The DAILY DIGEST: INFORMATION and OPINION from ST. JOHN'S to VICTORIA.EDITORIAL PAGEs
ARCHIVED at http://cdndailydigest.blogspot.com/
ARCHIVED at http://cdndailydigest.blogspot.com/
ST.JOHN'S TELEGRAM -
Nice work, if you can get it
CORNER BROOK WESTERN STAR -
Looking on the bright side
CAPE BRETON POST -
Research must be autonomous
HALIFAX CHRONICLE HERALD -
Auto restructuring: GM's general
MONTREAL GAZETTE -
Where's the will to fight cigarette smugglers?
Another report to ignore
OTTAWA CITIZEN -
Safeguarding the system
OTTAWA SUN -
Any physical activity is a good thing
KINGSTON WHIG STANDARD-
Fair comment and double standards
BELLEVILLE INTELLIGENCER -
Aboriginal kids' health a worry
TORONTO STAR -
Obama leads way on auto bailout
GLOBE & MAIL -
Temporary wards of the stateComment5
NATIONAL POST -
Let Galloway in
Poilievre's privacy posturing
TORONTO SUN -
An offer automakers cannot refuse
HAMILTON SPECTATOR -
More 'truth' in courts, please
K-W RECORD -
Region should reject 'living wage' policy
Watch for 'hackers'
SUDBURY STAR -
Deserters have a right to stay in Canada
WINNIPEG FREE PRESS -
Mr. Harper in the U.S.
WINNIPEG SUN -
Bad guys' gift has got to go
SASKATOON STARPHOENIX -
Obama actions underline shift in U.S. economy
CALGARY HERALD -
Upholding law right decision
CALGARY SUN -
Gambling with kids' well-being
EDMONTON SUN -
Punishment can't precede court verdict
RED DEER ADVOCATE -
TV host's apology no good
VANCOUVER SUN -
Addiction should be treated as a disease, not as a moral failing
VANCOUVER PROVINCE -
Every little bit helps in a bad economy
VICTORIA TIMES-COLONIST -
'Stonewally' keeps ducking questions
Tories' justice policies are really just politics
The core of the conflict
The Mideast conflict is between those who want compromise, and those who don't.
Canada judge upholds ban on British pro-Hamas MP
ABORIGINAL AFFAIRS -
Memo to Natives: stay in school
People of the Arctic: Use them or lose them
Time to invest in aboriginal infrastructure
AF-PAK PROBLEM -
'Misplaced optimism' in Afghanistan
PM: Afghan role will remain deadly
Karzai sells out sacrifices of Canadian troops
Afghanistan President Karzai is under fire for approving restrictions on women that would undermine one of the key justifications for Canada's mission there http://network.nationalpost.com/np/blogs/fullcomment/archive/2009/03/31/don-martin-karzai-sells-out-sacrifices-of-canadian-troops.aspx
Hot debate as Obama's war drones on
US moves to secure key Afghanistan route
US surge troops see highway as road to freedom in Afghanistan
ANALYSIS: Taleban forms its own AfPak alliance
Pressure on Hamid Karzai to scrap Afghan women's law
Toward Reconciliation In Afghanistan
U.S., Canada Propose Pollution Control Zones for Ports
We should worry about US border plan
Obama's Afghan strategy may make it easier for Canada
Transcript: Stephen Harper interview
Published: March 31 2009 00:57 | Last updated: March 31 2009 00:57
Stephen Harper, Canada's prime minister, was interviewed in the Financial Times office in New York on March 30 by Chrystia Freeland, US Managing Editor, and a panel of FT journalists. http://www.ft.com/cms/s/0/43f78316-1d65-11de-9eb3-00144feabdc0.html?nclick_check=1
ECONOMIC AFFAIRS -
VIDEO - THE REAL NEWS - Make or Break?
The question in the EU is - will they go down with the dollar system or find their own way?
New global financial system regulation needed: Carney
85% good enough for Product of Canada, say farmers
Deeper cuts, more plant closures needed, GM's new chief says
Credit card debt worries banks
FOREIGN AFFAIRS -
Beijing dismisses report of online spy ring
Iraq's Militia Clash Could Bode Ill for Afghanistan
Afghan mission can't become a U.S.-only effort: NATO
JUSTICE SYSTEM -
Tougher sentences tough on prisons
Kenney stands for Canada
Enough of multiculturalism bring on the melting pot
POLITICS IN THE PROVINCES -
N. L. Increases Its Fight Against Seal Ban
Obama climate bill could side-swipe Alberta oilsands
FEDERAL POLITICS -
UPDATED - Tories, Mulroney in tiff over party membership
Harper urged to appoint cabinet-level border czar
Harper heads to Europe at crucial crossroads for economy and NATO
House eyes Breitkreuz's explosive gun bill
Gun registry debate a signal moment for Ignatieff
NDP loses ground, Hargrove questions why party doesn't look for a new leader
The Commons: The eternal shame of the Ivy Leaguer
Tory MP warned of suspension over Ignatieff attacks
Immigration, citizenship, and "the limits of our self-satisfied mosaic"
Changes to domestic grain inspection increase food-safety risks: Report
Galloway begins Canadian lecture tour via live video link from N.Y.
Strombo v. Galloway VIDEO
Canadian government bans UK's Galloway Afraid of free speech
Controversy helped spread message: Galloway
British MP says effort to bar him from Canada 'backfired'
Debate me like a man, barred MP goads Kenney
Shed no tears for Galloway
More border guards for 6 Canadian airports
GM, Chrysler deemed unviable but still get $4B in loans
The bucks stop here
CSIS won't rule out tips derived from torture
Baird pledges tighter security ties between Transport-RCMP
Watchdog faults government appointments
PRESSURE POINTS -
Canada vulnerable to outbreaks, bioterrorism: Report
Green economics: It just doesn't add up
OPINION AND INFORMATION -
Canada can lead war on cyber spies, sleuth says
Conservative by nature
Canadian financial institutions benefit from a cautious culture that pervades all lending and trading practices
Stephen Harper's Quebec-bashing rep is a bad rap
Stephen, meet the Homeless Cons.
PM a custody klutz
A made-in-Canada digital strategy
Harper's bizarre American-first media strategy
Is Barack Obama the Bob Rae of the United States?
Au secours du diffuseur public
Des aéroports toujours vulnérables
Liberté d'expression Kenney dans la ligne de mire de Galloway
Affaire Mulroney-Schreiber Début de l'enquête publique
Les conservateurs affirment que Brian Mulroney n'est plus membre du parti
GM et Chrysler: c'est non, dit Obama
- Automobile - Une faillite imminente ?
- Chrysler et GM sont encore trop optimistes
- Automobile - Des géants centenaires
Vol d'identité: les conservateurs réintroduisent un projet de loi
Le Canada aurait aidé le Pakistan et l'Afghanistan à sceller une entente
Vol d'identité: les conservateurs réintroduisent un projet de loi
Le SCRS utilisera de l'information obtenue par la torture si nécessaire
Les Canadiens croient que Stephen Harper devrait imiter Barack Obama
J Charest maintient la demande de compensation pour l'harmonisation des taxes
Le système d'inspection de la qualité de l'eau n'est pas sans défauts
Le processus de nomination à Ottawa est inefficace, dit la vérificatrice
Voici les points saillants du rapport déposé par la vérificatrice générale
Le nombre d'incidents antisémites aurait augmenté de 8,9 pour cent au Canada
BELOW(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)The Harper government has now set a dangerous precedent. Should our governments feel free to bar any foreigner whose views are at odds with the government of the day? Canadian conservatives in particular should be distressed by the possibilities in this regard: What if under some future left-wing Canadian government, speakers from Israel or the United States are banned on the pretext that their involvement in wars in Iraq or Gaza somehow make them complicit in advocating "war crimes" or "state terrorism"? http://www.nationalpost.com/todays-paper/story.html?id=1445878
Subject: Politicians, the government, and Mr. Galloway
From: "Efstratios Psarianos"
Re. Mr. Galloway, here's an article that explains what the fuss is all about.
The article evokes something that I've been meaning to say for a while: in Canada, when a 'government' does something, that does NOT mean that politicians have taken action on a particular case. What it DOES mean is that the Public Service has done something in accordance with laws and regulations to which they are subject.
The thing to be understood is that in a properly-functioning democracy, especially in parliamentary ones, politicians do NOT call the shots: the government does, and the politicians set policy, makes laws and regulations, etc. In other words, the government consists of the Public Service, agencies, Ministries, the judiciary, etc., which does NOT include politicians, which make up the legislature (and Presidents in presidential democracies).
So, to put things in context, the CPC has NOT banned Mr. Galloway from entering Canada in an effort to stifle him. Rather, it has NOT used one of its Ministries' (public security/safety?) power to override the Canadian government's (Public Service) decision to ban Mr. Galloway's entering Canada because of his supporting a legally-identified terrorist group. Were Mr. Galloway a loudmouth who didn't explicitly support Hamas, in this case, there would be no obviously legitimate way to keep him out of Canada, unless a 'security certificate' were to be issued against him.
The point to be made here is a semantic one: unfortunately, the word 'government' has come to mean 'the government proper' and elected politicians, where the original sense of the word didn't cover the latter. The politicians' role as concerns the government was to make/approve the laws and regulations to which it must conform, and to 'tell the government what the people will no longer put up with' (Winston Churchill). Add to that their having to explain to 'the people' what's possible, what's not, and on what the politicians have based their decisions (in an ideal world). That is, politicians are the intermediaries between 'the people' and 'the government'.
To summarize: elected politicians and 'the government' are two separate things; and Mr. Galloway's being denied entry into Canada is a government thing that politicians have chosen not to override. And properly so, given his record (an organization with charitable status and funded by Saddam Hussein's Iraq; giving $45,000 to a legally-identified terrorist group, etc.). And on top of that, Canada's Federal Court has upheld "the government's" obligation to deny entry to Mr. Galloway.
P.S. This government and politicians not being the same thing really SHOULD have been taught us (and should be taught now) in school. My nephew in Ontario had a civics course in high school last year, but I don't know if this subject was ever brought up.
There are three branches of Government:
It is yet to be seen, should there be a court challenge, whether the Judicial supports the Executive in its decisions.
I dunno if there is any one out there who was in my classroom who can vouch that the above was taught in Grade X History.
«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»From: Larry Kazdan
Subject: Letter to Editor re: Campaign rules must be policed, Editorial, March 30
- Re: Campaign rules must be policed, Editorial, March 30
1. Wild West - money & BC politics
2. Election Stats from article "Party donors reflect old political lines", ===================================
Milo Cernetig, Vancouver Sun, Aug. 16, 2005
From: Ray Strachan
I dont want to be caught up in Semantics but if we were speaking in 1930 of "A
Lady of Ill Repute" , Was she a Lady of The Night, A lady of the Street,
Sex Trade worker,Oh My, or would she be known simply by "Whore". George
Galloway, ??????Idiot,Clown etc etc, anything but "A Good Man."Nothing
nearing "Good" from any of our " mainstream Media" or Politicians,except, for
Olivia Chow,she didn't add an adendum(and I cant speak for the Bloc), They
recently had one of their own, silenced,Maria Mouradni, for speaking out
against Israel. Maybe they have learned their lesson? Maybe they don't want to
have to get down and apologize to The Masters again. It surely must be
distasteful. But maybe not,, (to a politician?.) What is Semantics today?
Something that turns Good into Bad, Right Into Wrong,Bad into Good, Wrong
Im just old and confused and semi literate and would just like to get the
point. What is it that makes George Galloway a Terrorist?
From: Ron Thornton
Well, the Cape Breton Post (Climate 'vote' a bit too easy) had an article that reminded me that when it came to "voting" by turning my lights off at 8:30pm the other night, it appears I voted in favor of not acting on climate change. I prefer global warming over global cooling, and as it seems we are still coming out of the last age, it is as it should be. As for climate change in general, I want August temperatures year round. I want no change, but apparently that was not on the ballot.
We've already discussed the fact the Liberals and Tories have decided being democratic is just one pain in the ass that they will internally dispense with. In the HillTimes (Conservative and Liberal MPs likely won't face any nomination challenges) "Conservative Party president Don Plett said that most Conservatives across the country have given him positive feedback about the party's nomination contest rules for held ridings." It is my belief that Mr. Plett is full of shit, unless the party has seats in some communist nation I am unaware of or the membership has become a host of sycophants. However, if they want MP's to be elected, at least within the party, for life, then who are we democratically misguided folks to argue?
Have a good day, Joseph.
From: "Peter Robertson"
Once again, the dinosaurs and troglodytes that run "Canada's New Government" have succeeded in turning a teapot into a tempest. And once again, they have trampled on Canadians' right to freedom of speech in the name of "National Security".
The only thing about George Galloway that might have been problematic for our security forces is his penchant for haggis. Who knows? He might have brought Scotland's secret weapon, the nuclear haggis, with him. If he had been left alone, Galloway would have spoken to a few people in Toronto and other places. By their actions, Canada's New Government handed Galloway an international audience, and in the process made themselves a laughing stock. It doesn't matter whether you agree with Galloway or not: he has the right to be heard, and we have the right to listen to him and make up our own minds.
By committing this "courageous" political act, Canada's New Government has managed to alienate just about every Canadian voter of Arab origin (and the census tells me that there are more Arabs than Jews in Canada these days), upset many Scots, and offended many of us who believe in such archaic ideas as freedom of speech.
We should consign this lot to Jurassic Park in the next election, and get a New Government which can really think.
From: Rebecca Gingrich
Subject: Canadians not allowed to hear the truth
Banning Galloway Mocks Canada's Criminal Code
By William A. Cookhttp://www.uruknet.de/?p=m53000&hd=&size=1&l=e
March 29, 2009
Canada's border security officials and Jason Kenny, the immigration minister, banned George Galloway, MP for Bethnal Green and Bow, from Canada where he was scheduled to speak in Toronto on the 30th. "A spokesman for Citizenship and Immigration Canada said the decision was based on a 'number of factors' in accordance with section 34 (1) of the country's immigration act" (Guardian.co.uk 3/20/09). This action denies Galloway entrance as a foreign national on security grounds for one or more of 6 reasons including "engaging in terrorism," and "engaging in acts of violence that would or might endanger the lives or safety of persons in Canada." The CJC, the Canadian Jewish Congress, supporting the decision, noted that it should be seen as an "issue of security law, not a dispute over free speech" (Mar. 27, 2009, Montreal Gazette). Indeed, other Jewish organizations like the League of Human Rights of B'nai B'rith, not only supported the action but took some credit for the banning of Galloway.
The initial letter that began the Galloway episode was from:
Jewish Defence League of Canada.
Jewish Defense League From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia
The Jewish Defense League
From: "Eduard Hiebert
Good morning Joe,
Your appreciation of Fisk's apology is noted and appreciated, thank-you!
For public use, now and in the future, you may leave the following address eduard62(at)netscape.ca
Whether tongue in cheek or straight up, when Rebecca Gingrich in reference to the proposed changes to the Canadian Grain Commission and C-13 states "Sorry--but I see no reason for this commission to exist" that is almost the equivalent of hearing of the BC enquiry on the 4 RCMP officers' use of the Taser and now asserting we no longer need the RCMP but it is in everyone's best interest to fend for themselves.
Before we confuse baby and bath water further, let me simply indicate that the CGC was introduced into Canada after the robber barons knew no limits to plundering farmers income. To farmers, the CGC is like the police making sure the big boys play by the rule of law, not the rule of a dollar. The sorry state of the RCMP, like that of the CGC, has deteriorated from being a proper civilian 'keep the peace' force, and this deterioration for anyone to believe happened only over the Harper administration would be quite naive. The only difference, the other administrations had an eye on feeding farmers and Canada's citizens who need food back to the wolves over a period of the proverbial 1000 cuts while Harper is more bold about doing it yesterday.
On point, when Rebecca Gingrich then concludes "OH, I forgot--this Commission must be set up mostly for Eastern farmers as Western farmers do not have the right to sell their grain privately" is among the most blatant and oft repeated falsehoods around. Every farmer and every Cargil has the right to do what is called a "buy-back" which effectively sets a floor to the price so that farmers and the pool are not held captive by the lowest bidder and is then free to sell to whoever they wish, even at a lower price. Among those out to kill the CWB, when confronted with this reality, their "come-back" is they should be free to sell at lower prices (even if that lowers the price to all farmers....). Which if you analyse it objectively means economics be damned but my individual freedom trumps the common good and will of the majority.
From: "John Duddy"
Cc: "Splitting the Sky" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Imagine, our Jason Kenny allowed a suspected criminal in this video to enter Canada while stopping Scottish MP George Galloway.
Galloway got great publicity; Jason took a hit. Pay attention Ignatieff, Layton, Duceppe.
Anyone wishing to donate to the cause of free speech, go to Splitting_the_Sky website and read details.
Splitting the Sky will be in court soon, defending his right (duty) to serve a citizen's arrest on the suspect.
Subject: Bill C-13 jeopardizes farm incomes and food safety
National Office 2717 Wentz Ave. Saskatoon, Sask. S7K 4B6
Tel (306) 652-9465 Fax (306) 664-6226 E-Mail: email@example.com
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE MARCH 31, 2009
BILL C-13 JEOPARDIZES FARM INCOMES AND FOOD SAFETY
Bill C-13, An Act to Amend the Canada Grain Act, will cost farmers tens of millions of dollars annually, while jeopardizing food safety and the quality standards of Canada's grain exports. "The full implications of this bill are enormous," stated NFU President Stewart Wells. The changes that are lurking beneath the surface are not readily apparent but they will be devastating to Canada's grain farmers."
Debate on Bill C-13 is set to resume any day in the House of Commons. "This bill must not be allowed to pass," stated Wells.
The bill will add tens of millions of dollars of extra costs to farmers. The CWB and farmers will have to spend their own money to replace the destruction of independent testing by the Grain Commission. Regardless of the extra money spent by farmers, the tests will still not be seen to be independent and unbiased. Regardless of whether it's the Canadian Wheat Board that does the test or a contracted private testing company, the testing results will not have the credibility or standing that the current Canadian Grain Commission test has.
Bill C-13 is aimed at deregulating the grain industry, and would fundamentally change the mandate of the Canadian Grain Commission (CGC), stated Wells. "It removes the requirement that the CGC operate as a public interest watchdog that regulates the overall grain industry in the 'interests of producers'. Instead, it changes the CGC's role to become a passive service provider that provides grading, weighing and inspection services to grain companies on a fee-for-service basis. Farmers' protections will be reduced to a minimum, with plenty of loopholes for companies to circumvent those limited protections."
Bill C-13 would eliminate inward inspection and weighing of grain, thereby undercutting the CGC's ability to maintain high-quality standards, and putting grain farmers and consumers at risk.
Bill C-13 would also eliminate the requirement that grain companies be licensed and bonded. Eliminating these security provisions would leave farmers holding the bag if a grain company goes bankrupt, noted Wells. "Eliminating this provision will not save farmers any money. It will only increase their risk."
Farmers have not been calling for changes to the Canada Grain Act, concluded Wells. "The pressure to restructure the CGC and reduce its regulatory role has been coming from grain companies. The Harper government appears intent on turning back the clock to the 1800s, when there was no Canadian Grain Commission, no Canadian Wheat Board, no public research, no fairness, no equity, no justice and no market power for farmers."
-30 Canadian Centre for Policy Alternatives (CCPA)
Protecting Canada's world-class grain system
Download the Report/Study:
Threatened Harvest: Protecting Canada's world-class grain system - PDF File, 1835 Kb
From: "Eduard Hiebert" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: Why is Harper with forked tongue moving to REGULATE the Natural Health Products industry while DEREGULATING the grain industry?
For those familiar with Harper's attempts to deregulate the grain industry, if you have not yet heard of the Natural Health Products (NHP) industry, you will find the attached analyses of Harpers intent to REGULATE the NHP industry of significant interest and thereby better able to expose Harper's true intentions and loyalties as revealed earlier when Harper was the lead spokesperson for the "National Citizens Coalition". For an archived copy of his activities then, at the following link please see "Stephen Harper as president of NCC (National Citizens Coalition)" http://mbprov.eduardhiebert.com/cutting.htm
Please note, while Bill C-6 "appears" not as offensive as Bill C-51 from Harper's previous parliament, the fact of the matter is, once this bill is passed, by order in cabinet he has all of and more than what Bill C-51 introduced.
The question more of the public needs to understand, is how can Harper seemingly advance two actions which at face value of his claimed intentions are in direct contradiction of each other?
Please feel free to redistribute freely.
Shawn Buckley Drafts Bill C-6 Discussion Paper
From: "Jacob Rempel"
Subject:March 15, 2009 -- THE LONG DARK SHADOW OF THE TAR SANDS, by Silver Donald Cameron
Subject: THE TAR SANDS area of Canada.
Reference: The article appended below.
We elect a government to do the necessary thinking and
calculating to care for the resources within our borders.
Surely someone has done the calculation in dollars
of the value for Canada and Canadians of all the
natural gas and water being used, and the value in dollars?
the dollar value of the lost resources in the area, -
the cost of possible reparations,-
the cost of exceptional health injuries,
the cost of economic restoration of the people
affected negatively by the development, and
the cost of the loss of Canadian control and
better economic development in the area.
Plus, of course,
the inestimable cost of pollutant chemical and even
radioactive emissions into the soil, the ground and the air.
God gave this Garden of Eden for us to tend, not rape and despoil.
There will be karmic consequences for our delinquency as stewards,
a penalty for eternity.
All this is something I am not capable of calculating in dollars, or estimating.
However, it seems to me that the profit value to Canadians for the export sale
of tar sands oil cannot begin to pay for all these inevitable costs of extraction.
Let us therefore abandon the sands, restore the area as best we can, and use
domestically the natural gas the water and the space for better purposes.
--- Jacob Rempel, Vancouver, Canada.
Silver Donald Cameron
The Long Dark Shadow of the Tar Sands. Sunday, March 15th, 2009
Subject: What if the Bible IS true?
From: Robert Ede
What if .... the Bible's assertion that we will "reap what we have sown" ... is factual?
What if ... instead of "getting away with it" ... you actually do pay for your indiscretions, wrong-doings and "sins"?
What if ... you do actually have to "serve somebody"(whether you like it or not) ... AND by not actively "opting-in" to acceptance of G*d's authority and sovereignty over your life, you automatically default to playing exactly the same role on, exactly the same terms in service to Satan/the deceiver/the accuser/the Devil?
What if ... despite your well-informed opinion on this topic .... that you're wrong .... and the Bible IS true?
What if ... an in-depth study of this Book, known as the Bible (ie irrespective of how you "remember" it's contents from your youth), you found facts, sayings, themes, analogies, songs, parables and narratives completely at odds with what you thought you'd find?
What if ... most of what you thought it contained wasn't there or ... it was there, but now you see the Book, the people in the Book, the events involving the people in the Book and the message of this Book in a broader, more integrated way?
What if ... events, temptations, hardships, triumphs that affected, influenced, hurt, helped, delayed, blessed the Hebrews/ Israelites/ Jews seems much like what has happened in your life .... now that you've lived it a bit?
What if ... G*d's "best practices" method for managing/motivating humans to learn the lessons He wants them to learn about leading the life He wants them to lead, is by "provoking to jealousy", the individuals He intends as beneficiaries of His Grace/ Mercy/Blessings?
What if ... the long-term "Plan or Program" of G*d, the Name, Jehovah, YHWH, the Creator, the Sovereign of this Earth was ultimately about the success of a race/ identity/ group/ religion/ faith "other" than yours (or the one you grew up with)?
What if ... none of the established 20th-21st Century religions were "right"?
What if ... the olive tree of Romans 11 most accurately describes G*d's future "Plan" and warns the branches - the broken off ones, the grafted in ones, the re-graft-able (both in & out) ones- about: election, grace, stumbling, jealousy, casting away, boasting, unbelief, highmindedness, goodness and severity ... and of ignorance of this mystery.
30For as ye in times past have not believed God, yet have now obtained mercy through their unbelief: 31Even so have these also now not believed, that through your mercy they also may obtain mercy. 32For God hath concluded them all in unbelief, that he might have mercy upon all.
With apologies and credit to Dr Arnold Fruchtenbaum and Gideon Levytam
"There is no shame in turning back - when you find yourself on the wrong path"