia or the Sudan.
Do we even remember "all that" now? The lunacy that appeared after 9/11 that asked us to look for the "root causes" to explain why America may have "provoked" spoiled mama's boys like bin Laden and Mohammed Atta to murder Americans at work? Do we recall the successive litany of "you cannot win in Afghanistan/you cannot reconstruct such a mess/you cannot jumpstart democracy there"? And do we have memory still of "Sharon the war criminal," and "the apartheid wall," and, of course, "Jeningrad," the supposed Israeli-engineered Stalingrad — or was it really Leningrad? Or try to remember Arafat in his Ramallah bunker talking to international groupies who flew in to hear the old killer's jumbled mishmash about George Bush, the meanie who had ostracized him.
Then we were told that if we dared invade the ancient caliphate, Saddam would kill thousands and exile millions more. And when he was captured in a cesspool, the invective continued during the hard reconstruction that oil, Halliburton, the Jews, the neocons, Richard Perle, and other likely suspects had suckered us into a "quagmire" or was it now "Vietnam redux"? And recall that in response we were supposed to flee, or was it to trisect Iraq? The elections, remember, would not work — or were held too soon or too late. And give the old minotaur Senator Kennedy his due, as he lumbered out on the eve of the Iraqi voting to hector about its failure and call for withdrawal — one last hurrah that might yet rescue the cherished myth that the United States had created another Vietnam and needed his sort of deliverance.
[. . . .] Why would the world listen to a stumbling George Bush when it could be mesmerized by a poet, biographer, aristocrat, and metrosexual of the caliber of a Monsieur Dominique de Villepin?
Read on for mention of Westernization, globalization, "universities, media, and world organizations", "wealth is not created, but analyzed, critiqued, and lavishly spent" and more.
The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member for Prince George--Peace River.
Mr. Jay Hill (Prince George -- Peace River, CPC): . . . Canadians want some answers to these questions.
Yes, we agree, the Gomery inquiry is doing its job and getting to the bottom of the dirty facts about the sponsorship program. More backroom Liberal Party deals are being unearthed daily.
The Prime Minister promised Canadians he would punish those found responsible. Will the Prime Minister now keep that promise and rout out the shady characters in his government who allowed this type of corruption to fester in the first place?
Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, Justice Gomery is doing his work, and all Canadians will benefit from his work. We would be doing our work if we were to actually focus on the issues facing Canadians on a day-to-day basis, like agriculture, health care, our foreign policy issues, instead of talking about Justice Gomery's work on a daily basis.
They have no legal expertise over there. They do not understand the law of the land. Why are they trying to conduct a judicial inquiry here on the floor of the House of Commons?
Please note this script; Check farther down for repetition.
Firearms Registry
Mr. Gary Breitkreuz (Yorkton-Melville, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister promised voters a more open and transparent government and yet he hides a report on the $2 billion gun registry, a report he ordered and a report he promised would fix this mess. That report came back full of blanks.
Why is the Prime Minister blanking out the truth? Why is he doing the same thing Jean Chretien did, keeping Parliament in the dark?
Hon. Roy Cullen (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the firearms program has a very positive cost benefit because it is working and it is contributing to public safety.
Police and other officials use the firearms program information. In fact, they are averaging 15,000 inquiries a week from the firearms registry online.
So far this year,
1,100 affidavits have been prepared by the Canada Firearms Centre to support firearms related criminal prosecutions and more than 12,000--
(1140)
The Deputy Speaker: The hon. member for Yorkton-Melville.
Mr. Garry Breitkreuz (Yorkton-Melville, CPC): Mr. Speaker, that answer indicates that the government is shooting blanks and missing the target completely.
The Canadian Firearms Centre sent out letters with 770,000 free licence renewals but 46,509 letters came back as undelivered.
How are the police supposed to know where all the guns are when they do not even know where 50,000 gun owners live?
Hon. Roy Cullen (Parliamentary Secretary to the Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, the only member shooting blanks is the member opposite.
Police organizations are supporting the gun registry. In fact, I would like to quote the Canadian Association of Chiefs of Police President, Edgar MacLeod, who said:
There is no question that the system works and that it is a valuable tool.... [What was left out of the Chief's message? Anything?] new gun-control system
improves the screening of legal gun owners, increases their accountability and provides tools to prevent the diversion and misuse of firearms.[It is not the legal gun owners we are worried about.]
We are managing and containing the cost, and we will continue to do so.
Note to Hon. Roy Cullen, the Deputy PM, Mr. Brison and the rest of this Liberal government:
Canadians want you to fund our security, not track the legal gun owners' guns. These are not the ones trucking illegal guns (the handguns, assault rifles, etc.) -- the non-duck hunter, non-farmer guns that are used to commit violent acts, such as we have heard of endlessly out of cities like Toronto.
Canadians want that registry money used to:
* FUND OUR SECURITY SERVICES -- RCMP, POLICE, MILITARY, CSIS WITH THE STAFF AND EQUIPMENT NECESSARY
* RE-ESTABLISH AND FUND OUR PORTS POLICE, THE ONES CLOSED DOWN UNDER EX-PRIME MINISTER JEAN CHRETIEN
* REOPEN THE POLICE DETACHMENTS CLOSED DOWN, PARTICULARLY IN DRUG RUNNING / MARIJUANA GROW-OP AREAS
* STOP HARASSING THE LAW-ABIDING
* PUT $$$ INTO APPREHENDING THE CRIMINALS, NOT INTO THE POCKETS OF GOVERNMENT FRIENDS AND POLITICAL PARTY CONTRIBUTORS
* STOP IMPORTING CRIMINALS
* START DEPORTING THE 36000 COURT DEEMED DEPORTEES ALREADY HERE; IDENTIFY THEM TO THE POLICE AND THE PUBLIC
* START TREATING CRIMINALS AS CRIMINALS;
* START TREATING ORDINARY CITIZENS AS YOUR EMPLOYERS AND DESERVING OF YOUR RESPECT
* STOP THE GUN REGISTRY BAFFLEGAB AND THE LIBERAL CORRUPTION.
* ANSWER QUESTIONS IN THE HOUSE; STOP THE REPETITIOUS NON-ANSWERS IN QUESTION PERIOD
Yes, that was shouting!
If you have read this far, perhaps you need this before continuing.
Definition of Bravery
True bravery is arriving home stinking drunk after a very late night out with the boys....
Then.....being assaulted by your wife with a broom, and still having the guts to ask: "Are you cleaning, or were you flying somewhere?”
Thanks Susan. I like a man with a sense of humour -- and a woman who can see the humour in it.
Bud Talkinghorn: Drop Out Rate, Belinda's CPC -- Governments & Health, Junk Food, Children's Activity and Olympic Funding
The high drop-out rate in our high schools does not need to happen
Despite the grade inflation and emotional grade promotions, we are still faced with large numbers of drop-outs, who are doomed to marginal employment or the welfare rolls. The majority are boys, thus more problematic, as in their frustration, they are more likely to turn to crime or drug addiction. The reasons for this drop-out rate are complex. Some blame the feminization of the curriculum; other see a more pampered, narcissistic youth population who don't accept challenges. My take is that many boys and girls simply are not suited for academic schooling. They need to be streamed into what we used to call trade and technology fields. Give them the basic tools of literature and mathematics and let them apprentice for a skilled trade. In Australia for every academic high school, there were twice as many trade/technology schools. These schools divided the students' time between core academic, and industrial subjects, along with practical work in factories. They were assured of work at good wages upon graduation. Their drop-out rates were very low. In Canada, we must re-educate parents to be more practical in advising their children as to where to apply their talents. Blue-collar work is not demeaning and we have reached the stage where we have to import tradesmen. A relative entered the trades and is now a foreman making $85,000 a year in a Vancouver marine establishment. Had his father demanded he stay in academia, he would have been a failure in life. It just wasn't a fit. We must rethink our approach before we lose more kids.
I respect Ms. Stronach's principled stand on same-sex marriage. Obviously, she accepts the courts' Solomonic decisions. However, I can not accept that a bunch of judges, who are beholden to their mainly Liberal masters for their positions, can change a millennia-old institution. Canadians do not accept that opposition parties have the right to make legislation -- and that opposition is actually the minority by number of seats, not number of votes cast. Their combined number of votes exceeded that of the Liberals. Then, why should we allow a gay minority (3-4% of the population) to force a redefinition of marriage? I suspect that the Muslims who would favour polygamy far outnumber that gay percentage.
The Charter has some fine points; nevertheless, it is being used as a crowbar by every loony-tunes lobby group who want their pet ideologies made into law. And if that isn't bad enough, we have the Supremes 'writing-in' their own social engineering causes into law. What possible justification did they have for demanding Mickey Mouse sentences for aboriginal criminals? Since most victims of aborigines are other aborigines, that ruling is not only unjust, but also perverse nonsense. If the Supremes want to wear the hair shirt of white guilt, let them do it as individuals. Then there are the Supremes like Justice Basterache, whose main legal claim to fame is "Acadian rights". As though the Acadians need more rights! The current NB Premier is the product of an anglo parent and a franco parent but he obviously felt more himself as an Acadian, for he once ran for the Parti Acadien. This was a party that actually flirted with separating the French area (north and east) from the English area (center, south and west) of New Brunswick. Once ex-Premier and US ambassadorial appointee, Frank McKenna got the federal government to grant NB official bilingual status, the majority English were screwed. Most provincial government positions in the civil service go to bilingual francophones.
That cascaded into demands that private businesses, which do contract work for the government, also have bilingual employees. Seeing as government is king in NB, that means a lot of employees. The result is a large-scale exodus of English university grads from the province. One example comes from acquaintances where over half of their New Brunswick families' nieces and nephews have left for other provinces. The French language push of the federal government is moving apace in New Brunswick. Somehow, the Supreme Court does not see the politically motivated disenfranchizing of the English majority of that province as a problem. Nor do the draconian language laws of Quebec seem to demand their attention. To paraphrase George Orwell's motto in Animal Farm, "All Canadians are equal under the law, but some are more equal than others."
[An Aside from NJC: That is, unless they wish to give up on / postpone learning a perhaps more useful language, in favour of learning an acceptable level of French and mouthing the mantras about bilingualism in order to work--it is insidious and required for the decent jobs--learning French, not Mandarin, Arabic, Spanish, et cetera--but then, there is also a push to have the Chinese immigrants learn French, Chinese who have come to Canada. Is that what Promotion of French Minister Dyan Adam was doing in China?]
Unfortunately, I suspect that Belinda Stronach believes that the Supremes are unbiased and ideologically neutral. She has the same blinkered view that our college kids have come to accept. If the Conservative Party allows this social engineering to continue unchallenged, then they will be shunted to the political margins as the Red Tories were. The party must advance ideas that are occasionally unpopular with certain groups. Canadians are tired of "the big-tent" parties that, in reality, only stand for what the latest poll touted by the mainstream media tells them is currently popular. They want leadership on tough issues, not just what will appease.
Chew on this idea: a tax on junk food -- The poor would be penalized: critics; But minister says idea would help finance fitness for kids - and send a message
I am sure this minister means well and that children do need much more physical activity. Nevertheless . . . Perhaps parents should start by choosing to pull the plug on the television and going out with the children for physical activity. I suppose now that parents both have to work to live it is difficult. Governments could help by creating basic facilities for use by families and children together, not venues devoted to team or Olympic level sport. Nothing fancy, just rinks and playing fields, ski trails and the like geared to healthy families, not to creating Olympic level athletes.
In my opinion, it is the allocation of monies that needs to be retooled.
When Canadians entrusted the government with their health care, they gave away something more important, the freedom to choose. Now, under whatever guise, governments decide how we should live our lives; this effort is only one aspect. Governments are going to 'shape' Canadians up to lower health care costs. I am not condoning over-indulgence in junk food; I am concerned about how much freedom has been infringed upon and curtailed by governments over the period of the "free" health care years -- for our own good.
Why can we not exercise free will and free choice, whatever the consequences? Frankly, I prefer to make my choices for myself.
There is such a push in our society to have us live longer. Is living longer such a desired end -- if you have lived so as to have had a fruitful, fulfilling and relatively happy life? Give me freedom and a life as fine as I can manage; then, having done almost everything I ever wanted to do within reason, I would like a merciful end -- even one exacerbated by too much homemade bread, milk and cheese--death by Stilton comes to mind. Ah, in the end, everyone dies a suicide, doesn't she?
An idea to add a tax on junk food to finance athletic parks and facilities is still on the table, Municipal Affairs, Sports and Leisure Minister Jean-Marc Fournier said yesterday.
Despite criticism that it might penalize low-income Quebecers, Fournier insisted the plan would send the right message.
"When you drink soft drinks or eat chips, there is no nutrition in that," he said after announcing $150,000 in aid to encourage schools to promote a healthy lifestyle through various activities and initiatives.
"You can have (junk food). We don't want to ban that, but just to send the message that when you do that, you have to think about your health, and the government is thinking about your health by having sports infrastructures."
He said Quebec has not had significant money to invest in sports facilities for 30 years. There's a particular need for more soccer fields across the province, he added.
Has Quebec not received an inordinate amount of sport money from the federal government, in comparison to the other provinces? Unfortunately, for students, much went to build Olympic contenders, I believe. I have heard that Moncton, NB just got a wonderful new sports complex, whether from the province or from the feds or through monies hidden so as to make the source fuzzy. But that is Moncton, not the rest of the province. Nothing new there. If sportsmen and sportswomen love to do something beyond achieving good health, should they not do it and pay for it on their own, without funding from the rest of Canadians? It is often politically motivated allocation of money, anyway, is it not? Businesses will support athletes who are outstanding, if they desire to make money using them in advertising or if they want to be seen as good citizens--the warm fuzzies. If not, let life take its course. I would prefer the governments fund instructors, equipment and facilities to help all children be active, preferably, active in sports with the whole family, activities that may be continued throughout a lifetime.
The time has come for the federal government and the provinces to stop the politicization of every aspect of their dispensation of monies. Fund activities and sport in the interest of all Canada's children and families.
A four-year-old Newfoundland boy who lost a kidney to cancer and faced a staggering 30-month wait for an MRI received his scan yesterday after a surprise opening came up at a St. John's hospital.
[. . . . ] Across Canada, there are about 2,000 children waiting three to 30 months for MRI scans, according to Normand Laberge, chief executive officer of the Canadian Association of Radiologists. The average wait for a child is 12 months.
"Ryan's case is exposing what's not working in our system," Mr. Laberge said in a telephone interview from Montreal. "What the article has done is shown how we are abandoning kids on waiting lists with pretty important pathology. That cannot be accepted." [. . . . ]
And still governments, provincial and federal, tinker with how to gain political advantage with taxpayers' dollars?
Hon. Stephen Harper (Leader of the Opposition, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the smoking gun has been found. It has now been revealed that a top Liberal organizer, Jacques Corriveau, whose bills were unpaid received millions of dollars of taxpayer money via the sponsorship program. It is hard to believe that this information was not known by the government a long time ago.
My question is for the Prime Minister. Why was this not revealed to the public accounts committee before the election, as he promised?
Right Hon. Paul Martin(Prime Minister, Lib.) : Mr. Speaker, I would have thought the Leader of the Opposition, having stood up in the House numerous times with information that was incorrect, taken out of context and contradicted the next day, would learn that fundamentally the Gomery commission should be allowed to do its job. There should not be obstruction or interference by the hon. member simply because he has had it wrong so many times.
Hon. Stephen Harper (Leader of the Opposition, CPC): Mr. Speaker, this is the biggest scandal in Canadian history. We see millions of dollars being funnelled to a Liberal organizer out of public funds and the Prime Minister tries to hide behind the police, the RCMP and a judicial inquiry. It is a gutless lack of integrity.
When will the Prime Minister order the Corriveau money to be repaid to the public treasury?
Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, once again the Leader of the Opposition is trying to interfere with the Gomery commission by commenting on day to day testimony. As we have learned repeatedly, we have heard testimony contradicted, in some cases the same day, if not perhaps the next, by the same witness. That is why we have an independent inquiry that ought to be allowed to do its work and report back to us so that we have the truth. That is what Canadians want. I am shocked that the hon. member is interfering with the Gomery commission.
Hon. Stephen Harper (Leader of the Opposition, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the Prime Minister can continue to hide behind Gomery. He can continue to play for time. The truth is this, he can dither but he cannot hide.
[Translation]
The Minister of Transport said that all the dirty money pocketed by the Liberals would be given back immediately.
Corriveau did receive millions of dollars of dirty money. Why has the Prime Minister not already ordered this dirty money to be given back to the taxpayers?
(1420)
[English]
Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr.Speaker, once again, it was the Leader of the Opposition who said that Gomery was the best way to get to the truth in this. We agree with him on this one.
The Prime Minister had the courage to set up the Gomery commission to get to the bottom of this. We as a government want to get to the truth. It is the Conservatives, the Alliance Party, that is opposed to getting to the truth in this case. That is really offensive. They do not understand the Constitution. They do not understand the Charter of Rights. They do not understand the basic independence of a judicial inquiry.
Note: Scott Brison still does not realize how silly these answers sound, particularly about "understanding the Charter of Rights". The expansion of Charter rights has been occurring under Liberal-appointed, activist justices. The Official Opposition is charged with protecting Canadians from the overweaning judicial activism of appointed courts, protecting the majority of Canadians from this activism.
Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC): Mr. Speaker, that was irrelevant drivel. The Prime Minister promised that before the election there would be sufficient light cast on the sponsorship program. That did not happen.
Yesterday the Gomery commission revealed that there was a systemic and egregious overcharging for what had been delivered in the $40 million sponsorship money that went to Groupe Polygone.
While taxpayers got soaked, Liberal organizers were rolling in the dough. Not only was public money funnelled through the sponsorship program to Liberal-friendly firms, but it went to Liberal campaign organizers and directly to the Liberal Party of Canada.
Why was this damning information withheld from the public prior to the election, and who ordered the cover-up?
Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, once again the hon. member and hon. members opposite are making the grievous error of commenting on daily testimony. They have been proven wrong repeatedly as we have heard by contradictory testimony in the following days or weeks.
The reason Justice Gomery has been given his mandate is because Canadians want us to get to the truth. Our Prime Minister and our government stands full square with Canadians. We will get to the truth despite the constant interference of the opposition in this important matter.
Mr. Peter MacKay (Central Nova, CPC): Mr. Speaker, despite the constant attempts to avoid accountability, we will continue to ask questions.
Daily the evidence mounts as to the extent of the rot and corruption within the Liberal government. Working for the Liberal Party was literally a licence to print money.
Yesterday we learned that top organizer, Jacques Corriveau, got stiffed for printing Liberal campaign pamphlets, yet he received millions of government dollars in sponsorship contracts. In effect, dollars paid by the public were paying for Liberal campaign expenses.
Could the Prime Minister explain why public money was used to pay for his party's campaign expenses?
Hon. Scott Brison (Minister of Public Works and Government Services, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it really demeans the House when members of Parliament use parliamentary immunity to say things that are simply not true.
The fact is that on an ongoing basis, by commenting on Justice Gomery's work and by commenting on daily testimony, they are making errors and they are misleading Canadians by making those types of outrageous assertions here on the floor of the House.
We are not afraid of the truth. That is why we set up the Gomery inquiry to get to the truth, and we support Justice Gomery in his work.
[. . . . ]
Terrorism
Mr. Stockwell Day (Okanagan—Coquihalla, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the Tamil Tigers are world leaders in terrorism. They perfected the art of suicide bombing. They have done more suicide attacks than al-Qaeda. They have assassinated world leaders, including India's former prime minister Gandhi. They recruit children into death squads.
Other countries have banned this organization and all of its support groups within their borders. Why will our Prime Minister not ban the Tamil Tiger organization and its support groups within our borders?
Hon. Anne McLellan (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, we take very seriously our obligation to protect Canadians and to protect our allies from terrorists whether they may attempt to raise money here in this country for their activities around the world, or elsewhere.
We have a very rigorous listing process. We constantly review that process. We are constantly making determinations based on the best information we have and the risk assessments we have as to who should be listed and who should not be listed.
Mr. Stockwell Day (Okanagan—Coquihalla, CPC): Mr. Speaker, the leader of the political arm of the Tamil Tigers worldwide has looked at our process. When the Prime Minister was overseas he said that Canada was the Tamil Tigers' great ally. This is unacceptable.
Other allies, true allies, the United States and Great Britain, have shut down this organization and its support groups. A previous high commissioner to Sri Lanka has denounced the Prime Minister for not shutting them down. The good people of the Tamil community in Canada want this terrorist organization and all its support groups shut down.
Why will the Prime Minister not shut down this international gang of murderers?
(1455)
Hon. Anne McLellan (Deputy Prime Minister and Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness, Lib.): . . . we take our responsibilities very seriously in relation to listing terrorist entities. We will continue to review entities. We make regular risk assessments in relation to a host of organizations. We take our obligation seriously. Listing is obviously a serious act; it carries serious consequences. We will continue to review these situations, and we will list as we deem appropriate.
Ms.Mc Lellan, did you answer the question?
Does the government take their responsibilities seriously enough to protect Canadians from the terrorists in our midst? There are 36,000 deemed by the courts to be deportees but the government has been dragging its feet about deporting them. Do they vote Liberal?
