Monday, May 18, 2009

Daily Digest May 18, 2009



Closing fort touted as addition by subtraction

New credit-card rules welcome in hard times

Politiciansfrom another planet

India confounds the pessimists

Ottawa lags in trade row

The exploitation of nannies has a long, dreary history

Green shift gone but not forgotten

Should Guides go Godless?

The threshold of due process

Scholarship discrimination

The grey zone in immigration policy

Gasoline tax necessary, and not even an 'evil'

Controversy Dogs Dhalla
Power Imbalance



Canadian frigate thwarts potential pirate attack

American brains are Canada's gain

All in a very political family

N.S. campaign expected to kick into gear with first leaders debate

The positive pundits are wrong on the negative ads

Tories play political games with Dhalla controversy, 'lusting' after her riding

Some political observers say Prime Minister Harper should shake up PMO

Page pleads for job, independence

Lots to do in Afghanistan after mission, MacKay says

Defence minister pays secret visit to Afghanistan

Senate 'shocked' by government's ethics bill, and could reject it

Conservatives still don't have draft regulations for environment plan three years later

Deadline to bid on $1B deal too tight: critics

Spy agency gets new secret rulebook

British team finds no multi-year ice
Global Warning: Scientists must rein in misleading climate change claims

Le Canada pourrait bien rester en Afghanistan après 2011, selon MacKay

Duceppe prépare sa machine électorale

General Motors
Les négociations ajournées


From: "John Duddy"
Subject: Macleans.

Hello there Maclean's.
Just read your May 18th. edition. Page 2.

You write that Security and Prosperity Partnership was set up as a response to 9/11.
Where are your investigative journalists?

Scientists find evidence of explosives; you need to investigate.
Can you please look into this claim by a team of international scientists in a peer-reviewed paper?

They say that explosives brought down the World Trade Center in a controlled demolition.

That would suggest that the official story of the attack is false.

I know this was shown on TV in Denmark.

I would not want Canadian media to be left out on this scoop.

After all, twenty-four Canadians were killed on that day; this is a Canadian crime story.
John Duddy.

I am sending a copy of this to the Prime Minister, my MP and other politicians.

From: Larry Kazdan
To: Vancouver Sun LetED <>
Subject: Letter to Editor re: Sale of bloated BC Rail relieved taxpayers of financial burden,
Harvey Enchin, May 16
Re: Sale of bloated BC Rail relieved taxpayers of financial burden, Harvey Enchin, May 16
In 2007, Quesnel Mayor Nate Bello asked "How many derailments have there been on the old BC Rail line, 20, 30, 40? I've lost count....." While Harvey Enchin touts the efficiencies of CN operations, he omits to mention the raft of accidents after the sale such as the 2005 spill in the Cheakamus River which dumped 40,000 litres of highly corrosive caustic soda killing thousands of salmon, or the deaths of two crew members in 2006 when yet another CN train jumped the tracks near Lillooet, B.C.  Whenever public assets are privatized, and especially in this scandal-ridden instance, the question looms: Who really benefits?  Is it the environment and people of B.C. or is it mainly the corporate allies and political donors of the B.C. Liberal Government?

Larry Kazdan,
620 E. 23 Ave,
Vancouver, B.C.
(604) 874-9982
Quesnel Mayor Asks How Many CN Derailments Ha
Thursday, August 23, 2007
From: "Mahmood Elahi"
To: "Letters to the Editor" <>
Subject: With Harper facing certian defeat, Ignatieff must be ready to run a minority government

The Editor
The Toronto Star
Copy to: Rt. Hon. Michael Ignatieff, Leader of the Opposition, House of Commons, Ottawa.
With Harper facing certian defeat, Ignatieff must be ready to run a minority government
Re "Knee-deep in political mud and still sinking," by Angelo Persichilli (May 17).
It is said that coming events cast their shadows before them and it is clear that Prime Minister Stephen Harper will face a certain defeat in the next election and Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff will form the next minority government.
Mr. Harper wasted his time in search of a majority government. After three minority governments in 2004, 2006 and 2008, he should have realized that a majority government is beyond the reach of any party. He could have run an effective minority government in cooperation with other parties. But his highly partisan governing style precluded such inter-party cooperation.
With five parties -- the Conservative, the Liberal, the NDP, the Bloc, the Green -- competing for support and a country as vast and as diverse as Canada, no single party can win enough seats to form a majority government. The Liberals, led by Michael Ignatieff, seem to have regained their popularity in Ontario and Quebec. But they cannot replicate the performance of former Prime Minister Jean Chretien who won three back-to-back majorities by winning 100 of Ontario's 103 seats. Ontarians are unlikely to put all their seats on a single party and without sweeping Canada's most populous province, the Liberals can only form a minority government.
As such, Mr. Ignatieff should be prepared to run a minority government. He can follow in the footsetps of German Chancellor Angela Mercle who is running a grand coalition between her centre-right Christian Democratic Party (CDP) and centre-left Social Democratic Party (SDP). This calls for eschewing partisanship and vilification of other leaders. He can also look to Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi who is running a coalition government which even includes the separatist Northern League.

Subject: No retirement from my brother-in-law, looks like ... He works at AECl
From: "Efstratios Psarianos"

No rest for the wicked! My brother-in-law works at AECL, so no retirement for him.

AECL to build two power plants


I am upset with Conservative renewal of low intelligence attack adds.  Either Harper, or his dim advisors are bankrupt of good ideas.  Harper is so concerned about pleasing any and all interest groups he has lost ability to represent represent me fairly.
Fortunately I have an excellent MP Scott Reid who I will always support but I have lost faith that the present Conservative leadership is worthy my support.  Please discontinue sending me your feel good Daily Digest.  Conservatives have lost it trying to be Liberals ande they are no longer "listening".

From: Rebecca Gingrich
Subject: [On-Guard] This is why Canadians are dying in Afghanistan???

Who Rules America? By Paul Craig Roberts 5-18-9
What do you suppose it is like to be elected president of the United States only to find that your power is restricted to the service of powerful interest groups?
A president who does a good job for the ruling interest groups is paid off with remunerative corporate directorships, outrageous speaking fees, and a lucrative book contract. If he is young when he assumes office, like Bill Clinton and Obama, it means a long life of luxurious leisure.

From: Stephen M MacLean
Subject: DMI: Victoria Day -- 'Feudal Influences of the Canadian Crown'

18 May 2009

Good morning!  In honour of to-day’s holiday in celebration of the Canadian monarchy ­ and of the Queen of Confederation, Victoria ­ I wroteote a short posting for The Organic Tory, ‘ Feudal Influences of the Canadian Crown’.

As you can see, it is an idiosyncratic topic, the implications of which I don’t believe have been fully explored by advocates for a northern republic, nor fully appreciated by monarchist defenders.

Happy Victoria Day!


Visit my research website the Disraeli-Macdonald Institute for Organic Toryism online.

From: "Phyjllis Wagg"

From: "Jim Calvert"
Subject: RE: CPC/Liberal e-mails for donations media comment on ads.

I think maybe it's time to rename your publication Liberal/Communications/NET?
Publishing the fundraising letter from the Liberals complete with links to donate money?
Maybe you could have pretended neutrality by putting them in alphabetical order or something?
Have you looked at some of the speeches coming out of Iggy's mouth?
These aren't attack ads, they're facts.
He thinks he owns Britain as well as the U.S.
I don't think he even knows where he is half of the time.
Jim Calvert

Why object to knowing what your political opponent is doing?  Are you afraid that the Liberal arguments might be so much more pervasive than the Conservative ones?   This gives the impression that you are not comfortable with what the Conservatives are doing and fear the impact of seeing the Liberal propaganda.

Instead of attacking Joe it would be more useful for you to use Ignatieff's words, in the proper context, to oppose him.  As I have indicated before, it becomes difficult for Conservatives to do that because Stephen Harper has taken too many positions that are the same or similar to the positions on which Ignatieff is most vulnerable.

In fact, Harper has made many statements over his career in both speeches and essays that are just as open to attack.  For example, Harper's 1994 comment that:  "Whether Canada ends up as one national government or two national governments or several national governments, or some other kind of arrangement is, quite frankly, secondary in my opinion."  In an article in the National Post he separated Alberta from Canada saying that "Alberta and much of the rest of Canada have embarked on divergent and potentially hostile paths to defining their country."   He described Alberta as:  "a combination of American enterprise and individualism with the British traditions of order and co-operation."  In other words, he did not see himself as a Canadian.  In fact, he perceived Canada as a "second-tier socialist country, boasting ever more loudly about its economy and social services to mask its second rate status, led by a second-world strongman appropriately suited to the task."  He described Canada as a country exhibiting "insecure smugness and resentment" in regard to its American neighbours.

Have you ever heard the expression "the pot calling the kettle black"?   It is a fact that Harper made these statements and many others that can be used against him by a politician willing to fight fire with fire.  Harper has too much political baggage to be immune to a counterattack.

You have chosen to defend the kind of attack ads your party is producing, but are you doing it a service or a disservice?  If the Liberals begin to get their financial house in order, and there is evidence that is happening, and can begin an aggressive attack campaign against Stephen Harper, you could be supporting a strategy that will ensure the destruction of your party.
Although my comments are getting rather long there is one other point I would like to draw to your attention.  Stephen Harper made the following point in a speech he made in 1994:

"John A. MacDonald [sic] described his party and his need for a party in this way.  He said that he did not need people who supported him when he was right:  he always had support when he was right.  He required people who would support him when he was wrong, and that was the test of the value of a political party.

In my view that is not the way a responsible political party behaves towards the country…. We need people who will be willing to oppose us when we are wrong in the interests of the country."

I agreed with him at the time but it now seems he has changed his perspective.  He may not believe he is ever wrong.  You and his other followers may believe that he is never wrong.  It does appear that by 1992 he had adopted the Macdonald position when he said that the party was "expected to act as a discipline, professional, hierarchical organization."  What he meant by "hierarchical" came in a speech in 2003 when he said:  "The country still needs leadership­leadership when it counts.  And it behoves every one of you follow that leadership…."  That so many individuals are willing to give so much power to one individual should be a concern to everyone who values true democratic principles.

We should be having a debate about differing visions for the country but instead our political class is so fixated on a continuous campaign for more and more power that democracy is dying in a barrage of verbal diarrhea.  We should never become fixated on installing the next dictator under labels such as Liberal or Conservative to the exclusion of rational thought.

From:  Peggy Merritt
Subject: Re: CPC/Liberal e-mails for donations media comment on ads.

Hi Joe: I guess this might be the result of the recent review of of the 4 page article about Iggy's recent book in the G&M I noticed that not one columnists commented about the Liberal l leader claiming to be patriot and wrapping himself in the Canadiian Flag (after a 30 year absence) and stated that our Prime Minister was flawed. Thems words that require a response and if we don't get it from the media we do it ourselves. Peggy Merritt

My comments to Jim also apply to you.  One has to question why Stephen Harper is suddenly wrapping himself in the Canadian flag.  Are his motives any more valid than Ignatieff's?  I have always suspected that these two individuals basically come from the same mould and the more I see and hear, the more the similarities become apparent.

Phyllis Wagg

From: The Natroses

Hi Joe, As for IE matters, remember the good old days where even the retired worker got to collect for one year, before Canada pension kick in? Over the years, the IE has become a shell of his former self. Iggy is right, IE reform has to be done, since the present system was put in during the good times. Now that we have the bad times, where high unemployment is occurring all over Canada and not just in a few regions - living on the highest amount of $437 per week is damning when one lost his $90,000 job and a mortgage/rent to pay on top of that.
I would not mind an election on IE. It would be interesting to see how Harper will defend the present day system, and how it benefits all Canadians. LOL!  Add the "where is the action in terms of jobs in my community, regarding the stimulus money"  and the questionable changes made in retraining; Harper will be knee-deep in flinging accusations and insults at the Liberals. It is the makings of great TV, and perhaps for the first time the highest turnout in voters that are the regular ordinary Canadians, that will be making sure the Harper Conservatives are written off once more.  

On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 2:07 AM, The Natroses

To Jim Calvert,  Saying thanks for insulting me and the other posters. I can say, many of us lean towards being a populist - that is neither leaning to the right or left. Quite frankly, I am tired of posters such as yourself who are unwilling to see all sides and unwilling to state your facts to back up your viewpoint. Rather you are much more willing to accuse this forum or another as being a liberal frontman, or the posters as liberals posing as cons.
On Mon, May 18, 2009 at 1:55 AM, The Natroses
Hi Joe,
To Peggy:
Just thought to comment on your post, quote " I noticed that not one columnists commented about the Liberal l leader claiming to be patriot and wrapping himself in the Canadian Flag (after a 30 year absence) and stated that our Prime Minister was flawed. Thems words that require a response and if we don't get it from the media we do it ourselves."
I assume the words that you want to comment on is "our Prime Minister was flawed".  There is a big difference between both leaders, and how they see Canada. Personally my view leans towards Iggy's viewpoint and that is it is the people that makes Canada what it is. Whereas, Harper's viewpoint is a stance from a political perspective. Canada began in 1867, and its history. People are secondary to Canada. As for the media responding negatively, many of the same media people may just agree with Iggy, and besides the media storm if a media outlet decided to play devil's advocate on what is a Canadian. Iggy is in good company with other Canadians who are fourth generations or more. Talk to any one of those people, and the common response will be, it was the people who made Canada great, and not the politicians. It is the people who make it work, and this is what politicians have forgotten our history and how the people sent politicians to work on our behalf. Not only have they forgotten the history of 1867, Ottawa and especially the Conservatives have forgotten the history before 1867. This country was put together by its people, and sometimes it was back-breaking work, that yielded few results. But nerveless, the people did not give up. It is why I understand where Iggy comes from, and I too, can wrapped myself up in the Canadian flag. Harper cannot do the same. Harper and many of the other conservatives think the opposite, where the people have become secondary, and the government has become the primary source of what Canada is. Before, anyone starts to object - just answer one question. Why has the Harper government done nothing, regarding the celebrations of the War of 1812 - allowing the U.S. to be the primary source of information, celebrations?  Whereas in Canada, people mostly volunteers are fighting for a few crumbs of funding to build a few ships, to have a few out whereas in the U.S. there is 12 ships either made or will be made.
The War of 1812, was the beginning of nationhood for Canada. Perhaps Harper and the cons do not want a lot of press containing information, that states the opposite ideology and dogma that Harper expresses on Canada. Harper's dogma and ideology is conquer and divide strategies, whereas in the late 1700s and early 1800s, people united under a common threat. In the case of the War of 1812, the threat was Americans invading our lands. Harper would not want ordinary Canadians, especially his supporters to see, hear or express thoughts where governments of the day actually listen and heeded to their settlers, merchants, First Nation peoples and other people who wanted to control their own destiny, under the lands called Canada. 
Harper and his cohorts if transported back in time, would have given Canada away to the United States, because they do not understand that its the people and not any sitting government that makes Canada great.