Archive

Posts Tagged ‘Canadian government’

Nothing Changes Exclutionary Politics To Continue Under Newly Elected Conservative Party Leader Andrew Sheer


The Conservative Party of Canada’s leadership race has been decided. Andrew Sheer edged out perceived front-runner Maxime Bernier. A vote for  Maxime Bernier was considered to be a vote for change and 49.05% of Conservatives members voted for that change.  A vote Andrew Sheer was considered a vote for a softer approach and sell to the Harper vision of Conservatism, 50.95% of Conservative membership voted for that option.

What this means is that:

  • nothing will change of any substance in Conservative Party policy, or vision except the delivery;
  • at the end of the day this party will be the same anti Muslim immigration party it was under Stephen Harper’s Party;
  • the Conservative Party remains the same ideologically driven party that it was under the leadership of Stephen Harper;
  • there is a lot of Conservative members that are not onside with Andrew Sheer.

With the exception of two candidates those who vied for the leadership of the Conservative Party of Canada were the same people who:

  • failed to get one pipeline approved in the USA;
  • failed to get the soft wood lumber issue settled even though Canada won its case in court;
  • forced workers back to work with legislation, giving the workers less in terms of what they were seeking than what they were offered in arbitration;
  • suspended diplomatic relations with Iran, expelling Iranian its diplomats from Canada overnight for no apparent justifiable reason;
  • threatened to cut off aid to the Palestinians if they attempted to take Israel to court over alleged war crimes and crimes against humanity;
  • attempted to sell Canadian foreign aid for future trade considerations;
  • closed veteran’s hospitals all over the country;
  •   shut down veteran’s affairs offices all over the country;
  • refused to talk to veterans and the families of veterans;
  • refused to talk to veterans and First Nations and gagged Canadian scientists;
  • cared so little about the safety of the men and women who serve in our military that they removed life saving features from the contract with Sikorsky to build Canada’s Maritime Military Helicopter (The 30-minute run-dry capability.  The ability to secure the helicopter’s ramp in various positions during flight. Crew comfort systems during extreme temperature operations. Unobstructed hand and foot holds for technicians to conduct maintenance.  The ability to self-start in very cold weather. – Cockpit ergonomics factors.  A system to automatically deploy personnel life rafts in emergency situations.);
  • were responsible for the F-35 fighter Jet, Chinook, 7.6B Cyclone Maritime Helicopter, close combat vehicle fiascos;
  • prorogued parliament four times and shut down debate at least 100 times, both more than any other government in Canadian history;
  • supported a Prime minister of Canada who refused to take part in first ministers conferences.(This means that Stephen Harper, refused to talk directly to the leaders of the provinces and territories about the concerns and needs of their provinces face to face);
  • who agreed with Prime Minister Harper when he referred to real Canadians as those Canadians who share European culture, heritage, values and religion.

The Conservative Party of Canada is the same old tired Conservative Party promoting the same old divisive and racist policies.  Andrew Sheer while waiting for the next election will:

  • spew hate filled rhetoric  and  visceral with a smile instead of a frown;
  • crack down on freedom of expression, religion, and rights guaranteed to all Canadians under the Canadian Constitution and Charter of Rights and Freedoms, with a smile instead of a frown;
  • talk about what he feels are Trudeau’s bad policies and decisions, instead of promoting and declaring his parties own position and policies.
  • knock his positive approach to things, while promoting negativity, pessimism and fear of what the future holds
  • knock Trudeau’s charisma, to try to make his boring self look good.

When Stephen Harper became the leader of the Conservative Party of Canada the party advisors tried very hard to make him look approachable. He was made to serve at BBQ’s, scheduled to do more televised interviews. At the end of the day Harper could only look like what he was a cold calculating person, whose main goal politically was to literally remove the Liberal Party and all that it had accomplished from the face of Canadian politics. In the federal election of 2015 it became clear that Canadians had enough of Stephen Harper’s dictatorship like style of governance. The anyone but Stephen Harper campaign not only denied Stephen Harper his political priority, but swept Justin Trudeau into office with a majority government. Was electing a Stephen Harper clone a wise move with just two years to go until the next federal election?

I do not think that Andrew Sheer is going to fool anyone outside of his base supporters and party members with his smile that the federal Conservative Party has changed, or grown, anymore than Stephen Harper did serving burgers.   A leopard cannot change his spots and even if it were possible just this once, they did not even try.

  • Andrew Sheer will have a hard way to go trying to keep his party together as the divides are great. immigration, abortion, gay rights, back bencher inclusion are all sticking points.
  • Andrew Sheer is as boring as Justin Trudeau is charismatic.
  • Andrew share wants to continue with old policies that cost the Conservatives the last federal election.
  • Andrew Sheer is predictable.

If the purpose of choosing a new leader was to convince Canadians that:

  • this was a fresh thinking political party, they have failed;
  • they now had a leader that defeat Justin Trudeau in 2019,they have failed;
  • they are still the same old arrogant, out of touch with Canadians party that cost them the last election, they have succeeded.

Defeating ISIL Will Be A Hollow Victory Indeed, If The Price To Be Paid Is The Loss Of Canada’s Democracy Or Worse At Its Own Hand


me.jpg2In Canada being ignorant of the law is no excuse for breaking it.  This rule applies to all Canadians including the government.  This means that if you break a law that you do not know about this will not stop you from being arrested for said crime, because it your duty as a Canadian citizen to keep reasonably informed and up to date about the laws that you live under. If you are planning to do something in business for example and you are not sure of the laws governing the legality of you are considering, you are required to seek out professional legal advice to ensure that you are not in violation of any laws of Canada before you begin whatever venture you are considering getting involved in. So I would ask what is up Canada with this strong, stable majority Conservative government’s inability to understand either Canadian or international law, or their out right refusal to adhere to either one?

I ask this  because in my opinion the Conservative Party of Canada which has a majority government and holds a majority in the senate believes that neither body of laws applies to them.  They have repeatedly forced through laws that will not pass constitutional mustard, because they violate the both the international safe guarded rights of all citizens of the world as well as the constitutional rights of  all Canadians. These court battles not only represent billions of wasted tax payer wasted dollars that could be avoided if the government first sought out and then took some legal advice before ramming legislation through parliament and into law, but also highlights their view that their majority status puts them above the laws of Canada and in fact entitles them to disregard it totally and change it according to their whim. Of course this attitude and method of creating policy has seen a record number of their new laws and changes to Canada’s old laws  stricken down on appeal to the Supreme court of Canada and also in the courts below it. Since there are a staggering amount of cases in which this has happened to this majority Conservative Party of Canada government, I will just offer these few examples of the latest in a string of key legal defeats for the government:

  1. The Federal Court of Canada ruled that cuts to health care for rejected refugee claimants were “cruel and unusual.” and gave the government four months to reverse the changes introduced in 2012.
  2. June: Supreme Court upholds privacy rights, ruling that internet service providers must not disclose names, addresses and phone numbers of their customers to law enforcement officials without a warrant. This expected to force the government to change bills on cyber bullying (C-13) and digital privacy (S-4) currently before Parliament.
  3. April: In a unanimous ruling, the high court affirmed that offenders can receive extra credit for time spent in custody before they are sentenced, a blow against the government’s Truth in Sentencing Act, which attempted to curb the practice by allowing it only in “exceptional” circumstances. The ruling, which was precedent-setting but did not strike down the law, gave judges the right to apply the extra credit for time served but did not reject the government’s limit of a 1.5 credit.
  4. March: March:  The Supreme Court strikes down section 10(1) of the Abolition of Early Parole Act, which tried to retroactively abolish accelerated parole for offenders who had already been sentenced as a violation of the offenders’ charter rights.
  5. September 2011: The Supreme Court ordered the federal minister of health to grant a Vancouver supervised injection clinic an exemption under Canada’s drug laws so it can remain open. The ruling gave the minister discretion to approve or deny future requests for exemptions, but required the government to balance public safety and charter rights when making the decision.

Is it so hard to believe that Canadians who used to believe that the idea of “democracy” and the phrase, “rule of law” really meant something are now becoming cynical of both and see neither really applying to the governance they are receiving from this government of Canada? Unfortunately in today’s Canada it would seem that the present government feels that the rules, principles and spirit of democracy can be sidestepped, ignored and rendered moot simply by their creation of new legislation. I believe that when a government continually rams through legislation that is constantly in violation of its citizens constitution and charter rights as this government is constantly trying to do that  it is guilty of leading its country away from it being able to lay claim to being  a democratically governed and a law-abiding country, because it is not enough to simply declare to be, a nation must also demonstrate their democracy and rule of law through its actions and treatment of every citizen equally and without prejudice. These are a few of the things that concern me and have me beginning to wonder if  Canada’s boast of being a supporter of democracy, human, civil and religious rights are still true:

  1. This government’s chipping and stripping away of more and more of our rights and freedoms that are the corner stones of Canadian democracy.
  2. This government’s mocking of  our democratic processes with its altering of the Canadian law with its creation of its “ministry of democratic reform.” I believe that this ministry was created by this party to change existing Canadian law that made the governments  continued violations of Canada’s election laws (which were  landing them in hot water). Instead of seeking all party consensus this government did as it has done on so many other occasions and simply rammed the legislation into law, by virtue of the majority they hold in all committees. (senate and parliamentary) The Canada Election Act of old was put in place to ensure fair elections for all political parties; this is not the case with the changes the Conservative Party of Canada has forced into law with their strop, stable majority government.
  3. This Conservative Party of Canada majority  government uses its majority  to force closure and shut down debate using time allocation at least 75 times in this parliament alone.
  4. I see this Conservative Party of Canada majority government refuse to consider and adopt even one amendment from any opposition party into any of their legislation.
  5. I see this Conservative Party of Canada use its majority to make irrelevant and fire the heads of parliamentary oversight agencies like, the head of Elections Canada, the Parliamentary Budget Officer, The Privacy Commissioner, the Auditor General of Canada, just to name a few for doing their jobs.
  6. I see this government refuse to be transparent on anything that it is trying to accomplish, even withholding the cost of the war to degrade and eventually defeat ISIL which we as Canadians are paying for and have a right to know, but something that our allies freely given to their citizens and I great detail.
  7. I see the government passing laws that ask judges who are supposed to uphold the constitutional rights of all Canadians to ignore them if they are to by the police  the RCMP or CSIS

Some would argue that in  order to protect ourselves from terrorist attacks and the loss our, values, religion as well rights and freedoms that we must we must be willing to pay the price for this protection, namely:

  • Some loss of our right to privacy.
  • Some loss of legal rights for example (a)the right of an accused to face one’s accuser, (b)the right to have a judge examine all of the evidence of a case before him or her and decide on its merit and its legality and (c)the right to know that the judge has not allowed for the violation of you civil, human, Canadian Charter or constitutional rights.

I would suggest however that if the price of victory over ISIS is the loss of our rights and freedoms guaranteed us under the Canadian Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms and all international act and treaties that Canada is supposed to be a willing participant in, then the price tag is too high. What good is there for Canadians if in saving Iraq from ISIL for instance and bringing democracy of a sort to that region for another we have to violate and ignore the fundamental principles of our own democracy? These principles that this majority Conservative government of Canada are doing an end run around  are the core values that comprise the very bedrock that supports and allows for our way of life for any governing party in Canada to try to do away with any of this core is to make us the same as any other people governed by a dictatorship, or authoritarian regime.

Canadians are allowing the Conservative Party of Canada to capitalize on the fear they are guilty of inciting in this country.  I believe that the Conservative Party of Canada has nothing against Muslims and could careless about the plight of Jews or Israelis whether in Canada, Israel or anywhere else in the world; both of these groups are just a means to a political end for the Conservative Party of Canada. I believe that the Conservative Party of Canada has and is still exploiting those fears to such a dangerous level. Canadians are suspicious  and leery of other Canadians and  so divided that the majority of Canadians are willingly being led down the slippery slope of  going along with things that we know are racist, non democratic and in fact have a lot in common with those of Adolf Hitler’s Germany and Joseph Stalin’s Russia.

Since the war on terror began after 9/11 I feel that it is us who call ourselves the civilised nations who have become more like the terrorist we claim we are fighting rather than they becoming more like us.  We are more like them than they have been made to be like us, for instance:

  • The RCMP,CSIS and the police will soon be able to  legally pick up a Canadian citizen and hold said person in a secret location for 7 days without charge, on the suspicion that they may be going to commit a terrorist act at sometime not known and somewhere not known against some one or some thing, again unknown. Does this not sound like what happens in those regimes that we are supposed to be trying to change and the others as strong or stronger than us militarily that we very vocally criticize?
  • The RCMP, CSIS and the police will now be able to spy on Canadian citizens, take down whatever they believe not posted in the best interest of the country without the knowledge of said citizen.  This to me smacks of anti freedom of speech and expression the, like we see in China and Russia for example where the state controls what is seen publicly and what is okay to express publicly.

ISIL, Boko Haram, al-Qaeda and all the other organizations referred to as barbaric terrorist organisations do commit atrocities against women like kidnapping them and forcing them into marriages and the like, but these atrocities that I agree are despicable and need to be stopped unfortunately are all that separates them from the America led coalition, including Canada, this is what I mean:

  1. Both sides do violent, deplorable things to their captives  in order to extract information, or for some other advantage from them and both side have killed their captives.  ISIL out in the open and bragging and the American led coalition in secret and denying everything like in Guantanamo Bay.
  2. Both side knowingly target innocent civilians and consider their deaths and suffering as collateral damage again one side openly acknowledging and even bragging about and the other denying they do it at all.
  3. Both side say that they are right and are being threatened by the other and are only defending themselves and their very existence.
  4. Both sides now believe that it is okay to enter and cause war in a sovereign country without legal grounds. Although the prime minister and Jason Kenney  seem to believe that it is unlikely that Canada will be taken to court over violating international laws and that it is okay to do because the USA has been ding it for months without legally being  challenge by any international body where crossing over into to Syria to wage war on ISIL is concerned, does not make what Canada is doing legal, it simply puts them in the same illegal place as the terrorists they seek to degrade and defeat.(defiantly refusing to abide international law that gets in their way of accomplishing the political agenda)

What a hollow victory we Canadians will have won if we must lose all of what makes us Canadians to win the mission to degrade and hopefully defeat ISIL.

The Most Used Tools In Stephen Harper’s Toolbox Are The Words Terrorism, Terrorist Threat, Islamic Jihadists And Radicalized Canadians


Stephen Harper Rebuilding Canada

Stephen Harper Rebuilding Canada

The most used tools in Stephen Harper’s  toolbox are the words radicalized Canadians,  terrorist threat, terrorist, Islamic Jihadists and terrorism.  Under the guise of keeping Canada and Canadians safe Canada’s elected MPs  are being treated by this Conservative Party of Canada as though they could be potential sleeper spies, not to be trusted with anything related to the security and well-being of this country and its people, simply for being in opposition parties and only possible because the Conservatives are in power with a majority government. Stephen Harper and his Conservative Party of Canada have made it clear that they will not share anything that they consider sensitive information with all parliamentarians whether it is about  Canada’s finances, environment, or security and it forces me to ask what is up Canada?

Opposition MPs are Canadians  who were voted into office by other Canadians to represent them, make known their concerns and needs and give those Canadians access to decisions being made that will shape Canada for both them, their children, grandchildren and so on.  If these MPs of the opposition parties are being deemed untrustworthy and therefore not able to be a part of the decision-making process, does it not follow that the Conservative Party of Canada’s made in Canada version of democracy :

  1.  Becomes a sham, no longer representative of all Canadians, but representative of only the Canadians that voted for them?
  2. Becomes a dictatorship which seeks no consensus?
  3. In an effort to keep Canada’s population in line as their decent grows, public disobedience increases and protests get ugly will Turn Canada into a police state giving unlimited power to secret police, to spy on, arrest, detain and imprison any Canadian, because all  Canadians are now deemed  potential threats?

Stephen Harper and his Conservative Party of Canada say that they are adopting a Made In Canada Solution” to handle such issues as immigration, job creation, environmental issues, health and welfare, the economy, national security, just to name a few, but have you noticed that in all instances the Made In Canada Solution” approach this government is talking about means:

  1. That very little meaningful information will be shared with other parliamentarians, government watch dogs like the Parliamentary Budget Office, or Auditor General and even less for the ordinary Canadians?
  2. That all to often  are not only out of step with other Westminster type parliamentary governance, but also out of step with our closest neighbor and ally the United States of America?
  3. Canada is reneging on it international treaties, agreements and protocols that Canada has signed onto.

Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada with their fear mongering have forced Canadians to  become a people afraid of everything both real and imagined, because Stephen Harper wishes:

  1. To pass himself of as some great war-time leader; the only person capable of keeping Canada and Canadians safe;  capitalizing politically on the divisiveness that his fear mongering is responsible for creating.
  2. To remove the rights and freedoms of all Canadians that he and his Conservative Party of Canada decide get in the way of a government governing; Stephen Harper believes that the Canadian Constitution, The Canadian Charter of Rights and any institutions, or agencies that are in place to protect the rights and freedoms enjoyed  equally by all Canadians represent needless, “Red Tape”.
  3. Forever remove by legislation the need for Canadians to be part of Canada’s democratic process and governance by reducing their participation/ role to that of merely voting for who gets the opportunity to run decide things for them for a predetermined amount of time, so that the population works hard to guarantee their leader and their party a majority so that he/ she can make decisions that keep Canada and Canadians safe without interference from those who think differently and are different and therefore “Not real Canadians”.

What I am getting at is that Stephen Harper’s “Made In Canada Solutions” are taking Canada and Canadians further and further away from the fundamental principles and practices of democratic governance, due process of the law and equal justice for all, making Canada look more politically like the non democratic, oppressive regimes Canada claims to be trying to convert to democracy with all of its implied rights and freedoms.

  • With the creation of  the Conservative Party of Canada’s  Democratic  Reform Ministry, the Harper government let Canadians know that they thought that Canadian democracy  was  not functioning as it should. Minister of Democratic Reform Pierre Poilievre and his party  unilaterally  decided that not all eligible Canadians that were eligible to vote, needed to vote and enacted laws designed to make voting for certain Canadians citizens as challenging as possible. Pierre Poilievre accomplished his mission  by changing what used to be considered acceptable identification needed as  proof of residency, before voting to no longer being acceptable and with one vote of their majority government the Conservative Party of Canada had taken away the right to vote for over 50,000 Canadian citizens among which are (a) those in poverty and living literally on the street, (b) the elderly living in nursing homes unable to venture out and (c) those who were waiting to receive identification from the government due to theft, or loss, just to name a few.
  • With the creation of the Conservative Party of Canada’s Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Ministry,  Stephen Harper was able to enact laws to restrict the traveling of Canadian Muslims, or rid Canada of Muslims his government did not like. Steven Blaney,  Minister of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness accomplished his mission by
  1. Using the authority granted to him unilaterally by his majority  government to create and enact laws to remove a  Canadian Muslim’s Passport while they are still in Canada, or are abroad, intentionally  stranding them in another country.  If you were a Canadian Muslim knowing how the government of the day feels about Muslims would you feel safe to visit your family in your country of origin, send money home to help support them as many Christians and Jews do every day, knowing that your actions could be misconstrued as aiding  and supporting terrorist activity which could result in your   Canadian passport being invalidated without notice and without the opportunity to return to Canada and defend yourself in a court of law, as in the case of  Imam Ali Sbeiti? I contend that to remove a person’s passport, while they are out of the country without notification before hand amounts to deportation without due process that may very well violate their constitutional rights and freedoms, but more importantly in my opinion is a mean-spirited cowardly action, not representative of  the Canadian values, spirit and high morality that I know of this country and people.
  2. Using the authority granted to him unilaterally by his majority  government to create and enact laws to make it legal for those in law enforcement and security to arrest and detain without proof, without charge or due process of law any person they or any other citizen in Canada or anywhere else in the world thought might be plotting, or considered likely to commit a terrorist act. then if they do decide to charge you with a crime under the terrorist act is it not reassuring to know that it will all be done in secret and that no one will ever see the evidence of those who accused you, definitely not your lawyer or the e presiding judge?  Now I might be crazy, but that sounds like being whisked away in the middle of the night by some Gestapo type secret police and a lot like the actions of other governments this Harper government and its allies  denounce.

Canadians have become so confused by all of the fear mongering that is going on that they cannot see that this government is not only out to restrict the rights of certain Canadians that they are deeming to be terrorist threats, but are in reality systematically chipping away  most of the rights and freedoms that all Canadians used to take for granted.  This was always their ultimate goal, made easier for them to do, because the threat of terrorism, terrorist threats  and Canadians becoming radicalized has most Canadians willing to give up their rights for the security and the protection that the government promises them in return. The Harper government is making Canadians a promise it has no intention of ever making good on, because stopping terrorism is not even a real part of the Harper government agenda. The terrorist threat is just another tool in  Stephen Harper’s tool box, that  he and his party use to get Canadians to comply with their real agenda, which is to put all of the power in the hands of the government, without the need to answer to oversight bodies of any kind, be they parliamentary, or judicial.

Does it not makes sense that if this government really wanted to end terrorism and erase the threat of terrorist acts  then they would  be willing to look at the root causes of terrorism and work at trying to find  peaceful solutions to ending terrorism rather than dropping bombs on who they deem terrorists, giving them more reasons to hate and kill and closing of diplomatic channels that would have them heard?

I contend that this government is using its own form of terrorism on the Canadian people. the Harper government are keeping Canadians so scared that they are willing to do anything and give up anything in order to be able to feel safe. The price demanded of every Canadian to feel  safe in their  own country by Stephen Harper and his Conservative Party of Canada is that every Canadian willingly give up  the rights and freedoms guaranteed to them in the Canadian Constitution and the  Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms.

Consider this: If the Harper government along with all its allies really ended terrorism, or the terrorist threat, how would they get their citizens to willingly give up their rights and freedoms and join the New World Order? The government of Canada under the governance of Stephen Harper will never give up such a valuable tool as the Terrorist Threat / Terrorism.

Eve Adams Too Blonde And Too Pretty To Be Taken Seriously In Politics, Infer Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj And Kady O’Malley


Eve Adams Too Blonde And Too Pretty To Be Taken Seriously In Politics Say Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj And Kady O'Malley

Eve Adams Too Blonde And Too Pretty To Be Taken Seriously In Politics, Infer Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj And Kady O’Malley

c557919c9244d4cb9576e67236544003Is it any wonder that women do not run for political office in numbers that would be expected in Canada, or get the cabinet positions that they deserve based on their experience and merit when influential women like Althia Raj, (the Huffington Post Canada’s, Ottawa bureau chief) cover stories like Eve Adams crossing the floor the way she and other female journalists did on CBC’s, “Power and Politics” ? Althia Raj’s comments have been the most sexist and chauvinistic that I have heard to date and she has repeated them on every occasion she gets over the last 4 days with other panellist either:

  1. Rolling their eyes and grimacing
  2. Emboldening the Eve Adams hating males on the program to follow suit.

You would have thought that Eve Adams was the 1st elected politician to cross the floor and that it was somehow made worst by the fact that she was a blonde, easy to look at female by the way  Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj and Kady O’Malley  cynically attacked Eve Adams’s credentials. In my opinion their combined insistence that the only reason she got her job in the 1st place was because of who she was sleeping with was such  a throw back and discredit to the advances of the female in politics, in the workplace and in women’s rights in general, that I thought it rich that they kept referring to her lack of  commitment to women’s rights issues, eluding to her voting record, while in the Harper government. I watched as guest moderator of  CBC’s Power and Politics’ Rosemary Barton not only permitted, but joined Althia Raj and Kady O’Malley  when they decided to whip out their hidden penises, disregard all of Eve Adams’s hard work for over 25 years in politics and make some very sexist and chauvinistic references, inferring that:

  1. Eve Adams was only looked at as an MP by the Progressive Conservative Party, because of the relationship with her partner  Dimitri Soudas.
  2. Eve Adams was only looked at as having any value to the Liberal Party of Canada because of her relationship with her partner Dimitri Soudas.
  3. If Eve Adams was not blonde and cute that no one would even be covering the story of Eve Adams’s defection.

The  comments of  Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj and Kady O’Malley did little to shed any meaningful insight to the pros and cons of Eve Adams  crossing the floor, but instead reminded me of my time in  high school where there were always a group of not so popular girls plotting to take the prettiest girls in the school down a peg by spreading unflattering roomers about them, or labeling all of the cheer leaders as sluts having sex with all of the jocks, and all blonde girls as dumb and ditzy, whose only  chance at finding happiness, respectability  and success in their life after high school  would be to go to college and university and find and marry a successful man.

I personally do not like the past politics of Eve Adams and in her case with her long standing vocal support of Stephen Harper, his method of governing and for his policies. My cynical side makes me think of the old adage about the leopard not being able to change it’s spots, but even  at my most mean spirited moment; my most sexist moment; my most swaggering chauvinistic moment would I suggest that Eve Adams’s advancement in politics and with the Conservative Party of Canada had anything to do with her looks, or who she was sleeping with, because there is absolutely no evidence of that.

I do not think that Eve Adams will be able to convince many people that it is possible for her to stop believing in what she professed was good for all Canadians and Canada over the last 25 years overnight and even if she could, how could Canadians believe that she would not change again over night.  What I am getting at is that Eve Adams does have a credibility issue, but it is not her looks, her credentials, or who she chooses to sleep with; it is can the voters in  the GTA riding she hopes to represent in the 2015 federal election as a Liberal MP, believe what Eve Adams says she believes in  today will be the same for the foreseeable future; in other words can they trust Eve Adams to know what it is she believes in.”  That being said I do not see how sitting as a back bencher in the Harper government could be said to be doing your job for your constituents either.

No one on any current event program that I have watched has tried to even answer the question, or seems to care why a 25 year staunch conservative party member suddenly chose to leave the party she has worked for and supported since the age of 14. I am not surprised when I hear men refer to a women’s looks, sexuality as having gotten her to where she is, but in this day and age to hear that type of talk from respected, highly educated women, who would call themselves progressive and feminist, such as Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj and Kady O’Malley was truly a shock and a step back for journalistic integrity and responsible journalism. I would suggest that Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj and Kady O’Malley all retake  journalism 101, and seriously revisit why they became reporters and if they should be trusted by Canadians to relate what is happening politically in this country.

I wonder what these ladies have had to do to advance their personal careers that makes them so cynical and ready to believe that this is the only way that a woman can realise success in todays world? The fact that Eve Adams was still parliamentary secretary to the  minister of health  and making major spending announcements on behalf of the Conservative Party of Canada right up to the time of her defections announcement meant little to the 3 amigos, who ignored that question contented with the opportunity to bash Eve Adams, and  fixate on the future job prospects of Dimitri Soudas within the Liberal Party of Canada.

I think that it is also time for CBC to come to grips with the fact that encouraging their reporters to put their personality into their reporting of the news is leading to news coverage that is slanted and bias.  Every current events news program has color analysts on a panel, giving what is supposed to be their opinion based on the facts as they see them, but usually end up with everyone talking over the other trying to score political points for their party of choice. this inability to control the other panellists and keep the debate intelligent is something Rosemary Barton finds funny judging from her comments.  So now the host or moderator and the panellists for CBC’s current event shows are all giving their personal slanted often emotionally charged views on air, that at the end of the day forces  us the viewers  to listen to an hour of what amounts to political campaigning with all of its attack ad mentality, political spin and rhetoric, instead of factual, non bias news reporting. I wonder if there is any is any monetary, professional, or any other kind incentive paid to these color annalists by the political parties they fight so hard to  put in a good light? I wonder what is the going price is to get a spokesperson/attack dog reporter the likes of a Rosemary Barton, Althia Raj, or Kady O’Malley to cross the floor of journalistic integrity to the side of bias reporting?

Does Justin Trudeau’s Honesty, Transparency And Willingness To Listen To Others Make up For His Lack Of Experience?


c557919c9244d4cb9576e67236544003What is up Canada, does Justin Trudeau’s honesty, transparency and willingness to listen to others make up for his lack of experience, appears to be the question leading up to which leader we will vote in 2015? We as Canadians have  a lot of evidence to show us what politicians with a lot of political experience are capable of doing for Canada and to Canadians.  All Canadians have to do is look at the leader of the governing party Stephen Harper and the leader of the official opposition party Thomas Mulcair to see the proof that experience in a leader for a country is not all that needs to be looked for when choosing a country’s leader.  In the case of both Harper and Mulcair it becomes painfully obvious that all they bring to the table is experience in politics that is bad the country and the people they are supposed to be serving.  I believe that if as in the case of Harper and Mulcair that their political experience  gets in the way of them remembering that although they have been elected to govern the country, that they are still the servants of their people then they and not dictators, or sovereigns then I think that having political experience means nothing good for the country.  Harper’s and Mulcair’s political experience seems to cause them to:

  1. Close their minds and hearts to the feelings of others.
  2.  Feel that they have all of the answers and know what is best for everyone without having to ask them.
  3. Feel they have no need to consult with experts, take advice, or ask the opinion of others and honestly seek consensus.

It is these things that tell me that for all of their political experience Stephen Harper  and Thomas Mulcair have become a bad thing for democracy, this country and its people.

Stephen Harper, Thomas Mulcair   and a majority of Canadians consider Justin Trudeau the politician to beat in the 2015 federal election, despite what Harper and Mulcair are saying about his lack of political experience.  Both leaders are trying to persuade the non committed voter to vote for them and not Justin Trudeau, because they see Trudeau as being too young, too rich and too politically inexperienced to deal with all of the problems that they the more experienced politicians have gotten this country into and vow to continue to get us into if re-elected, or elected in 2015.

 Understand that Stephen Harper and Thomas Mulcair are not that far apart when it comes to gas fracking, pipelines, decriminalization of marijuana, or how to deal with the Middle East conflict.   I get a sense that Canadians are not all that thrilled with what politicians have been saying and doing in terms of governing this country and are looking for a leader who is not already corrupted by years of political experience and who stills believes it is their duty to Canadians to:

  •  End tragedies plaguing this country like child poverty, communities with no drinkable water, homelessness etc..
  • Be open, transparent and honest when addressing the concerns of all Canadians.
  • Give all Canadians cause to hope  and work with us to help us turn our dreams into realities.

Stephen Harper and his government are  experienced at embarrassing Canadians with  political scandals.

  1. Shoe Store Project – 2007 – Prime Minister’s Office under Stephen Harper plans $2 million, government-controlled media centre to replace current National Press Theatre (which is run by press gallery staff, instead of those from the PMO).
  2. Julie Couillard scandal – 2007 – Conservative Foreign Minister Maxime Bernier resigned after leaving sensitive NATO documents in the home of Julie Couillard, an ex-girlfriend with links to the Hells Angels biker gang
  3. In and Out scandal – 2007 – alleged circumvention of election finance rules by the Conservatives in the 2006 election campaign.
  4. First Prorogation – 2008 – prorogued government to avoid a non-confidence vote.
  5. Afghan Detainees Inquiry or Prorogation 2 – 2010 – prorogued government a second time claiming it was for the Olympics to avoid inquiry into the maltreatment of Afghan detainees. Harper was found to be in Contempt of Parliament for refusing to share information. The first time in Canadian history.
  6. Robocall scandal – 2012 – Allegations of widespread voter fraud occurring during the 2011 Canadian federal election. Robotic and live calls to voters are claimed to have been made in 38 ridings. Currently under investigation by the RCMP and Elections Canada.
  7. The ETS Scandal – An ongoing Canadian political scandal involving alleged wrongdoing by Canadian government officials in the award of a $400-million information technology services contract and allegations of political interference in the ensuing cover-up.
  8. F-35 Fighter Jet Scandal – 2012 – Involved misleading costs of F-35 Fighter Jets to replace former CF18s.
  9. CFIA Scandal – 2012 – is an ongoing scandal involving food inspection services being insufficient to the Canadian public this comes after the budget cuts to Canadian Food Inspection Agency and the temporary closure of XL Meats due to a widespread E-coli outbreak in Alberta.
  10. Canadian Senate expenses scandal – 2012 – An ongoing investigation concerning the expense claims of certain Canadian senators which began in late 2012. Senators Mike Duffy, Pamela Wallin, and Patrick Brazeau claimed travel and housing expenses from the Senate for which they were not eligible.
  11. Nutrition North Program scandal, that has elders eating out of the garbage, because the subsidy program is not working and the prices of food is too high for them to afford.

I will stop here because I think that my point is made that sometimes the experience of our politicians is not always a good thing and often just leaves them, more arrogant, more cynical and more adept at misleading us the voter and more likely to willing do so and feel justified in doing so when caught.

 Stephen Harper is experienced at breaking records set by other governments that were not good for democracy, the country, or its people:

  1. The amount of times that they have used prorogation to allow his government not to answer difficult questions.
  2. Imposed time allocation to shut down debates in the house of commons.
  3. The amount of times that they have used omnibus budget bills to make the total content of the bill impossible to be looked at in-depth and to avoid having the things that have nothing to do with the budget to be scrutinised in their proper  committees and by the committee members of the opposition parties whose expertise is in those matters and made for a meaningful debate.

In my opinion  since The New Democratic Party of Canada made  Thomas Mulcair their leader the federal NDP has become more Autocratic than Democratic.

Since becoming the leader of the New Democratic Party of Canada, Thomas Mulcair has proven that his experience leads him to believe that the only way to win votes and elections is to be as arrogant, dishonest and as hypocritical as Stephen Harper. Thomas Mulcair with all of his so called political experience has lost just about all of the credibility that Jack Layton gained for the federal party, by abandoning the NDP’s principles and policies in his pursuit of power.

  1. Thomas Mulcair is supportive of Energy East, a raw bitumen export pipeline that will expand tar sands production 40% above the current rate of 2 million barrels per day – this flies in the face of NDP climate policy.
  2. Thomas Mulcair supports Kinder Morgan he states that with a better environmental assessment process Kinder Morgan would be OK. Kennedy Stewart’s petition only opposes the pipeline going through Burnaby.
  3. Every New Democratic Party MP voted in what had to be a whipped vote to support the Canada Korea free trade agreement. This went against NDP trade policy which opposes supporting any trade agreement with Investor State provisions.
  4. Thomas Mulcair is opposed to decriminalizing marijuana and has stated on national TV that he will not follow through with NDP policy to decriminalize.
  5. Thomas Mulcair supports gas fracking.

I guess Thomas Mulcair’s experience has told him that Canadians respond to American style of politics and in an effort to try to win election in 2015, he and his party faithful have personal attacks on the other party leaders as well as opposition MPs  rather than promoting what are his and their personal attributes that put him and them above the other leaders and MPs and worthy of getting our votes at election time. The NDP has wasted a lot of time and energy in the House of Commons in trying criticizing their opponents on topics devoid of fact, that appear to have nothing to do with the matter being debated. He like Harper has decided that the way to change how your party addresses certain sensitive political issues is to either force them out.

Hassainia, the MP for Verchères-Les Patriotes in Quebec said of Thomas Mulcair and the NDP one week after her resignation, “I didn’t resign only because of the party’s position on the Israeli attacks against Gaza, but  because Thomas Mulcair and the NDP are being dishonest  when they say that the Israelis are the oppressed in the present conflict.” I resigned also, because, the NDP no longer shared my values and by this I mean, “The NDP has one of the youngest caucuses in Canada, and it has the most women. We promote the value of work–family balance, but as soon as someone inside the party has to deal with both, as I had to, it’s less clear, especially when there’s no maternity leave.  We have to apply the policies that we defend internally as well.” Note: Hassainia is the fourth MP to quit the NDP caucus since the “orange wave” of 2011.  Lise Saint-Denis joined the Liberal Party, Claude Patry chose the Bloc Québécois and Bruce Hyer left to sit as an independent before joining the Green Party.

Thomas Mulcair experience seems to have also led him to believe as leader of the Official Opposition he and his party are above the law, jus like Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada.  Under his leadership Thomas Mulcair has allowed for political scandal to infest his party.

  1. Refusing to stop for the gate-keeper on Parliament Hill who was just doing his job.
  2. Refusing to stop for the  RCMP pursuing in their car signal lights flashing, trying to get him to pull over.
  3. Refusing to apologise to anyone for his actions and refusing to take responsibility for breaking the law.
  4. Guilty of causing his own members to resign from the party, dissatisfied with his dictatorial style of  leadership and where that style of leadership is taking the NDP as a political party.
  5. Guilty of approving the Satellite Offices Scheme which turned into the Satellite Office  Scandal.
  6. Guilty of approving the NDP mass mailings scandal, involving taxpayer dollars.
  7. Guilty of personally doing nothing to help 2 female MPs in his party, who alleged they were sexually harassed by 2 Liberal male MPS,  with the exception of whining about the actions taken by Justin Trudeau.
  8. Failing to stop the  2 female MPs in his own party scandal in which 2 female NDP MPS from publicly naming the 2 accused male Liberal MPs and giving graphic interviews of the events, while insisting  their right to remain anonymous, be kept.

In fairness Justin Trudeau does not have the experience of the other 2 politicians have and he is far from perfect, but I think that his lack of experience and imperfections are a breath of fresh air and will work in his favor, because

  1. The political process has not yet hardened his heart and mind against Canadians and he still feels that he is one of us; neither above or below us which translates to him relating and talking to Canadians, not at them.
  2. Justin Trudeau is hard to control by political machines, because he still feels  obligated to say what is on his mind and many people may not appreciate what it is he is saying, or perhaps may get offended by what comes out of his mouth sometimes, but he is not afraid to simply tell it like he sees it without a scripted pre-written response and everyone knows that what he says he means.
  3. Justin Trudeau proved with his actions during the senate scandal and the sexual harassment  that he does not feel that either his party , or himself are above the law and that once he is aware that laws are, or could have been broken that he is  not afraid to take action, own the problem and no matter the cost politically to him and his party try his best to do the right thing under the laws of this country, parliament and in the best interest of all Canadians.
  4. Justin Trudeau also refuse to use attack ads and follow the American style of politics, rather putting his reputation as an honest, hard-working person out there for all to judge instead.
  5. Justin Trudeau also feels that one should never shut down diplomacy and turn to violence to settle problems and that the more people you kill only creates more enemies and never makes for lasting friendships, or trusted partners.
  6. He is the only federal leader right now that is willing to state openly that he believes that to solve a problem like terrorism be it home-grown or foreign, requires that the root causes of what has upset these terrorists, must be understood and fixed, before they will see the value in peace.

I guess if you are the type of Canadian that likes to be lied to, treated like a child who does not know what is good for you and must be spied on, abused, told what to do and led around by the nose, then I guess that Stephen Harper and Thomas Mulcair with all of their experience doing that and a whole lot of other dictator like things is the way to go.  I for one like the fresh, honest, transparent face that Justin Trudeau brings to politics with his in experienced self and I am willing to have my feelings hurt just a little if that is the price for him saying truthfully how he feels in an open a spontaneous manner. Justin Trudeau’s mistakes are honest and human, unlike the other 2 leaders whose mistakes are not mistakes at all, but instead calculated, deliberate actions used to garner votes based such tactics being utilised in the past successfully to win votes. Stephen Harper and Thomas Mulcair’s political experience when confronted with wrong doing allow them to either lie, evade stand on their experience  in politics. Even when found guilty of the crime for which they were accused both of these leaders show little or no remorse, but instead cite case after case where their wrong doing has been used in the past by other experienced politicians successfully and without fear of punishment.

I think that Canadians are tired of what the old style of experienced politician is doing or not doing on our behalf and is ready to let the country be governed by a political party who has a leader who does not think that they have all of the answers and still sees others views, opinions and ideas as important and necessary to have before acting on their behalf; a person who really believes in not only the rules of democracy, but in the spirit of democracy as well.

Are Machine Guns For The RCMP, New Powers For Our Politicians, Police And Spies To Snoop, Or The More People We Kill The Answer To Canada’s Terrorism Problems?


c557919c9244d4cb9576e67236544003What is up Canada? Are machine guns for the RCMP, new powers for our politicians, police and spies to snoop on Canadians at home and while they are traveling, or the more people we kill, the answer to Canada’s Terrorism Problems?  Has anything that this government has done since they decided to join the USA in exacting its never-ending revenge on all the Islamic states in the world for the few Islamic extremist who ordered and carried out the attacks  in the USA on 9/11 helped to protect Canadians from terrorist threats and attacks in Canada, or abroad? I do not think so. Has anything that the USA led allies including Canada has done up to this point helped to reduce the number of terrorists, or terrorist attacks in the world, or has it all gotten a whole lot worse? I would say that for Canada it has gotten a whole lot worse since everything that happens of a violent nature is deemed to be a terrorist attack and in some way related to radicalization of a young Canadian into a Islamic terrorist group.    It is like the more power the government takes for itself, the better they arm the RCMP and the more snooping power they give to the police and our spies, the less Canadians are being protected. We are being asked in the name of  aiding in our own protection by this government and these protection agencies to give up our rights listed below and are getting nothing in return, because all of these things do not seek to solve the problem, but instead seek to mask the problem.

  • Right to have the police obtain a warrant before they start collecting information regarding our internet,  our cellphones, or anything else digital.
  • Right to have the police get a warrant before they search our homes and other private property from which they feel may contain evidence of a crime that has been committed or will be committed somewhere in the future.
  • Right to a fair and open trial based on evidence deemed relevant to the case by a judge, with evidence and witnesses that can be cross-examined and allow for ourselves to be able to be arrested without a warrant and to be judged by hearsay from witnesses that will no longer be identified and can not be cross-examined even by the presiding judge.
  • Right to travel freely whenever and wherever we want, because somewhere at sometime some cop, or  pencil pusher working in a policing, or spying agency somewhere within Canada or within the Five Eyes has determined that you could be a home-grown terrorist looking to engage in terrorist activity abroad, based on evidence that no one else including you, or a judge will ever see.

None of the things mentioned above are the way of doing things in Canada, but they are in line with how nations we call oppressive regimes operate.  The Harper government is changing Canada into a  country where the government and the policing agencies do not need to answer, or prove just cause to an independent judicial oversight body for their actions when restricting, or denying the rights of its civilian population.  Even while Stephen Harper and his government are bombing other countries, participating in the torture of captured enemies and engaging in diplomatic isolation tactics for other nations who they deem to be oppressive regimes, Stephen Harper and his government are rewriting the laws of Canada to give themselves and Canadian policing and spying agencies the very same power over Canadian citizens as those countries we call backward, lawless, inhumane, totalitarian and anti democratic. How he still insists on the validity of Canada’s claim to be a leader in the fight for democratic governance and an end to social and legal injustice with a straight face, I do not know. I do know however that lasting peace can not be achieved through coercion such as trade  sanctions embargoes, diplomatic isolation and in some cases helping to enforce no fly zones, naval blockades and even going to war to unseat what we call rogue governments.  History has shown that these tactics only increase resentment and the hardening of positions.

I do not think that any of the measures in the new laws will help protect Canadians from any type of terrorist threat, whether it be foreign, or domestic, because none of these measures address the real problems that must be solved before peace can be won. Everyone made fun of Justin Trudeau when he talked of getting to the root source of the problems that are causing young Canadian males to turn away from their government and country and try to go abroad and fight for organizations like ISIS and kill Canadians and her allies. Everyone tried to make Justin Trudeau seem idiotic when he said the answer to the war on terrorism could only be found by finding out what the root causes are that make people chose to be terrorists in the first place and relieve the source of such desperate actions, but I think in both scenarios Justin Trudeau was right.

Canadian home grow terrorist attacks: How many people can we put in jail, stop from traveling abroad and even if we could stop them all what are we asking for more soldiers run down in the street, more shootings at historical sites, or attacks on government building, police stations, maybe city halls, national assemblies, or parliament hill once again?  Is this so much better than finding out what is hurting people and driving them to commit such senseless acts of violence, whether they are real or imagined? I like Justin Trudeau do not think so.

Neither do I believe that arming the RCMP with machine guns will keep them from getting killed when they are ambushed.  those that died in Moncton did not die because they were out gunned they died because they were caught off guard, ambushed and had no chance to defend themselves. Maybe the Harper government could make those types of weapons that killed the members of the RCMP illegal in Canada instead of insisting that they are the right of every Canadian to own, or barring that reinstate the Long Gun Registry so that those officers who answer emergency calls are not walking into incidents where the  criminal has the potential of being better armed.

Terrorism abroad:  The USA and it’s better gunned allies have bombed, civilian targets and military targets in almost every Islamic nation trying to win it’s so called war on terrorism. These so called anti terrorist groups have crippled economies, denied access to trade markets, starved and denied innocent men , women and children food, water, medicine in an effort to break them and force them to give in to what the participating countries in the Western alliance want, which in my opinion means the end to their existence as free independent Islamic nations; much the same as they did to the North American Indians, the people of the African nations especially South Africa, the people of Hawaii and the Polynesian Islands.

They have named themselves, The Coalition of The Willing, The Western Alliance and made it clear that they support Israel no matter what crimes against humanity it perpetrates and I am sure in the eyes of most of the Islamic nations they invade, bomb, occupy and kill innocent people they are called terrorists and considered enemies that need to be resisted by any means necessary.  In its latest act of stupidity the Harper government along with the Tom Mulcair’s NDP and the Justin Trudeau’s Liberal Party of Canada have come together to acknowledge that the Palestinians not only have reason, but it is also their right under international law  to sue for Israel for what it considers war crimes that Israel has perpetrated against them and in the same breath denounce such an attempt calling such an attempt ill-advised and detrimental to a lasting peace achieved through negotiations.  The USA and its allies are not only denouncing the Palestinian effort  to avail themselves of their legal right to sue for justice, but are threatening to withhold a promised financial aid package, claiming that to sue Israel for the war crimes it has committed, is counter productive to a negotiated settlement with Israel for a 2 state solution.   How productive is giving these people no solution other than doing what they are told? The USA and their allies have only one offer on the table for the nations of Islam and that is to accept the USA and their allies which includes Israel as their betters and accept the paternalistic arrangement that would leave them without a way to defend themselves militarily, legally in the world court, as well as leave them financially dependant on handouts from it handlers, who at anytime could simply withdraw that support to get compliance to new rules and regulations imposed by the west, as they are doing to Palestinians right now.  How can any sane person in this day and age think that this is the road map to peace in the Middle east or anywhere else.  If you killed my grandfather, grandmother,  father, mother, uncles and aunts and now you are killing my children, my grandchildren, nephews and nieces and call them collateral damage, do you think that you are making more terrorists as you call them, or allies ready to work towards peaceful solution?

The answer to the terrorist threats both international and domestic is very clear, but is being muddied by glory seeking greedy politicians and a fanatical leader in the Middle East who does not want a peaceful negotiated settlement and has stated publicly that he would not allow for a 2 state solution as long as he is the leader of his country.  If countries like Canada who claim to want terrorism to end  and be replaced by peaceful negotiated settlements and truly seek the end to the never-ending wars and the senseless deaths of millions around the world and now at home to end, all sides must be able to see the value in such a brokered peace. I think there needs to be:

  • Support for those who work towards a legal solution whether it is in the world court, or at the negotiating table and condemnation for those who do not, no matter which side dispute we align ourselves with.
  • A realistic offer for peace put on the table.
  • An understanding in the west that it cannot win this war by employing bombing raids that target civilians, embargoes and trade sanctions that end up starving and denying medical supplies to innocent men, women and children, by creating no fly zones that allow the side we are on to bomb the other side.
  • An end to the USA and its allies putting wanted dead or alive contracts on the heads of other countries leaders.
  • An end to all of the interfering by Canada and its allies with another country’s right to seek legal recourse within the confines of international law.

The war is now in our country thanks to Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party of Canada and their unfair, unjustifiable, unconditional support of Israel no matter how many innocent lives they take, no matter how they violate treaties, and no matter how much land they illegally occupy and resettle.  John Baird thought only to laugh at the Palestinian display of their ill feeling for Canada and in fact sought to mock their efforts.  John Baird acknowledged that the only reason Canada supports Israel unconditionally, because it is the only democratic government in the Middle East .  The names freedom fighter and terrorist mean little and are used by the west according to what side of a confrontation they backing at the moment.  When the Russians were in Afghanistan they armed the Afghanis and called them freedom fighters, today they call those who would repel them and reject their control the way they repelled the Russian invaders, terrorists. Canada used to call the Tamils of Sri Lanka freedom fighters, until we decided to back the other side who we knew were guilty of crimes against humanity, Canada now calls them terrorists now as well and has put them on a terrorist list.  There are too many, Palestinians, Syrians and Afghanis living in Canada for example to just keep being a party to the killing of their innocent loved ones back where they originated in the name of democracy and peace and expect no type of retaliatory action from any of them, in any fashion, ever.

Now thanks to Stephen Harper and his government we have Canadians joining terrorist groups and  killing Canadians at home and abroad. What is up Canada, do you think we are really winning the war on terror, either internationally, or domestically? Do you really think that giving the RCMP machine guns, policing agencies and spy agencies the power to violate your privacy rights and the government the authority to remove someone’s citizenship will really help to keep you safe? I don’t.

Can Journalistic Integrity, Or Journalistic Standards Of Excellence Be Used To Describe Canadian Political News Coverage?


c557919c9244d4cb9576e67236544003What is up Canada? Can journalistic integrity, or journalistic standards of excellence be used to describe Canadian political news reporting? I ask because it never ceases to amaze me how little it takes to manipulate and thwart the integrity, ethics and the effective functioning of the Canadian press and other news agencies, when it comes to their reporting of politically charged issues and trying to get news agencies to follow a politically charged story to its end.  I do not mean a story’s monetary making end, but seeing a story resolved and all questions that were of interest at its begining being answered. What was once fearless coverage and digging out of the facts and a relentless search for the truth to the bitter end, that has seen journalists willing to go to jail to uphold freedom of speech, expression and the right for Canadians to know what is going on in my opinion seems to have been pushed into the background and replaced by the fight to be the news agency with the best gimmick and providing the most provocative, insulting telling of the news found anywhere. Canadian news agencies do this in my opinion do this in an effort to entertain the most people, gain and keep the largest audience and sell the most ads for the highest possible cost. Unfortunately the side effects are in my opinion:

  • No follow through on important stories.
  • No focussing on stories because of  negative public opinion.
  • No reporting on stories, because of pressure, or threats from advertisers, or a withdrawing of government funding and advertising if applicable.
  •  Reporters giving the audience more of their personal opinion instead of just reporting the facts and allowing the audience the opportunity to make up their own minds on any given story.

Through greed the big news agencies in Canada have reduced the life expectancy of what was at one time considered to be a newsworthy story to a couple of weeks, there is little if any follow-up and sometimes the important dull story is ignored all together.  As Canadians we have gotten used to not knowing what  the ending is to news stories  and do not even feel like we are missing anything anymore. We have stopped asking what happened next and have grown accustomed to supplying our own ending with, using rumors, our assumptions and guesses to replace truth and facts.

How did the story of the refugees aboard the MV Sun Sea end, has it ended and where can you find the answer in Canadian news coverage?

  • 452 refugees (men , women and children) seeking asylum in Canada upon reaching our shores  end up thrown in jail for their efforts and are the cause of Canada’s whole immigration system being altered by the Conservative Party of Canada and soon after they are imprisoned their personal story vanishes from the news. From this point on all Canadians are told in the news is how the laws are being changed to protect the refugees and Canadians from those who would abuse the generous Canadian immigration system with government spin and propaganda. Eventually there was nothing in the Canadian news  about the 492 human beings imprisoned in jail over 4 years ago in a Canadian prison by the Conservative Party of Canada, their, releases, or deportations if any, or whether or not the process has been fair.   The big news agencies to me are no longer informing Canadians about what is going on that is important to Canadians, but rather following a story as long as it can be converted into cash dollars.

Unfortunately news agencies would consider the reporting on the scandals involving politicians personal life more important for Canadians to know about than what laws are being changed, enacted or repealed. Did you know about the story below. If not, ask yourself why not?

  • Bill C-304, introduced by Conservative back bencher Brian Storseth, repeals Section 13 of the Canadian Human Rights Act, which bans hate speech transmitted over the Internet or by telephone getting passed its 3rd reading in the House of Commons and going to the senate was not considered important enough to even report.  Isn’t the fact that this bill takes away the authority of the country’s human rights commissions to investigate online hate speech and request that violating websites be taken down seem as relevant to Canadians as Rob Ford smoking crack cocaine, no matter what side of the issue they are on?  If the answer is yes than how could this  Conservative private members’ bill  only receive nest to no media attention, and even less commentary, while the Rob Ford story dominated the news and is still being referred to almost every day somewhere in the news?

More and more the news has become just another tool in the tool box of both  politicians and their political parties. No sooner do politicians or political parties say publicly what they would like to see happen with a political hot potato then presto the story disappears from the mainstream news and what happened in the story below becomes a recurring theme. This story was dropped  without a single protest in the news, no screaming for the freedom of the press on this one, no just compliance with the government’s request, as though Canada’s  national security depended on it. All of a sudden no more information from news agencies about allegations of harassment and sexual involving federal MPs from different political parties like:

  • What has happened if anything concerning the allegations of sexual misconduct made by?
  • Who were the 2 female NDP  MPs who refused to be identified but saw no problem giving very graphic detailed   interviews to anyone who would listen, against 2 male Liberal Party of Canada MPs who identities were on the front pages of every newspaper and on the lips of every television news panel and host in Canada and around the world?
  • The government wanted the story to be handled in private, the results hidden from Canadians, but was that the job of the news agencies to ensure?
  • How Canadian news agencies allow for the reporting of only half of an alleged story based on an interview with female accusers refusing to be identified while repeatedly naming the accused males and than just drop the story?

This is what I mean when I say that the Canadian news agencies have  become just another tool in the tool box of our politicians rather than the seekers and providers of current events important to Canadians as they unfold and continuing with that story until everything important in it has been reported and all questions have been answered.

Unfortunately the Canadian news agencies are even worse in their coverage of international politics committing the same mistakes covering international news as they do domestic; for example:

  •   Boko Haram kidnaps 300 little girls from school in Nigeria and the story dies inside of two weeks. The same Boko Haram  burns a town to the ground and is suspected of killing up to 2000 in one day and the story is all but ignored.   All over the Canadian news channels one commentator after another commented on how what was happening in Nigeria was being ignored, because of what had happened in France, to Charlie Hebdo.  Repeatedly there is a news bit saying that  what happened in Nigeria and the story shifts to minute by minute of the story as it unfolds in France and the reporters were not even apologetic.  This showed me that they believed that Canadians would want to know more about the France tragedy then the Nigerian and that there was more to be gained with reporting the story unfolding in France, rather than focussing on both equally.

I no longer have faith in Canadian news when it comes to politics, because it has become the instrument of government spin, rhetoric and propaganda.  With political reporters vying for jobs on television shows as paid political panelists, encouraged to give their personal opinions rather than sticking to the facts of a story, I find that they all try to out do one another slinging mud  on the politician / political party with whom they do not share the same views  and become spokespersons for the  politician/political party with whom they do.  I think responsible news coverage is a simple relaying all of the facts of a story and following it through to its end.  I believe that there is no room in a news story for a reporters personal opinion and innuendo. If the news is going to become like any other television show done for ratings and generated cash potential and news paper news articles are going to become little more than a reporters musing than these reports should be given to Canadians with a disclaimer that reads, “We are calling this news coverage, but be warned some or all of the content you are reading or hearing may or not be just the opinion of the reporter.” “We cannot vouch for the accuracy of the information you are getting, because we are more interested in keeping you entertained than whether or not you are getting the truth, because being entertained is what we think keeps you tuning in every day and you tuning in every day is what generates advertising dollars.”