Quote du Jour

Liberal MP John MacKay responding to Finance Minister Jim Flaherty's explanation of 'net debt' during question period:

'This is more fiscal fairie dust from the tinkerbell of the neocons.'

So Much For That Open Democracy Thing...

Via Reuters:

BAGHDAD, Nov 27 (Reuters) - Iraq's parliament will bar the media from future sessions and began on Monday by refusing access to reporters and then cutting off television coverage as a debate on mounting sectarian violence became heated.

Spokesmen for the government and parliament said it was part of efforts, newly agreed by Iraq's National Security Council, to stop political leaders contradicting each other in public and prevent media coverage that was deemed to inflame conflicts.

"If there is any tension in the state, then the media should be kept out because it may increase tension," speaker Mahmoud al-Mashhadani told lawmakers in a televised session after dozens of journalists were barred from the building by security guards.

When one lawmaker rose to object, Mashhadani, from the Sunni minority, ordered the cameras turned off, effectively shutting off public access to a legislature whose election was held up by the United States as a beacon for democracy in the Middle East.

No transcript is published and journalists and members of the public have always been barred from the chamber itself.

I'm pretty sure that Iraqis know there's tension already considering that they're dying in record numbers.

Canadians will find that this rings some bells:

An official in Prime Minister Nuri al-Maliki's media office said: "This is one of the decisions of the National Security Council to make sure people speak with one voice to the media."

Shorter Right-Wing Blogger: 'Watch me as I grasp at pixels'

CSI: Bloggerville has completely lost its mind.

He should have titled that post 'Right-wing Kool-aid is bad'. It obviously makes you go blind.

Raw Story has a screen capture from the Drudge Report which, of course, joined in this nutbar conspiracy theory. In all of this, just as was the case during the Israel/Lebanon war, nothing is said about the context of the picture on the right-wing blogger's site linked to above. Never mind that these women were standing over a coffin. Just like they never mentioned the dead people, including children, who appeared in photos they were so busy trying to prove as fakes during the summer, all they're capable of focusing on is hints of fauxtography. And that's the most disturbing thing about this crusade they've been on.

On the Ground In Iraq

Patrick Cockburn is one of the few western reporters who is determined to travel around Iraq to get the real story out, despite the security concerns. In his latest article for The Independent, 'It is strange how in Iraq slaughter soon seems to be part of normal life', he takes his readers to Mosul, Tal Afar and other areas of the country and provides a broader picture of the realities on the ground than most North American reporters are capable of compiling. He describes how sectarian divisions have become so personal that Shias married to Sunnis are now encouraged to seek divorces rather than cavorting with 'the enemy'.

He also describes the relationship between the Bush administration and the grip it has on the Iraqi government while it publicly claims to be applying more pressure om al-Maliki to take over control:

Of course Messrs Bush and Blair argue there is no occupation. In June 2004, sovereignty was supposedly handed back to Iraq. "Let Freedom Reign," wrote Mr Bush. But the reality of power remained firmly with the US and Britain. The Iraqi prime minister Nouri al-Maliki said this month that he could not move a company of soldiers without seeking permission of the Coalition (the US and Britain). Officials in Mosul confirmed to me that they could not carry out a military operation without the agreement of US forces.

So, how can the Iraqis control what's going on if the US government won't let them? This flies in the face of previous proclamations that Iraq's democratically-elected government is anywhere near being independent and the fact that Buscho is building its largest embassy in the world in Iraq along with permanent US military bases shows they are far from willing to let any Iraq government actually run the country. If that isn't the definition of an occupation, I don't know what is.

Getting Bush and his neocons out of Iraq will be a monumental task, obviously.

Quebecois as a Nation Motion Passes

As expected, the motion to recognize Quebecers as a nation within a united Canada has passed:

Yeas 266
Nays 16

Liberal party leadership candidates who voted against the motion included Volpe and Dryden which led the CBC pundits to declare that this issue will still be a topic for lively discussion during the Liberals' convention this weekend.

On Israel & Iraq

Following on the heels of the new cease-fire in Gaza, which does not include the West Bank but should have, Israel's Olmert gave a speech on Monday that's receiving a lot of attention but which really has nothing new to offer:

The prime minister is offering the Palestinians a bevy of enticements, from the release of "important" prisoners to the opening of the border crossings and the establishment of industrial parks. But he is demanding a pricey down payment: meeting the conditions set by the Quartet (recognizing Israel, relinquishing violence and accepting previous Israeli-Palestinian accords), implementing the road map peace plan (i.e., disbanding terrorist organizations), and releasing abducted soldier Gilad Shalit. To date, the Palestinian leadership has rejected these demands, and it is doubtful whether they will accept them now only in return for the promises made at Sde Boker. But the proverbial "ball" of responsibility for the diplomatic impasse, and for translating the cease-fire in the Gaza Strip into a diplomatic initiative, has been boldly tossed into the Palestinian court.

The White House, of course, is thrilled because Olmert is parroting its talking points and is taking the focus off of the fact that the US administration has just let the conflict slide, despite all of its bluster about wanting peace in the region. The timing of this ceasefire and so-called attempt at reconciliation though coincides with what Baker's Iraq Study Group will most likely recognize as a major stumbling block to ending the war in Iraq. It's long been known that the grief suffered by Palestinians is one of the main complaints by people like bin Laden and his followers, yet the Bush administration has just preferred to try to kill all of the terrorists instead of examining its policy issues in the Middle East and how they contribute to fueling the violence.

Bush and Iraq's al-Maliki are scheduled to meet in an upcoming summit and there is now speculation that Palestinian leader Abbas may meet with Bush as well but it looks like Olmert will not meet with Abbas at that time while Condi Rice will play conduit between the two. You'd think the two leaders would actually sit down and talk to each other and that Olmert would realize that the conditions he laid out in his speech have already mainly been rejected by the Palestinians, thus creating another long, uphill battle to reaching a point of agreement for both sides.

Meanwhile, as Iraq's president met with Iran's on Monday, news of upcoming troop withdrawals from Iraq came from Britain, Poland and Italy:

As the summit approached, Britain said on Monday it expected to withdraw thousands of its 7,000 military personnel from Iraq by the end of next year, and Poland and Italy announced the impending pullout of their remaining troops.

Baker's Study Group may be seen as a way to win the day all the way around by some but it certainly won't provide anything near what is needed at this time to deal with the diplomatic and military crises in the Middle East. If the Bush administration had actually taken a serious long-term look a few years ago at how the Iraq war and its shelving of the road map would affect the instability in the region, we wouldn't be at this crossroad now. The first step to digging its way out of the current situation now that its been backed into a corner (as the GOP was by the election results) is to finally admit that it has made some incredibly disastrous mistakes based on ideology rather than reality.

Bush's national security adviser Stephen Hadley had this to say about the WH's lack of strategy today:

"We're clearly in a new phase, characterized by this increasing sectarian violence that requires us obviously to adapt to that new phase and these two leaders need to be talking about how to do that,"

Hadley described the Jordan meeting as one where the leaders would share ideas but not finalize any plans for a new strategy.

"We're not at the point where the president is going to be able to lay out a comprehensive plan," he said.

That's as close to an admission of absolute failure as we're going to get and it's only a 'new phase' to the WH because they've had their collective heads in the sand for far too long denying the reality on the ground.

The lives lost in the meantime can never be recovered and while the WH is still in charge, it's up to the Democrats to do the right thing and push hard for a plan that will work as soon as possible.

Tory Cabinet Minister Michael Chong Has Resigned

CBC TV reports that Tory Michael Chong (President of the Queen's Privy Council for Canada, Minister of Intergovernmental Affairs, and Minister for Sport) has resigned over his government's stance on the Quebec nation question.

As soon as I can find a news story to link to confirming this, I'll post it.

Update: Via CTV

Conservative cabinet minister appears set to resign his post over Prime Minister Stephen Harper's stand on Quebec.

Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Michael Chong (he also holds the sport portfolio) will reportedly announce his resignation at a news conference later today.

Chong opposes the motion, set to be voted on in Parliament this evening, that the Quebecois constitute a nation within a united conference.

Independent MP Garth Turner and other sources told The Canadian Press about Chong's impending move, saying he tendered his resignation today.

Other Tory MPs are upset about the motion, Turner said.

The Globe & Mail reports:

OTTAWA — Intergovernmental Affairs Minister Michael Chong quit the Conservative cabinet Monday to protest Prime Minister Stephen Harper's resolution recognizing Quebeckers as a nation, MP Garth Turner said.

Mr. Turner, who was forced out of the Conservative caucus earlier this year, asked Mr. Harper in the House if Mr. Chong was quitting.

The Prime Minister did not respond directly, but said the government will watch the result of the vote on the controversial nation resolution.

Update: Chong held a press conference in which he explained that he believes in civic nationalism as opposed to ethnic nationalism. Further, he said he's resigning his cabinet post so that he can abstain from the vote this evening while sitting in the back benches as an MP.

CTV has more on Chong's press conference.

I Want to Be a Nation Too

A couple of years ago I decided that I wanted to be a think tank. I think. My brain contains various opinions. Ergo, I am a 'think tank'. Now, I'm not a widely recognized think tank and I'm not funded by anyone but that's beside the point. I still fit the definition.

So, with all of this 'nation' talk in Canada lately, I've decided I'd like to be a part of a nation too. I'm not sure if I qualify for the 'Quebecers' nation because, although my parents and all but one of my siblings are Quebecois, I was born in Saskatchewan. But, I was raised with that Quebecois culture too. Not only do we need a definition of 'nation' - which everybody and his chien is now busy trying to decipher - we also need to know who would be a part of this 'Quebecers' nation: People who live in Quebec? People who live in Quebec and are French? People who were born in Quebec and are French but live across the country? People like me? I'm confused.

BC premier Gordon Campbell said today that First Nations people should also be declared a 'nation'. Makes sense. They were the first nationers in Canada, obviously. I've probably got some First Nations blood in my ancestry along the way, but I don't think I'd qualify for First Nations nationhood status. Who knows though? Maybe I could be a member of the Quebecers nation and the First Nations nation.

I live in Alberta where some people would like to see this province recognized as a nation too. But, as I said, even though I've been here for over 20 years, I'm originally from Saskatchewan. So would I be a part of the Alberta nation just because I live here or does the Alberta nation idea only include born and bred Albertans? Who knows?

Therefore, considering the fact that no one seems to be able to agree on exactly what this 'nation' status idea means and because it's obvious that it's merely a debate in semantics without any real benefits anyway, I think I'll declare myself a nation and be done with it. If Stephen Colbert can have his own nation, I can too.

Welcome to catnip's nation.

A Peace Sign is a Symbol of Satan?

Since when?

A homeowners association in southwestern Colorado has threatened to fine a resident $25 a day until she removes a Christmas wreath with a peace sign that some say is an anti-Iraq war protest or a symbol of Satan. Some residents who have complained have children serving in Iraq, said Bob Kearns, president of the Loma Linda Homeowners Association in Pagosa Springs. He said some residents have also believed it was a symbol of Satan. Three or four residents complained, he said. "Somebody could put up signs that say drop bombs on Iraq. If you let one go up you have to let them all go up," he said in a telephone interview Sunday.

Lisa Jensen said she wasn't thinking of the war when she hung the wreath. She said, "Peace is way bigger than not being at war. This is a spiritual thing." Jensen, a past association president, calculates the fines will cost her about $1,000, and doubts they will be able to make her pay. But she said she's not going to take it down until after Christmas. "Now that it has come to this I feel I can't get bullied," she said. "What if they don't like my Santa Claus."

link

You would think, logically, that those who have children serving in Iraq would understand that peace is the ultimate goal there and would welcome that expression of hope. That a peace sign would be seen as subversive or, ridiculously, as a 'symbol of Satan' shows that some people have completely lost their marbles what the holiday season is supposed to signify: 'Blessed are the peacemakers'.

Update: AP has a photo of the Satanic wreath:


Don't stare at it too long or we'll have to call an exorcist and that pea soup vomit is a bitch to clean up.

Great minds think alike...

From the 'Hey! Didn't I write something just like that?' department:

Saturday's Globe and Mail endorsed Stephane Dion for the next Liberal leader while ripping apart Michael Ignatieff (which I've turned into a hobby) and concludes:

The problem is not that there is an absence of impressive people interested in the job. It's just that not one of them is perfect for it. Each of the contenders boasts attributes of leadership, and each reveals areas of weakness and vulnerability. If you could mix and match the characteristics of those four candidates, the result would be sure prime-ministerial material. But when they vote on Dec. 2, Liberals will have to settle for something less.

And that echoes what I wrote here earlier in November:

Now, if we could somehow morph them all together (minus Joe) into one super-type candidate, the Liberals might actually have something going for them. I'm not a betting gal but, if I was, I'd put my money on Dion or Rae after the first ballot.

I haven't officially endorsed anyone but I do like Dion. I think he'd make a very vibrant leader and, according to my informal poll which also has him in the lead, a lot of people seem to agree. On the other hand, Bob Rae does have nice hair...

But I do agree (obviously) with the Globe and Mail when they say that no one is the perfect choice but if they all end up working together, despite their differences during the race, there's a good chance the Liberal party could reinvent itself in a way that's once again palatable in the eyes of the majority of Canadians - not that I agree with all of their centrist policies since I'm a small 'l' liberal, but they're the only so-called left-wingish party that has a chance of booting Harper and his cronies out of power. The sooner that happens, the better.