Can You Hear Me Now? Good!

Preacher Moss, a muslim comedian who appeared on Comedy Network and at Yuk Yuk's, starts his comedy routine with "Welcome to America! Land of the freedom and opportunity, where I can be anything I want - except a pilot!"

Add cellphone businessmen to that list of jobs that Arab Americans can now no longer participate.

As Shabina from Moz Boondoggle writes,

In a nutshell, some 20-year-old Dearborn guys were held on terrorism charges because they bought a ton of cell phones and had a security guidebook for Royal Jordanian Airlines in their car (oh, and they were Arab). The bros from Texas were held on terrorism charges because they bought a ton of cell phones and snapped pictures of the Mackinac Bridge (oh, and they were Arab).

Both cases crumbled pretty fast (Texas boys free first, then Dearborn dudes). After hours-long interviews, the FBI conceded that the guys were innocent. Their families and lawyers said they were just being good businessmen, buying cheap phones and selling them at a markup. The guys will most likely sue, and I sure hope they make a buttload of money.

Liberal Catnip has more of that as well.

The good thing about the affair was that the investigation agencies approached the cases with an open mind. The bad thing was that we are now encouraged to snitch on our neighbours and fellow citizens. While that may not be a bad thing, as the British airplane plot was foiled by a Pakistani-British muslim reporting suspicious behaviour, I do wonder where as a society we are heading off to, as Britain discusses profiling.

UPDATE: Thanks to knb, here's the CSIS head's attitude to profiling.

The director of the Canadian Security Intelligence Service said Tuesday that the spy agency avoids racial profiling because it is "fundamentally stupid'' and does not knowingly use information gleaned under torture offshore because the practice is "morally repugnant.''

One Blogging Tory's "Paki" Rant

The next reason Conservatives wonder why people in ethnic communities don't vote for them, they should take a hard look at posts like this by fellow Conservatives. While it is illogical to tar all Conservatives with the same brush, I find it amazing that Blogging Tories allows such posts to be linked to from its main site, and no other Tory rebukes the original blogger.

Pakistani Terrorism

Call me a racist or a bigot, I am gonna say it any way and I don't care what you call me at all! I was wondering why all these Pakis want to blow up thousands of people all over the world including Canada and recently UK.

Pakistan is the most dangerous country on the face of planet and its people are among the most dangerous and most radicals.

They are an Islamic nation without a national identity. Believe me, they identify themselves first as Muslims and then as Paki nationals.

First, regarding the alleged terror plot yesterday, it was the Pakistani government and intelligence services that helped disrupt the plot.

At a news conference, British Home Secretary John Reid said he was "grateful" for the help of the international community, in particular Pakistan, in disrupting the suspected plot.[BBC]

Second, some of the suspects are not even of Pakistani origin.

Third, it's just wrong to term all Pakistanis as 'dangerous', 'radical' and 'Muslim first'. If all Pakistanis were Muslim first then Bangladesh wouldn't have separated from Pakistan in 1970, and Pakistan wouldn't have a Baluchistan issue to deal with now. If all Pakistanis were radicals, then the Conservative Prime Minister wouldn't have appointed Wajid Khan, a Liberal MP of Pakistani origin, as his 'special advisor'.

Fourth, while I am not a Pakistani, the term 'Paki' has racial connotations and history, and should not be used in such a manner. It's like using the 'n-word' for a black person. It's just racist.

Finally, it's one thing to say Pakistan has a problem with some radicals (that moderates like Musharref are trying to fight). It's another saying all Pakistanis are so. It's plain wrong, and the Blogging Tories should call him on it.

And for symbolism's sake, last week England won a cricket match and clinched the series against Pakistan, in England. Their main bowler in the second innings? One bloke called Sajid Mahmood, of Pakistani origin, now playing for England, who took 4 wickets for only 22 runs to help crush Pakistan.

Tags: Racism Canada Conservative Party

Which Part Of Opposition Don't You Understand?

To MP Wajid Khan,

Dear Sir,

You are a member of the Opposition party. The Liberal party is right now NOT the governing party. As such, your duty as a caucus member is to keep the government on its toes. It's the governing party's responsibility to govern. For that, they need members of their OWN caucus to step up to do the job. If their caucus canNOT do the job, it is your duty to call them on it, and remind voters at election time why the whole party of Conservatives could not find a special adviser on South Asia and the Middle East to the Prime Minister.

Thank you,

Crescent Canuck.

PS. Mr Bill Graham, much as I like you as a person, how could you allow this to happen?

UPDATE: I believe the Conservative party must make efforts to have one of their OWN caucus members approach South Asians and other ethnic minorities to show that they are reaching out to those communities. Hiring an opposition member is no way to move to the centre. Where is Jaffer, Grewal? The Conservatives must also try to examine WHY they cannot get elected in major cities.

Tags: Liberal Party Wajid Khan

Israel's Right To Defend Itself

Today Israel has warned South Lebanese that it will 'escalate its operations' as well as destroy 'moving vehicles' [BBC]. So if you are a family still living there, you can't escape.

As the conflict dragged on, I heard various people say 'well Israel has the right to defend itself'. I don't have any problem with this statement. Any sovereign nation (and I include Israel) has the right to deal (militarily if needed) with threats to its existence. You heard it here on Crescent Canuck - most Arabs accept that Israel is here to stay (some like Jordan and Egypt even have peace treaties with them). This may come as a shock to some people, but most residents in the middle east aren't opposed to peace - even if that means giving up claim to occupied territories - in return for a fair solution to the refugees / displaced people and settlements.

Growing up in the Middle East, every book teaching Arabic used to have a chapter on the Palestinian issue. During 1993, when the Oslo accords were signed, and we saw pictures of Arabs and Jews in the Holy Land exchanging flowers, I remember telling my Arabic teacher - "we don't need this chapter now". There was genuine optimism amongst the Arabs. Sadly, the joy was short lived as the thorny issue of the refugees remained.

In this crisis, I criticize the 'defensive' action of Israel that went too far in proportion. Most Arab states - initially supporting the Israeli action (even *gasp* Saudi) - has now withdrawn that support.

As I posted on June 28,
"Today, in response to the kidnapping of a 19 year-old Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, Israeli forces have invaded the Gaza Strip - cutting off electricity and water, at the height of summer, to some 1.3 million people."

This is what sparked off the chain of events. Israel could have dealt with the militants by
a) sending in a negotiation team.
b) trying to pinpoint where the soldier was being held hostage and attempt a rescue.
c) warn Ham as of consequences if the soldier wasn't released.

They did none of that.

Again, when two soldiers were kidnapped and few others killed in Lebanon, again Israel had the following options
a) give the government of Lebanon time to negotiate a safe release for the hostages and demand punishment for killing eight others, and warn of consequences.
b) send in an elite force to rescue the hostages.
c) restrict military operations in south Lebanon. As Beirut is over 100 km away from the border, and the maximum range of the rockets are 30 km, rocket launchers in Beirut are not a threat.
d) provide positive proof to the UN that Iran was behind this attack.

This didn't do any of this. Instead, Lebanon is being collectively punished. A government that could've been a model of democracy is now terribly weakened. A terr orist organization is now seen as legitimate by the rest of the country.

And finally, Israel could have asked itself why are 342 Palestinian children (under 18) still in custody. Surely, they can't all be terro rists?

Divisive Politics From Harper

"I understand that not everyone is lucky enough to be born into a rich family, to attend private schools, or to live an international lifestyle," he said. "Instead, millions upon millions of people wake up each and every morning, and get ahead the Canadian way. By working hard, by saving a bit of money, by doing the best they can to make the right decisions for themselves and their families, these people are our people." - Stephen Harper's address to members of his caucus and invited constituents in Cornwall, Ontario.

This type of us versus you is crass politics at best, and at worst class warfare. We shouldn't be surprised. We have seen similar divide-and-smear attacks from conservatives in the past. We should be above this way of politics where we divide and include certain groups and exclude others. My Liberal Canada is inclusive of ALL Canadians. It is progressive. Is it no wonder that it is only in the Liberal party that we have religious candidates with strong views of homosexuality campaign along with gay candidates? It's because we don't play divisive politics, unlike others.

'Real' Canadians versus 'fake' Canadians.

Good Women versus Ambitious Women

'True' Marriage versus 'Fake' Marriage

'The West Wants In' versus 'a culture of defeatism'

Those Who Drink Tim Hortons vs Starbucks (ohh...).

And many others.

h/t Red Tory, HarperBizarro.

Tags: Canada Stephen Harper

Ban Or Regulate Cycles On The Road

As someone who carpools to work every weekday, I see lots of cyclists on the road as we approach downtown. Downtown Toronto is a very bike-friendly city, with bike lanes, narrower car lanes, right-of-way and other facilities given to the bicycle. Unfortunately I find cyclists often abuse those rights.

For example,

• many a time I have come to a complete stop at an All-Way-Stop, and the driver in the other direction is about to go, when a cyclist zooms by besides me. It seems Stop signs do not exist for some cyclists.
• When the light turns red, as a driver you stop. Some cyclists on the other hand become a 'pedestrian', getting off thier bikes and running the red if the road is clear. That's jaywalking for you, on a bike.
• Many cyclists do not check their blind spot before veering onto your lane in case of construction blocking the bike lane. Many a time you can brake and the cyclist 'dings' you. By the time you are out of the car yelling at him, he is on some side street furiously biking away.
• Quite often it seems to me an accident between a car and a cycle will be due to the cyclist's recklessness, yet you will see some city politicians and bicyclists crying foul about this city's intolerance for bikes.

As the price of gas keeps going up, we are only going to see more and more cyclists on the road. Those bike lanes are going to get crowded. It's time to either ban cyclists from the road, or regulate them. I propose the following legislations that should be passed either in busy metro cities, or province-wide, and should apply to any cycle using the main roads:

• All cycles must have working white (front) and red (rear) lights (not reflectors).
• All cycles must be equipped with mirrors on the handles.
• All cyclists must pay a plate registration fee (could be as small as $40 per annum). This should give them a license plate with a unique license number they can (and must) attach to their bikes. This would prevent them from 'dinging and running'.
• All cyclists must pass the G1 road test (or an equivalent bicycle test) so they are aware of the rules of the road.

While I agree that the bicycle is an environmentally-friendly way to commute, save money and be physically fit, that does not give it a free pass from the law.

PS. FYI I was not 'hit' by a bike today. This is something I have thought about for some time, and especially after near misses.

Tags: Toronto Bicycle Commute

Snubbing Ontario Could Be Costly

Flipping Ontario The Bird Could Cost Harper

Remember those early days of the Conservative government when Harper met Charest numerous times, yet could find just precious small time for the premier of Canada's most populous province, while attending a Tory fundraiser? Harper Snubs Ontario, read most headlines across the province.

Now it looks like Ontario could be important again.

"Harper has staked much of his political fortunes on gains in Quebec and on his promise to make federalism work there.

If he fails to satisfy Quebec Premier Jean Charest, it will allow nationalists to crow about the failure of federalism, and fuel the separatist cause, a nightmare scenario for Harper and Charest, both of whom will likely face the electorate in the next year or so.

Quebec's strong Lebanese and Arab community condemns Harper's recent support for Israel in the Mideast crisis, and warns he cannot count on their support.

Quebecers are also the least supportive of Canadian involvement in Afghanistan.

So most observers think the Tories will need to win more ridings in Ontario, where they now hold 40 of 106 seats.

Premier Dalton McGuinty hints that Harper could pay a political price in Ontario if he meets only Quebec's demands on the fiscal imbalance."

What should McGuinty do if Harper suddenly wants to 'be nice'?

Down in Quebec

According to the latest polls, Harper's chances of majority government have taken a huge hit by low polls from Quebec, stemming from his support of Israel. The interesting fact for me is that while the Tories are reported to be down to 23%, the BQ has surged to 43%.

Why did the votes not go to the Liberals? I interpret it as soft federalists going to the BQ because they see the Liberals not likely to win the next election. I predict that if, by midway through the next election campaign, the Liberals look favourites to win, the Conservative support in Quebec will bleed further (as federalists look to back the winner and abandon a sinking Tory ship) while those voters flirting with the BQ will return to the Liberal fold.

Tags: Ontario Stephen Harper

Liberals Standing Up For Canada

Graham blasts PM

There you go.

Also, does any one know who David Orchard is endorsing /has endorsed for the Liberal party's leadership convention? I heard a rumour he was endorsing Dion (don't know how true it is). I don't know too much about Orchard, though I recently posted one of his writings. His latest article deals with Stephen Harper and 'Stand Up For Canada'.

Orchard's latest article:

Standing up for Canada?

[also posted at Global Research]

Here are a few excerpts:

A million tourists, expats and "snowbirds," including roughly 50,000 Canadians, were trapped in the country.

...

The current Canadian government was recently elected promising to "stand up for Canada."

...

With 50,000 Canadians in harm's way what has been our government's response? Canada's new UN ambassador, John McNee, told the Security Council that Israel's action in Lebanon "was an exercise in its right to self-defence." The minister of foreign affairs, Peter MacKay, refused point blank to endorse the secretary general's call for a ceasefire. Prime Minister Stephen Harper stated: "Israel's response, under the circumstances, has been measured." He announced that it was "too early" to call for a ceasefire.

...

Eight visiting Canadians, including four children, were killed by Israeli bombs. The Canadian government made no protest. Is this Mr. Harper's idea of "standing up for Canada?"

...

The Harper government's abject response to the murder of Canadians and its refusal to demand an end to the bombing constitutes an abandonment of its duty to protect Canadians and to defend the rule of law on behalf of all humanity.

...

Gideon Levy, writing in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz, said, "In Gaza, a soldier is abducted from the army of a state that frequently abducts civilians from their homes and locks them up for years without a trial but only we're allowed to do that. And only we're allowed to bomb civilian population centres."

Our government in Ottawa has, whether for reasons of religion or ideology, sided uncritically with a foreign government, in this case Israel's, at the expense of our own national interests as Canadians and law abiding members of the world community.

Perhaps Harper should review the change he made to his Five Priorities.

" ... strengthening our country at home and around the world".

I thought it was a sad day for Canada when our nationals (particularly operating under the UN badge) are killed by a foreign army and our Prime Minister questions the actions of those killed.

I have said all along that regardless of who you support (Israel/Palestine) this is a foreign conflict.

Tags: Canada Stephen Harper

Ottawa to Review Help For Non-resident Citizens

Following on from my discussion of "Convenient Canadians", I find this article from the Globe and Mail (emphasis mine).

Ottawa to review help for non-resident citizens

Canada will re-examine the practice of paying to rescue its citizens who have made lives in other countries, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said yesterday as the evacuation in Lebanon winds down.

...

Numbers suggest that most of the 8,700 people evacuated through the port of Beirut on ships chartered by Canada were tourists. Many Lebanese-Canadians have strong ties to their homeland and holiday there with relatives and friends.

...

Canadians travelling abroad who are placed in a situation of danger and need to be evacuated are generally expected to cover the costs. But those fees are occasionally waived in the case of large-scale operations that involve extraordinary circumstances, Foreign Affairs officials have explained.

The article does not detail the cost and logistics required to vacate the 8700 or so Canadians who wanted to get out of Lebanon.

I don't know what to say about this. I think Canada has a duty to help her citizens (any citizen, regardless of hyphens) get out of a warzone. However asking them to pay for it may not be so bad. Those who went there on vacation will get a refund from their unused portion of the air ticket but Canadians who live there may be unable to access their bank accounts in a war zone. However, it shouldn't have costed too much to evacuate 8700 people that a G8 country cannot handle. There are many countries where many citizens live elsewhere (such as Ireland, Sri Lanka) but the home country does not question their citizenship. Is there any reason Canada be different? I hope the review is only about the cost of the evacuation and who will bear it.

The article had this interesting excerpt:

But Mr. Harper's suggestion that the government will review the policy of helping to evacuate Canadians who have relocated to their countries of origin is unlikely to sit well with the immigrant communities he has been courting in his bid to win a majority government. His remarks represent another example of his willingness to take a strong and occasionally controversial stand on issues of principal or that appeal to his core constituency.

...

In either case, no distinction has been made between Canadians who make their home in Canada and those who have homes in other parts of the world. And no distinction is made between Canadians who are citizens of more than one country and those who belong to this country alone.

The Citizenship Act of 1977 permitted people to be citizens of Canada and another country. And, for decades, Canada has taken pride in the fact that it takes in people born in other parts of the world and embraces them as its own. Former prime minister John Diefenbaker pledged to bring in a Canadian citizenship that "knew no hyphenated consideration."

Mr. Harper's remarks drew some harsh criticism from opposition members yesterday.

There was no complaint last year when Canada tried to rescue hundreds of its nationals from Louisiana after hurricane Katrina, said Dan McTeague, the Liberal who was responsible for the protection of Canadians overseas during the previous government.

"Why is it an issue today when it wasn't at this time last year?" he asked. "There is no such thing as degrees of citizenship or classes of citizenship. And what does it say about Canadians who are going around the world imparting their expertise and making Canada a world player? . . . [That] the Prime Minister might review whether or not it's worth the effort of trying to get them out?"

Bill Siksay, the NDP citizenship and immigration critic, said there is no distinction in Canadian citizenship for people who are resident in Canada and those who live elsewhere.

Tags: Canada Dual Citizenship

"Fisking" Peter Worthington

I should start a "Toronto Sun Stupid Column Watch (As I See It)" on this blog. I am sure with Michael Coren and Peter Worthington on their staff, that section would never be short of new material.

Worthington's latest article is "Convenient Canadians".

First, he makes the ridiculous statement that "there are twice as many Canadians [50,000] in Lebanon as there are Canadians in the army". As far as I know, the strength of the Canadian Armed Forces is 62,000 [Wikipedia]. Moreover, only 40,000 Canadians have requested evacuation.

Worthington, half of 40,000 is 20,000, not 62,000. Please get your facts straight.

He writes "most are dual-citizenship Canadians who've chosen to return to the motherland to live as Lebanese -- until trouble strikes and then they want the Canadian government to rescue them, not the Lebanese government". We have no way of knowing how Worthington came to this conclusion. Does he know the average age, wealth or status of Lebanese-Canadians? Some have lived for decades in Canada before choosing to retire there. Lots of snowbirds do that. They live for 6 months in Florida. It doesn't make them any less Canadian.

Others, after spending considerable amount of time here, have returned to start a business or venture there. They may still have family, property here.

The venom continues: "frankly, any dual-citizenship Canadian who chooses to live in one of the danger areas of the world should not expect Canada to rush to his aid and rescue him and relatives when danger threatens."

So I guess we should also not rescue any mountain climber, skier who gets stuck on the 'Danger' terrain, spelunker or a hiker. And if you choose to live in a desolate part of the world (like Northern Canada) you should not expect a rescue when danger hits either. Remember, two weeks ago, Beirut was a peaceful capital city of a thriving multicultural country recovering well from a civil war.

Then Worthington gets to his point of view that deserves its own blog entry - "The view that "a Canadian is a Canadian" and all should be treated equally may need revising".

A Canadian is a Canadian. Period. Across all political aisles, there should be no dispute. We should not have categories of Canadians.

The Lebanese-Canadians who were living in Lebanon are no less Canadian than the thousands of Canadians who live and work in the USA. You know, like Worthington's daughter and son-in-law, a certain Mr David Frum.

Mr Frum and his wife, Danielle Crittenden, have both emigrated to USA. They are now US citizens. They live and work there [Wikipedia]. And so, Worthington concludes, in his bid to deny dual citizens full Canadian status, "If someone wants to be a Canadian, that person should give up citizenship in his birth country.An exception should be made with the U.S. on grounds that we are geographically, traditionally and culturally close.

Ofcourse. You cannot serve two masters. Unless it's the US. Then it's OK.

One other statement from the column caught my eye.

"Although Lebanese have settled in Canada for well over a century and are productive citizens, Canada's current policies risk clogging the country with people who shouldn't be here and whom we don't want."

Who do you not want to come to Canada, Worthington? And why?

PS. I actually submitted a Letter to the Editor, that got published today, however it's a truncated and edited version.

Tags: Canada Peter Worthington Dual Citizens

Saturday Protest Pictures

The Saturday protest started on time, weaving it's way past ROM and the Israeli consulate and stopping at the US consulate. What was surprising was that given how angry some of the protestors were (they after all had family members still being bombed and killed) the protest managed to pass off quite peacefully. The Druze, Christians and Muslims (Sunni and Shite) of the Lebanese community were there, protesting, as were some Christian and Jewish (!) marchers. In the Middle East these groups would be fighting each other. Here in Canada they march together peacefully, get angry at the government and then go for work. That's the beauty of 'freedom of speech'.

There was a strong NDP presence at the rally (and these are communities that traditionally vote Liberal). After Warren Kinsella managed to obtain from some of the Liberal candidates statements unilaterally supporting Israel (kudos to Martha Hall Findlay for not falling into the trap) many people were angry at Joe Volpe. I remember Volpe coming to our mosque and issuing blunt statements that he was 'with us'. That kind of ethnical politics can backfire spectacularly, as he no doubt will find out. I don't have a problem with candidates such as Bob Rae supporting Israel. He has been very clear on this issue and we can disagree on some things, but what really irks me is when politicians try to play both sides and be hypocritical.


Sign saying 'bombing Canadians is NOT a measured response'.


What surprised me was the presence of a large number of Jewish protestors.


The NDP had a strong presence at the rally, here represented by MP Peggy Nash.


More Jewish protestors.


What's a Bantustan? But the map was interesting.


A Jewish rabbi and a Shite Imam speak. The placard to the left had an interesting drawing of a 'BBC' missile.


The vibrant (and angry) Lebanese community of Toronto were loudly present.


Some of the pictures were heart wrenching, especially those of babies bombed that the media won't carry.

(Photos courtesy: L.C.)

Tags: Canada Israel Protest

Attention! You Should Be Offended!

Desecration?

Courtesy Red Tory, I came across this article. It mentions that the patron saint of England, St. George, may be changed as he may be considered offensive to Muslims. Red Tory writes, "this is cultural sensitivity gone mad".

I don't think this is a case of cultural insensitivity at all. What I don't get is who decided this image is offensive to Muslims. From the article, it appears that the Church of England is worried that his image is too warlike. And it is the Church of England that appeared to have decided this could be offensive. I am sure they got a few crackpots who wrote letters but it looks like this is the Church's initiative.

I had a hearty laugh about that one. What is offensive to me is now going to be decided by someone else, be it the Church of England or the mullahs of Iran. The British also had a history of fighting India. All Indians (and Pakistanis, Bangladeshis and so on) have a bad memory of the Union Jack. Should that now be changed as well? I am sure if you ask any Indian, Pakistani, Bangladeshi, Sri Lankan living in Britain (and are British) about it, they would go hmph! They don't care! What matters is bread and butter issues like discrimination, jobs, taxes, education, health care and so on.

What offends me is if a politician preaches hatred against a particular sect. A person tries to shove his particular beliefs on me. If a legislator decides to ignore hate crimes. If a leader breaks his promises. If people are blind to abuses by their elected representatives, and so on. A flag, a symbol, a piece of ancient history, that's irrelevant. I am sure the Church of England has better things to do.

We look forward to having this debate again on cultural sensitivity come Christmas/Holiday time. Meanwhile, come Euro 2008, I will be waving my England flag on my car again.

Tags: Cultural Sensitivity Political Correctness

A Few Questions On The Evacuation

Before I begin I would like to say we shouldn't criticize the evacuation procedure too much - Canadians never had to deal with anything of such a magnitude before, and so quickly. I think they are doing the best they can under trying circumstances. I can proudly say our government was there for Canadians. We should all follow Sam Eid of Toronto's example - who volunteered to work as a baggage handler at the port because, as he said, "The Canadian government gave us an escort. It was my way of paying them back". Having said that, I have a few questions:

1. Why did Israel blockade one ship carrying Canadians to Cyprus for more than 3 hours, before sending them to Turkey? Many people got sea-sick, deprived of medical attention and water, or got sunstroke. This is a ship carrying helpless civilians!
   
2. Why is the "security window" provided to Canadian ships so narrow? And why should there be even a need for security windows? Noone should bomb ships carrying innocent civilians, period. You would think that for all the blind support our Prime Minister gave to Israel (even after our citizens were killed), the Israelis would be nice enough not to threaten our ships, no?
   
3. Six ships carrying passengers were not able to fully load before they had to leave port. Why? I heard the captain of one ship refused to go to Beirut until the Israelis gave him a security guarantee, which took its time coming.
   
4. France offered to help with the evacuation effort, Quebec Premier Jean Charest, who met with French President Jacques Chirac. Why? I mean, thanks France, but please make the offer to the leader of our nation, Mr Harper, will you? Charest is just the premier of a province, not a nation, get it?
   
5. Why are some bloggers (especially Cons) questioning the Canadian-ness of some evacuees? They are Canadians. Period.
   
6. Nine days ago some bloggers wrote they were glad the Israeli Prime Minister didn't pussyfoot around the Hezbollah attack, having the guts to say this was an act of war by Lebanon. Therefore it was Israel vs. Lebanon - a war where civilians could be killed. Now, as Israeli atrocities mount (considerable enough so that Louise Arbour could speculate them as war crimes) suddenly it's back to Israel vs. Hezbollah, or a democratic nation vs. a bunch of terrorists. What happened to Israel vs. Lebanon? 'Cos that would mean it will be democratic nation favouring one religion vs. democratic multicultural country. Oh...
   

Tags: Canada Israel

Belinda Stronach's Ideas Reviewed

I have just finished reading through Ms Belinda Stronach's ideas for the renewal of the Liberal Party (h/t Clear Grit). I have said before that I am glad Ms Stronach is a Liberal and a smart one at that. Let me go through some of her ideas.

1. The need for a grassroots strategy.
   This cannot be denied. For too long it seemed an elite crew had the keys to the party machinery. Liberals must feel they can influence the party's direction, and thus will become more involved with the party (important in the ground war during elections). In here when Ms Stronach mentions grassroots financing she is correct - if more money came from individuals than corporations, the party would be more reflective of its members than corporations. However we need to get a lot more contributions from a lot more people to remain financially in the black.
   
2. One Member One Vote.
   While I recognize this is as grassroots as it gets, there is one problem with this. Let's say Ontario has a larger number of Liberals than Alberta. That would mean Ontario has a larger influence in the party than Alberta. I would like some sort of equal representation of ridings, and one-member-one-vote within each riding itself.
   
3. A Convention on party renewal in advance of the leadership selection.
   Certainly. This should be a must. If we are serious about renewal we need to hear from the Liberal leadership candidates their ideas on such issues.
   
4. Caucus Election of Ministers and Critics.
   I still think the cabinet should be the privilege of the PM/leader. However if a system was proposed where the cabinet was appointed by the PM/leader and then approved by the caucus that would be a suitable compromise and check to the power of the PM/leader.
   
5. No parachute candidates.
   I don't have a problem with a person from one riding deciding to run for nomination in another riding and gathering suitable support to win the nomination. However the process adopted when Michael Ignatieff was crowned, as well as when Raymond Cho was not allowed to run for the provincial Liberal nomination in a by-election in Scarborough Rouge-River, left a bad taste in my mouth. To be truly democratic, anyone wishing to run for the Liberal nomination should be allowed to do so, as long as the person has been a bonafide member of the party for some time. Let the local party members decide on their representative. Now, the leader can appoint someone, or the riding association can decide so-and-so will be on the ticket as someone else has no chance of winning the nomination.
   
6. More women in the party.
   While I support more women in politics I don't think a party should make special affirmative action to that end. Like any male-dominated field, women will be rare.
   
7. $1 Memberships.
   To join the Party or to renew one's membership should be recognized as an expression of political faith, not a fund-raising opportunity.
   I agree 100%. The present membership fee of $16.50 in my riding (for a year only) is quite steep, in my opinion. Also, Ms Stronach's other ideas in this section, such as party auctions, shares etc. are quite innovative.
   

Please do go over to her site and read her ideas. As we head into another election in a year's time (likely), we should have atleast implemented a few of those suggestions.

Tags: Canada Belinda Stronach

More on Harper's Position

I find it perplexing that Canadian PM Harper would not criticize Israel for Canadian deaths. Regardless of whatever position you hold on the Israel-Palestine conflict, we are Canadians first. And Canadians are now dead in this war.

When the US made it a policy to pull over Arab-Canadians at the border, Canada's Liberal government protested. They even posted a travel advisory on their website warning about travel to the US, our best friend, business partner and ally. The US then disregarded that policy. Similarly Canada's Liberals have frequently petitioned for Canadian activists held by Israel. When it mattered, the Liberals stood up for Canada.

I don't think Israel purposely targetted the Canadians. However, they purposely targetted civilian infrastructure in Lebanon. They are destroying airports, bridges, houses, buses, ports, offices and hospitals [BBC]. Harper should first condemn Israel for targetting civilian infrastructure that has nothing to do with the radicals in the south of the country. Then he should say Israel's response is now no longer measured. And finally, he should ask Israel to stop attacking ports [this is how we are going to remove our stranded nationals].

Many bloggers said since a radical force over which the Lebanon government has no control kidnapped soldiers near the border, they hold Lebanon responsible for an act of war. Now Israeli warplanes have killed Canadians under direct order of the government. Is Israel's response still measured, Prime Minister? What about the thousands of Lebanese/Palestinians the Israelis hold in their prisons? Who begs for their release?

On Harper's Misguided Position And Quebec:
It seems Harper's ill-thought out strategy and position on the Middle East crisis may backfire in terms of votes towards the Conservatives. First, thousands of Lebanese Canadians in Montreal have protested against the government's position. These are Quebec suburbs where many voted Conservatives last time around, being sick of the Liberals. Reuters reports that many may now rethink their vote next time around. It looks like Peter's comments from my previous post is a bit optimistic. I am glad. It is time politicians realize their actions have consequences at the ballot box.

The flip side of this position is that many of these votes may now go to the BQ rather than the Liberals.

Did Harper modify his position, as asked by the Star? Even though he dodged questions, It would appear no.

Meanwhile the Canadian Arab Federation has criticized Harper and accused him directly of being responsible for the death of Canadians. This is ofcourse stupid of them. It's like Jack Layton blaming Paul Martin for the death of the homeless. Arab lobbyists still have to learn a lot.

Tags: Canada Israel

Canada Needlessly Involved

Canada is getting involved in the new Middle East crisis with no parliamentary debate whatsoever [Star], courtesy Bush's new lapdog "Steve". As far as I can remember Canada has always had a balanced view in the conflict, tending to reflect a position in between US and France. Many Liberals such as Jason Cherniak and Shoshana have different point of views than mine. However, this position of Canada on the crisis needs to be debated in Parliament, a fact that seems to be lost on the Conservatives, who debate next to nothing or usually give 6 hours notice. And where is the Opposition when you need them? Even the NDP? If Canada gets needlessly involved, who knows whose apple-cart we could rattle?

Update: US blogger Abu Sinan picks some illuminating Israeli quotes.

Tags: Canada Israel

Liberals Need To Be More Left Than Right

Jason Cherniak commented sometime ago, regarding his statements about Omar Alghabra, that Muslim Canadians are unlikely to vote Conservative because of vitriolic statements by some Tories. While this generalization has its flaws, one part of it is basically true. Let me get to the flaw first.

All Italian-Canadians do not vote one way, neither will all Muslim Canadians, many of whom come from various cultures and backgrounds. Indeed many South Asians vote for Liberal simply because they have more role models in the Liberal caucus (such as Ruby Dhalla) but that does not stop a lot of them for also voting for Conservatives in the West. Harper's strategy of focusing on same sex marriage in the GTA has not borne fruit, however his actions on jobs, credential recognition and tax cuts have.

The Liberals have always played a delicate balancing act (on their position on the Middle East) well. This meant both Jewish voters and Muslim voters simultaneously voted for the Liberals. However, Paul Martin lost a lot of support within the Muslim community when he declared "Israel's values are Canadian values". Looking at recent actions by Israel where they seem to be killing civilians for fun it is clear Canada's values are very different. Paul Martin was probably pandering to some vote bank. However, the second part of Jason's statement is true. The lost votes did not go to the Conservatives but to the NDP.

It is for this reason that I believe the Liberal's next leader must be more left-leaning than right. We must emphasize our social programs, our environmental policies and our progressive society to steal back those NDP Liberals that we lost.

Another thing that struck me recently is how rabid the right wing has become. In previous eras, to be right leaning you wanted less government, lower taxes, less involvement in foreign affairs, more spending at home, increasing personal freedoms and protecting rights. Today, the right subscribes to strict interpretations of a religious code that they seek to impose on others, restrict personal liberties, increase spending (military, GST cut), do not care about deficit, treat environment as a dirty word and so on. The Toronto Sun has recently called even for standing together with Israel, as if that is something Canadians should do, when we have no stake in that country and should NOT be involved. The way to fight the Conservatives is NOT to be more right (look where it got the Democrats) but by re-stating progressive Liberal values.

Tags: Canada Foreign Relations Liberal Party

Even More Gruesome Than Haditha

(Remember, from what I understand, Michael Ignatieff supported this Iraq war, while Mr. Harper bemoaned that our solders are not there with our allies.)

This is what we need to guard against as Mr. Harper puts us in a US-style insurgency fight in Afghanistan. It has been said that soldiers placed in unfamiliar situations often react in unpredictable ways, actions they would condemn in 'normal' life they would not hesitate to undertake in a warzone.

Conversely here you don't hear calls from Bill O' Reilly and the like for all Americans to condemn this incident, rather most Americans will hardly know about it, thanks to their impotent media. However when a single allegation is made on a muslim, they hold all 1 billion muslims responsible for this situation.

"After the decision was made to rape the woman, according to the FBI affidavit, three of the soldiers changed out of their uniforms and into dark clothes. One soldier told investigators that Green covered his face with a brown T-shirt. One of the soldiers told investigators he changed clothes so he "wouldn't be seen." The affidavit said that four of the soldiers then grabbed three rifles and a shotgun and headed to the house. The fifth soldier was said to have stayed behind at the checkpoint.

According to the accounts of the two who stood guard, Green went to a back bedroom, closed the door and shot three family members. An Army official said the three were believed to be the woman's mother, father and sister, approximately age 5. "Green came to the bedroom door and told everyone: `I just killed them, all are dead,' " the FBI affidavit said.

Around the same time, the soldier identified as the "known participant" grabbed the young woman -- whose age is believed to have been about 20 -- and threw her to the floor, according to the affidavit. The two soldiers acting as guards told investigators that both Green and the other soldier raped the woman before Green picked up an AK-47 assault rifle he had found at the house and killed her."

[Full Article] it is as disgusting as it sounds

To those that say Canadian soldiers are well trained and 'better' than our American counterparts, I say while that may be true, we cannot prevent such incidents from taking place. Remember Somalia? It may be one bad apple, but it's a stain on our uniform.

The Army should ensure soldiers not be posted in Afghanistan for more than 4-5 months, get regular and long leaves for home, and psychiatric assessment is performed on soldiers on a regular and mandatory basis.

(h/t: blevkog)

PM Incensed by 'Fouling' of Memorial

Is this really national security matter that it's top news on our newspapers and even the Prime Minister is compelled to comment about it on radio?

A man urinated on a statue (or even a graveyard). Charge the man with public mischief. End of story. I am sure the guy peeing did not care about 'fouling' a national monument. He just needed somewhere to go and made the unwise decision to do it in a public place and not go to a washroom.

The right wing picks pseudo battles and wars on which there is only one position, they claim that position, and then ignore the real issues of the day.

I am not saying the issue is not important. However it's not a priority.

Israel's Actions Destabilize The Middle East

Mr. Stephen Harper was quick in his early days to show his displeasure with the election of Hamas (a result no one wanted or expected in the West) by cutting off aid to the Palestinian Authority and restrict cash flow into the impoverished area. Many right wing commentators had mouthed that election of Hamas was like declaring war on Israel, as Hamas did not recognize the country.

Today, in response to the kidnapping of a 19 year-old Israeli soldier, Gilad Shalit, Israeli forces have invaded the Gaza Strip - cutting off electricity and water, at the height of summer, to some 1.3 million people. That's 1.3 MILLION of the poorest people on earth without electricity and water in 45 degrees heat. Many of them, employees of the civil service, will be seriously short of cash as all aid had been restricted. Israel also destroyed three main bridges that connect to the Gaza strip, thus preventing any subsequent relief to reach the area. And in what could be tantamount to a declaration of war, Israel has captured the cabinet members of another government [Star].

Is the targeting of and destroying the lives of 1.3 million justified, for the sake of 1 soldier's life? And not to forget, actions such as these of Israel's breeds terrorism, which in turn affects the capability and safety of our soldiers in Afghanistan. Canadian soldiers who would have struck a cordial relation with many Afghans will now have to distance themselves from Israel (our ally)'s actions. Previous Liberal governments had succeeded in cementing a balanced position of Canada in the Middle East conflict. By aligning ourselves with the US and Israel, Mr. Harper runs the risk it entails for Canada.

All this ofcourse, to secure the release of a soldier. And what were the demands of the insurgents who captured the soldier in the first place?

Arab blogger Sabbah informs us:

"... are now asking for the release of Palestinian women prisoners and Palestinian children under the age of 18. And in case you don't know, as of April 2006, the latest numbers of Palestinian women prisoners and Palestinian children is 342 Palestinian children and 122 women. I wonder how much attention the Western media gave to this fact, if they did in first place. Do the Western media mention the demands of the Palestinian militia? Did you hear about the Palestinian Women and Children in the Israeli prisons?"

Another blogger, Avari writes:

"Of course, this did not start with the kidnapping of Gilad Shalit. It started when Israeli shells led to the deaths of Palestinians, including women, on a Gaza beach; predictably enough, Israel claimed it released a report ... that showed no Israeli involvement, though TIME Magazine, in its June 26, 2006 issue, questioned such a report, citing Human Rights Watch's impartial report."

Even though the language used by some of these bloggers may be harsh, the truth in asking for fair coverage of Israel's actions and its implications cannot be denied. Mr. Stephen Harper should now ask Israel to withdraw and return to negotiations for the release of its solder.

Liberals Should Concentrate On Basics

The Conservative Party will win the next election. Unless the Liberal party members and its candidates change their tactics - that is my conclusion. The Conservative Party has focused its attention onto a few basics - and this is what the people will remember come voting time. Let's see what the Conservatives have done for ethnic communities (a Liberal stronghold in Toronto and other cities) recently:

• Opened a public enquiry into the worst terrorist act on Canadians. Yes, I am talking about the Air India bombing. I can say rest assured had most of the targets been white, the public enquiry, outrage and condemnation would have been super fast. The Liberals had 13 years to solve the crisis. They didn't.
  
  
• Most immigrants credit Pierre E. Trudeau and his liberal policies for helping them come to Canada. This is the no. 1 reason why they keep voting Liberal. However, in recent times, the feeling has set in that we Liberals only bring in immigrants to secure a vote bank, and do not care about their looking helplessly at the job banks.
  
  Last month, the prime minister announced the creation of an agency to help ensure the overseas credentials of immigrants are recognized by Canadian employers. Many foreign-trained doctors, accountants and other professionals are forced to take low-paying jobs because their credentials aren't recognized here. Harper said the agency will help new immigrants "navigate the bureaucratic labyrinth of credentials." The agency will receive $18 million in funding over the next two years.
  
  
• Most telling was the vice president (South Asian Market, RBC)'s comment at a recent awards gala "The Liberals came and went (in government), but they never showed up at this event". Added one member, "Indians by nature are a conservative people. And they like to back a winning horse."
  
  
• Thousands of skilled immigrants who struggle to be licensed by Ontario's regulatory bodies could be helped by a new law that would target unfair barriers to employment. [link] My parents who are first generation immigrants and face numerous hurdles to get their degrees recognized positively cheered this announcement. We don't know how it will help but it's doing something.
  
  
• The Liberals in their debates are focusing on abstract dreams. "Big Canada Big Dreams", "One World", "Green Economy", blah blah blah blah blah. Only Scott Brison, Stephane Dion and Gerrard Kennedy (especially him) gave some concrete steps on how they would deal with BASIC problems. Like it or not we are taxed too much and it is time the party realized that throwing money at (some) useless social programs is not working.
  
  
• There seems to be a basic tendency amongst the candidates to be too leftist or too right. Yes, we know street racing is already banned (maybe) or tougher sentencing for crimes does not solve crimes. But it makes for good politics and you guys are POLITICIANS. Remember Jean Chretien's quote "Politics is a game and I am a good player"? Well, get back to politics. We are not in power anymore, and we should realize it.

Signed: A Frustrated Liberal.

Tags: Liberal Party Canada

Please Protect Us From South Toronto

A Canadian blogger warned today that USA, and in particular the enclave of "South USA", was a breeding ground for "Christian" extremists and that Canada will be under threat as long as passports are not required of all Americans crossing the border.

"South USA, like those parts of Birmingham that are host to the radical homeschooled children who influenced the Oklahoma building attacks and the abortion clinic bombing, has people who adhere to a militant understanding of Christian values," said ---, chairman of the blogging subcommittee, dealing with topics of immigration and border security, noting that USA has a very large North American community.

...

What I wrote above could be classified as racist. Wrong. Or plain bigotry.

What a moron. Is it that easy to get elected there, wherever that is?

Tags: Toronto Canada

Canada Not Doing Enough For Sports

The World Cup of football (soccer) is one true global sporting event. Forget Olympics or the Superbowl, the World Cup beats all comers combined. Over 200 countries participate, with 32 in the finals, watched by over 3 billion people (that's 1 in every 2 persons on earth), this is the world fiesta of sports. Amongst all the flags that will be flying high in diverse Toronto over the next month, one flag will be sorely missed. Canada's.

It seems unbelievable that a poor country with a population of a million people (Trinidad) can qualify from CONCACAF for the World Cup, but Canada cannot. Soccer is also not Trinidad's main sport, cricket being the primary while basketball comes second. Yet they made it. Is it just the culture?

I feel Canadian kids do not place too much value in any sports except hockey. There is nothing wrong with loving hockey too much, but our government should encourage other sports as well. They do nothing of that sort.

We do not even have a dedicated Ministry of Sports (unlike many other Commonwealth nations) - it's grouped under the Ministry of Heritage. Canada, with a rich source of immigrants, should excel in three world sports - football, cricket and tennis. Yet, we suck.

Sports requires enormous dedication. Athletes have to train hard, dedicate time, and their parents their money. Once they reach high school, most kids abandon sports. If the sport is not big and does not have a winning team, there are no sponsors, and therefore the team members have to take other jobs to sustain themselves, thus they cannot train or practice full time, and therefore they cannot win - ergo the cycle continues.

Although this news may surprise ice hockey fans, cricket has a long history in Canada. The Toronto Cricket Club was established in 1827 and the Canadian Cricket Association was formed in 1892. Cricket was the national game of Canada in the 1900s. The Canadian team has qualified for the last World Cup as well as the next. Yet most of the team are amateurs and weekend players with regular week jobs.

For sports such as soccer and cricket, where Canada has potential, the Government of Canada and the governing bodies of the sports must sit down and work out a funding formula for the team so that they can practice full time, play full time, and do not have to worry about paying out of their own pockets for equipment, travel and so on. This can continue until the sports get popular and obtains enough sponsors to sustain themselves. For all the money spent on the sponsorship fiasco in Quebec to promote Canada, nothing raises your patriotic fervour than watching your national team on the pitch.

Tags: Canada Sports

Who's Afraid?

Warren Kinsella and Cerberus both posted a 'We Are Not Afraid' post. I decided to join too, and made up my own 'made-in-Canada' solution (to paraphrase our Minister of Environment).



Tags: Toronto Canada

Toronto Arrests

Following this very, very bad news story with morbid curiosity. The Star, the CBC, the Post and even the BBC have all made this their lead story of the hour (check out BBC's really old stock photo of Toronto - no condos around the CN tower). Most reports are talking about how the people nabbed are 'homegrown'.

As a Torontonian this is ofcourse bad news for us, and for Muslims as a whole, if only because an RCMP source says it "anticipates more arrests". Although the men are innocent until proven guilty (remember not a single successful conviction has so far resulted from RCMP arrests in this arena lately), the Muslim community of Canada must take its head out of the sandbox and realize that there are some Canadian Muslims who don't feel the love of Canada the same way as the rest of us do, and they will not care what happens to Canadians (and their fellow Muslims) as long as they can blow up something.

The black community seemed to be in denial for a long time about the 'gangsta' and thug culture that led to many young black men choosing a life of crime, and the consequences are not pretty. Thankfully, statements such as these was only the start. Time and again I have gone to the mosque to hear the imam preach that as Canadians it is our duty to stop terrorism and protecting Canada is a holy duty. Yet you will see many older immigrant Muslims pretending the problem does not exist or is a vast conspiracy. Thankfully the younger generation (homegrown Muslims) are more aware of the dangers. Most of them blame illegal immigration, propose a tougher line on immigration than many Conservatives I know, and are more likely to question radical views than the older folk.

"Islamic extremists" as mentioned by the news reports are an oxymoron, any more than Mc Veigh was a "Christian extremist" or an IRA member was a "Catholic extemist". However, the Western world themselves were Christians, so could understand that the IRA did not represent Christian values (just as Iraqi Muslims blown up by other Iraqi Muslims never blame 'Islamic' bombers - just bombers). Muslims in the West are a minority and not enough is known about us. As such, people can be ready to assume the worst about us - that's why Muslims in the West will face a greater burden to explain themselves to their neighbours and friends when such issues crop up. That can only be resolved when more and more young Canadian Muslims (and other immigrants) are ready to involve themselves in the Canadian society politically, or in the media.

Having said all of this, I condemn Mr. Harper's act of issuing a statement on the issue. This is a law-and-order arrest situation, the men have not yet been convicted, this is just a photo-op and another political opportunism on his part.

Tags: Toronto

Interviewing Mr. Dion

Thanks to Rob (and Denise?) for organizing the blogger-Dion conference/interview.

Mr. Stephane Dion impressed me as a person of integrity, sincerity and hard work. I think he has a clear vision of the Canada he wants to build, and is willing to listen to others and is open to debate, in making Canada work. He is proud of Canada as she is now, is proud of Canada under the previous Liberal governments, but acknowledges many things can be improved. Although I have not heard enough from the other candidates to make an endorsement yet, Mr Dion looks to me to be a capable man. He tried to be diplomatic about the other candidates but stressed that what sets him apart from the other candidates vying to be Canada's most successful party's new leader is experience. Some of his answers were very impressive - and even after a long time in politics he is yet to be touched by a scandal.

"I have 10 years of experience as a minister." He repeatedly stressed. "I would not be ready 10 years ago. I am ready now." He pointed out some of his achievements (Clarity Act being the most important, followed by various treaties and agreements between the federal and provincial governments). In his words, he 'brought the world together in Montreal to save the environment while Mr Harper is breaking the world apart'.

The conference started with him praising the bloggers and many of us thanking him for taking time out to speak to us - average common Joes (albeit with a website). Over the hour, many topics were discussed such as Kyoto, immigration and French Canada. I will recap the two questions that I got to ask him, and summarize the others.

Q:We have so many foreign professional doctors/nurses immigrating to Canada yet we have a doctor/nurse shortage in the rural communities and cities because these doctors are working odd jobs and cannot practice medicine. If elected leader, what will you do to rectify that?

Mr. Dion acknowledged that this is one area Canada should vastly improve its record in. For immigrants to be fully productive and contributing to the economy, he would speed up recognition of their credentials. While many candidates say the same thing, Mr. Dion offered three processes that he wants to implement.

First, he wants to boost the Canadian embassies abroad to process the immigrants faster, recognize their credentials on the spot and lobby for them. In my opinion this approach immediately decentralizes the processing of credentials, making it faster and more efficient, while giving the immigrants a solid idea of where they will start on entering Canada. It's a good idea.

Second, Mr. Dion told me at the moment - Canada has no inventory of shortages of jobs. We do not know where are the jobs that are not being filled, where are immigrants being missed. He said this is something he would work on with the provinces.

Third, he would encourage immigrants (perhaps by providing incentives - Mezba) to move away from the big three (Toronto, Montreal, Vancouver) where they have helpful communities to smaller cities such as Winnipeg where they are needed and also would face less competition.

Q: There is no help for young people in Canada, as it seems they don't usually vote so politicians don't usually care. We graduate with a huge student debt, earn lower starting salaries, pay higher taxes and get few (if any) deductible benefits. Do you have any plans to help us out?

When I asked this question I also pointed out that Mr. Scott Brison (another candidate) had said he would change personal taxes to eliminate the welfare trap and help young Canadians by making the first $25,000 a year earned during the first twelve years of their working life tax free.

Mr. Dion did not commit to a similar idea, but said he would provide incentives for young couples to buy energy-efficient homes and appliances (green products). However, rather than promise help for young people as a whole, he said he would increase the Child Tax Benefit as much as possible (without going to deficit) to help needy families with kids.

On the topic of environment, Mr. Dion said had Mr. Gore been the next President of the United States, the world would have been in a much better state (environmentally) and we all would have been closer to meeting our Kyoto targets (as Mr. Clinton was a big supporter of the treaty). He said 'it is never too late for the environment'.

On healthcare, Mr. Dion believed it a constitutional right for Canadians to have access to health care. However, with costs going up 5%, he was open to new ideas to innovate the management, as long as your wealth did not affect the health care you are eligible to receive. He also said drug approval in Canada is too slow, and even pointed us that Canada did not have the scientific ability to quickly test new pesticides to inform the cabinet whether the pesticide would be harmful to the environment.

On electoral reform, Mr. Dion preferred the German model (which he tried to explain but I did not get). He recognized the problem with proportional representation as too many parties, unstable minorities and frequent elections. On senate reform, he was not in favour of an elected senate (which would lead to stalemates) but would support term limits (6 years, he said).

On being a team player, Mr. Dion said even while the famous Chretien/Martin fight was going on, he himself faced a nomination challenge as some people wanted him out of his riding. Yet, he said he managed to resolve the issue without bringing it to the front pages, as that would have 'hurt the party'. He said while personal convictions are important, it is equally important to be a team player.

He also stressed that he wanted ordinary Canadians to help him out.

"When you have a vision it doesn't mean you have the answer to everything," he said. "I am open to ideas."

On aboriginal issues he said it was a shame the Kelowna agreement was cancelled. Lawyers were the ones making the most out of land disputes, according to him. On national debt he alerted us that by 2010, we could have a ratio of 2.5 workers supporting 1 retired person if problems are not resolved. On crime, he refused to acknowledge Canada has a serious problem with violent crime, calling it a false propaganda. He said while crime has increased, we still have very safe streets. He criticized Mr. Harper for playing games with a serious issue, calling his recent proposal to criminalize street racing a photo-op, when, as Mr. Dion pointed out, we already have a similar law on the books.

He criticized Mr. Ignatieff for voting to extend the Afghan mission, for reasons I mentioned here and here.

On the whole, I was impressed with what I saw and heard. I did not find his English too hard to follow. He would need to make shorter speeches and provide sound bites for the TVs during an election. I also perceived him to be the 'greenest' candidate so far. I would encourage everyone to examine his record and experience when voting for a candidate. After all, as he said, he did not just 'come out of the academy and try to be a leader'.

Bloggers who participated in the conference:
A Canadian Leaf
A View from the Left
Crescent Canuck
Liberal Country
Miles' Blog
Next Face
The Steel City Grit
Views from the Left
Younger Liberals

Tags: Stephane Dion Liberal Party Canada

The TTC Wildcat Strike

I have just got to work. What is usually a 40 minutes carefree drive listening to my favourite CDs became a nightmare 2 hour drive. Yes, the Toronto Transit Commission, a slow, cumbersome way to travel at the best of times, decided to go on a wildcat strike.

This was an illegal strike. In Canada, when your work contract is up, your union is allowed to on strike if there is no new deal. However, while in the middle of the duration of your contract, you CANNOT go on strike. The transit workers decided to cherry pick an issue and stage a strike. They should all be fired AND jailed.

This is the time for some tough action. In Canada it seems our elected officials have no spine. Aboriginal protestors dig up a road in Caledonia and all the government can do is urge everyone to be nice. The TTC union went on strike because they knew there would be no consequences for their actions, except causing an inconvenience to millions of people (but what do they care). The government should arrest the union leaders, as well as every third driver or worker on strike (since you cannot arrest everyone). And they should stick to their guns and remain firm, and throw those guys in jail for a month or two. And repeat for other illegal strikes.

If they do that, the next time a union decides to hold a city hostage by an illegal strike, they will think again.

Tags: Toronto TTC Illegal Strike

The New Citizenship Act

Monty Solberg, our new Citizenship and Immigration Minister from Medicine Hat (a place that is almost devoid of immigrants - only 98 foreign students as of 2004, compared to 32,908 from Toronto alone) was recently asked about a plan to revise the Citizenship Act (something the Conservatives supported previously). Peter Worthington of the Toronto Sun (a 'right'-leaning writer who I would hardly claim to be Liberal-biased) comments, "Solberg seemed a bit out of his depth".

One of the factors of the issue was the following:

Naturalized Canadians are somehow "secondary Canadians" because their citizenship can be revoked by a secret cabinet committee and they can be deported without getting a fair trial, as guaranteed under the Charter of Rights. The new Citizenship Act would have removed that clause, taking the powers away from the Cabinet and granting them to a judge (a non-partisan). As Waterloo-Kitchener Liberal MP Andrew Telegdi, former chair of the committee, mentioned, the Citizenship Act has been on the order paper for years and was adopted unanimously by the House of Commons last fall.

And what does Solberg now claim? That there is no consensus across the country on them. That is blatantly unjust, in my opinion.

"Judging from presentations heard coast to coast," Telegdi had replied [I am quoting the Sun column], "and in all my years in Parliament, I have never (seen) anything closer to a virtual unanimous consensus."

The only groups opposing the Act are a few associations that want to punish some Nazi collaborators who are now here, as citizens, having lied on their application to Canada some 50 years ago. They want those guys (some are allegedly mere camp guards or conscripts and are now over 80 years old) to be instantly deported from Canada without a trial. Well, just because some citizens may have lied on their application form 50 years ago is no reason to deny NEW Canadians their basic rights as Canadians, in my opinion.

Support the new Citizenship Act, Mr. Solberg.

Tags: Canada Immigration Citizenship

David Orchard on Afghanistan

I received a newsletter today containing David Orchard's latest article on Afghanistan. Let me post the article first [all emphasis mine], and then discuss a bit.

We are wrong in Afghanistan
By David Orchard

Canadians are fighting and dying in an undeclared war in Afghanistan. Prime Minister Harper has stated that Canada will not "cut and run" in the face of increasing casualties. Foreign Affairs Minister MacKay says Canada will "finish the job." Chief of Defence Staff, Rick Hillier, is quoted as saying "Canada needs to be in Afghanistan for the long haul… at least a decade -- and probably a lot longer."

But why is Canada in Afghanistan?

We’ve been told that Afghanistan was a haven for terrorists and therefore its government needed to be overthrown to protect the rest of the world.

However, in international law, labelling a country a haven for terrorists is not sufficient grounds to justify an invasion of, or an attack on, that country. A long list could be compiled of nations that have harboured, willingly or otherwise, those who could be called terrorists. International law allows the use of military force only if one’s nation is under direct and ongoing attack itself or if it is authorized by the Security Council of the United Nations.

Canada has not experienced an attack by Afghanistan.

As for the Security Council, the U.N. resolutions on Afghanistan prior to the U.S. invasion in October 2001, contained not even an implied authorization of military force. Today Canada is not in Afghanistan under UN command. Our soldiers are not wearing blue helmets. We are operating in Afghanistan under U.S. command, as part of U.S. "Operation Enduring Freedom."

Ah, but at least we are there to do good things, our government replies. To help a war-torn nation stabilize itself, to bring democracy to a country badly in need of such and to help liberate women and girls who suffered under the iron heel of the Taliban.

Yet history shows that "democracy" is rarely imposed on a country by the barrel of a gun. Nations that attempt to force their system of government on others invariably create resistance. Many colonial wars can be cited as examples, including those in Afghanistan’s own past.

As for the west’s influence on Afghan society, a report by the Revolutionary Association of the Women of Afghanistan (RAWA) stated shortly after the invasion that conditions in Afghanistan for women were worse under the control of our allies, the Northern Alliance, than previously under the Taliban. According to the RAWA, "These [the Northern Alliance] are the very people who immediately upon usurping power… proclaimed -- amongst other sordid restrictions -- the compulsory veiling of all women. The people of the world need to know that in terms of widespread raping of girls and women from ages 7 to 70, the track record of the Taliban can in no way stand up against that of these very same ‘Northern Alliance’ associates…" It should be noted that these are women who opposed the Taliban and were lauded in the U.S. media prior to the invasion for having done so.

Canada is now in Afghanistan as part of a foreign occupation and a very real, hot war that took, by conservative estimates, 20,000 Afghan lives within the first six months alone.

With its 1991 war on Iraq the U.S., for the first time in history, began using depleted uranium munitions. It has since used large amounts of DU weaponry in the former Yugoslavia, Iraq and Afghanistan. The contamination from depleted uranium remains deadly for hundreds of thousands of years. Dr. Rosalie Bertell states in her Update on Depleted Uranium and Gulf War Syndrome, the use of DU in war is a "a clear violation of the Geneva Protocol on the Use of Gas in War." She writes: "DU generates a poison gas, known commonly as a metal fume, which is highly toxic when inhaled. It can also be classed as a radiological weapon of indiscriminate destruction which does not respect national boundaries, and which persists long after a conflict is over." The effect of DU on both Afghan citizens and returning Canadian and American soldiers has been almost completely ignored.

Perhaps it’s worth looking beyond the official reasons given for this war. Prominent American writer Gore Vidal in his book Perpetual War for Perpetual Peace writes: "We need Afghanistan because it is the gateway to Central Asia, which is full of oil and natural gas… That’s what it’s all about. We are establishing our control over Central Asia."

It’s time for some serious questions about Canada’s deepening Afghan involvement. If Canada wished to undertake a role in Afghanistan as a peace keeper, the U.S. would first have to pull out. Then Canada could, if asked by the U.N., perhaps consider a role in stabilizing the country. Being part of a U.S. military operation to subdue the country is by definition the opposite of peacekeeping.

The ongoing threats by the U.S. to attack Iran speak clearly of an escalating scenario ahead -- one in which Canada may well be drawn further into a vortex of events which cannot be justified legally, morally or practically.

David Orchard is the author of The Fight for Canada -- Four Centuries of American Expansionism and farms in Borden, SK. He ran twice for the leadership of the former Progressive Conservative Party of Canada and is now a member of the Liberal Party.

I almost agree fully with the above comments. I read now that Harper, facing the very real threat of his 'give us two more years' bill failing (due to the Bloc, NDP and some Liberals) saying he will ignore the vote.

A defiant Prime Minister Stephen Harper said Wednesday he would ignore his minority opponents, extend Canada's military mission in Afghanistan by one year and ask Canadian voters to back a two-year extension in an election.

Basically, it comes down to what I said in the last post - grant 1 year extension only. The Liberals should vote to support the mission for one year and then examine whether we are achieving our objectives.

Afghanistan is not Serbia, where we can overthrow the regime and expect the new government to take over and keep things hunky dory. Afghanistan does not have a culture of democracy. It has high levels of poverty, illiteracy and corruption - besides having armed warlords ruling the countryside.

Tags: Afghanistan Canada

We Cannot Be In Afghanistan Forever

What is our mission in Afghanistan? Is it to eradicate the remnants of local militants and insurgents, to train and strengthen the local security forces, and to leave once democracy takes root? Sounds an awful lot like another country in the news.

We have been there since 2001. What have we been doing till now, that while it cannot be finished by February, will be done in two more years? We cannot remain there indefinitely, everyone agrees. The government of Canada should provide a timetable to Members of Parliament as to what the military has accomplished so far and what we hope to do in two years, as well as what will be our benchmark for exiting the country.

We cannot just say "we have to be there until the job is done". How do we measure if the 'job' is 'done'? What are the benchmarks, the qualifiers, the indicators that our job is being done?

The Liberal Party of Canada should not vote to extend the mission for two years carte blanche. We should extend it for a year only, and another year provisionally. We cannot be in Afghanistan for 'decades'.

UPDATE: Joe Volpe is the first to officially state his views on our Afghan mission. (h/t: TLLC)

Tags: Afghanistan Canada

Discussing Joe Volpe

I have been following the reports of the LPC(O) AGM on Liblogs, as well as reading up on Cerberus's blogger endorsements of the various candidates. At this stage, I am not ready to commit to anyone, but will probably decide near the end who to vote for (or whose delegate to vote for). No one has yet given very specific policies they would like to implement, so it is tough to judge.

Let me talk about Joe Volpe. While he was Minister of Citizenship and Immigration for Canada, he did one very good thing. He tabled legislation that allowed international students to work anywhere in Canada (not just their campuses) while they were students, and eased the path to their working in Canada after graduation, provided they stay away from the big cities.

He didn't have to do this. International students don't vote and are a cash cow for universities. I had a few friends who were international students, and I can tell you that obtaining money for tuition was always a concern. Many had to work under the table (gas stations, bus boys etc. for $4/hr). This law helped fight those illegal jobs, genuinely helped students (which in turn helps universities) and provided a way for Canada to harvest the talents of the brightest of them. The law was common sense, yet such a law had not been passed before. Besides, targetting smaller cities helped spread the wealth (and congestion) away from Toronto, Vancouver and Montreal.

Why am I wary of him?

"We don't need to re-invent the Party. We just need to give it back to the people who are its rightful owners. We need to take it back from the backroom players who hide behind new faces." - from his website.

Yet according to Carolyn Parrish, ex-Liberal MP, on CTS a few days back, it was Mr. Volpe who campaigned to not allow her back into the party, who was a core Martinite, and who was always a key player behind the scenes. I don't know if that is true, but I remember another incident about Mr. Volpe.

He was asked, on a visit to our mosque, by a young kid whose father was held by the government of Canada for years without a trial, on a security certificate. He detailed his life without his father, and asked Mr. Volpe when he could see his father again, and why Canada does not charge him or let him go. As Minister of Citizenship and Immigration, I felt Mr. Volpe had no answer.

Darfur Rally At Queen's Park

I had to come downtown yesterday, and on my way back I walked by Queen's Park, where a large gathering was rallying to decry the 'genocide' at Darfur. Led by turncoat MP David Kilgour, many in the crowd urged the government to stop what he called the "21st century's first genocide".

As it is when I attend rallies, I observe the makeup of the crowd. Last year's anti-Sharia rallies contained few Muslims who were concerned about their rights being falsely interpreted by some culturally biased clerics, and was primarily, to what appeared to me, led by Iranian pro-Shah monarchists. Even though I did not want Sharia in Canada, for the reasons I wrote in the blogpost, none of that was discussed, rather, the crowd (with a few 'confused' NDP-ers), I thought, were most intent on bashing Islam and Muslims.

This year, the same can be said about the Darfur rally. With a few exceptions (notably some of the speakers who lost their loved ones in the conflict), the crowd was anglo, young, and probably had no deeper understanding of the conflict than what was mentioned in the national media.

"It's the Arabs," one latte-sipping student sporting a hippie look told me. "They are killing the native Sudanese. It's like Bosnia."

I see. Where did the Arabs come from, I asked him. He didn't know. Another said the minority Arabs formed the government and were killing the Christian black majority.

Never mind its Muslim-on-Muslim violence, Arab-on-Arab violence, black-on-black violence. Most people never heard of Sudan before. They won't know where Darfur is in Sudan. All they want is the Canadian army there to do 'something'. To go where we are not wanted to do what we are not meant to do and to pick sides in a conflict we don't have a stake in.

To read an 'Arab' take on the situation, read Abu Sinan.

My position: we must strongly encourage the local and neighbouring countries (including Gulf and other Muslim countries) to send their troops in and try to mediate the dispute. We can put some social programs to support a few refugees. But when Mr. Harper is cutting our social programs and environmental programs to pay for tax cuts, we cannot fund any more unnecessary foreign military adventures.

Tags: Sudan Darfur Canada