February 28, 2006: 

A promising start. Harper makes some good moves and confounds the critics.

While the "Emerson caper" was not to everyone's liking and certainly not in BC where voters never let dissatisfaction with Ottawa stand in their way of putting a Liberal into office, Harper is demonstrating early signs of statesmanship we have not seen in decades:

• A promise to respect (for a change) areas of provincial jurisdiction identified in the constitution has temporarily cooled the jets of the secessionists. While it is too much to hope Quebec can ever be weaned from its love of blackmail, we now have some sort of truce without having had to give anything away. It's a good way to buy some time and besides, its what all the other provinces have been asking for too. The outcome is all the more interesting because during the campaign a BQ slogan was "Don't let Calgary decide for Quebec". Well, a lot of what Quebec wants is what Calgary and Alberta want too.

• The appointment of a Supreme Court judge following a public, parliamentary review is refreshing and unprecedented - an important step on the right road. I enjoyed watching the process and feel I now actually know something (for the first time) about who is sitting on the bench. Even some Liberals appeared enthusiastic as the process unfolded. A few pundits have squawked that no tough questions were asked. Maybe so, but this is Khanuckistan. Taking even a small, polite step toward full democracy is a big step for us. Let's not scare anyone just yet.

• An intention to honor Alberta's choice (Bert Brown) in an elected senator. Paul Martin carried on like doing this would invoke some sort of constitutional crisis or bring down the wrath of God. Why not let a bit of democracy intrude on these appointments? Why not take a chance? The Senate isn't that important anyway. Martin is looking more like an "empty shirt" with every passing day.

• Appointment of Michael Wilson as ambassador to the US. In an interview with TIME magazine Wilson says all the right things, promising to repair relations with the US while protecting Canada's legitimate interests in trade disputes. There's a lot of damage to undo but if anyone can manage it, it's Wilson.

We deserve this. Let's hope there's more to come.

Mexican "Justice" - and tourism in Thunder Bay

The recent gruesome murders of a Canadian couple south of Cancun, Mexico underline the reasons why I don't visit Mexico, Cuba or any other place where neither you nor the locals have any real rights. It may be fine visiting some gated resort or arriving on a cruise ship where you are kept apart from the surrounding community but if you don't care for that, stick to American, European or Australian/New Zealand jurisdictions when looking for a winter vacation.

A couple of years ago while in S. Texas I drove across the border into heavily promoted and presumably sanitized Progresso - just for a look. I lasted about 10 minutes. The most offensive sight was a couple of policia looking very unkempt and greasy, swaggering down the street, twirling their pistols around their index fingers and occasionally aiming at passers-by (laughing as people cowered). Another cop demanded cash or my vehicle would surely be vandalized (by his own thugs, no doubt) he assured me. In North America cops would lose their badges on the spot for this sort of nonsense and probably do hard time besides.

On another occasion, elderly Khanuckistani friends of ours shopping in the same town were tossed into a filthy, roach-ridden prison for 24 hours. The reason? There was a brief power outage causing the store to go dark for a few minutes. When the lights came on a clerk reported some money missing and the policia automatically arrested the gringos (all filthy rich, evidently from their habit of cutting power lines and looting department store tills).  Afterwards - no apology, no process, no nothing. No habeus corpus in sight. At least they did not have their throats cut.  Just lucky.

And now we are supposed to believe that 30 year-old hitmothers from Thunder Bay pursued the Ianieros to Mexico, broke into their rooms, overwhelmed them and cut their throats. Anything is possible, of course. Especially in Mexico. It could have happened that way, eh? I hope this will not ruin Thunder Bay's tourism industry. I was there on a stopover last year and it seemed like a nice, safe place. Maybe next time better pack a "piece" and wear a high collar.

February 23, 2006:  Islam off its rocker, or is that how it was meant to be?

The other day Sunni Muslims bombed to smithereens the beloved Shi'ite "Golden Mosque" in Iraq. Let's see them try pinning this one on the infidel although I won't be surprised to read soon some allegations from Ahmadinejad or Zarqawi that it was all a Mossad set-up (like 9/11). When these people aren't issuing fatwahs, stoning women for adultery, assassinating Dutch film-makers or burning down embassies they spend their free time destroying their own shrines and slaughtering their own people. What is it with them anyway? And just whence this endless supply of guns and dynamite? Where do they find all this time for mayhem? Where is this "religion of peace and tolerance" they keep yakking about? They can't even tolerate themselves.I have just finished reading the Koran (Qu'ran, if you prefer) and it is as bloody and intolerant a document as you will find anywhere if you take a literal interpretation. The Christian bible isn't a whole lot better ("slay your disobedient sons", etc) but it seems that in 2000 years most Christians have moved on to a mature realization that a lot of this stuff is anachronistic crap and a historical curiosity at best. But not Islam. For them it's "Forward to the 12th century". Allah Akhbar and off with their heads.  Every word of Mohammed (surely the "ass" of Arabia if the behavior of Islamists is any reflection of his teachings) must be taken as it stands.

Yes, yes, we all know there are "moderates" but where are they hiding? Why do they not attempt engaging their fanatical soul-mates or, if they are doing this why don't we ever hear about it? Are they afraid too or is the vile western press suppressing news of their progress? There's been a lot of talk in the blogs and press about whether this wacko manifestation of Islam is inherent to the religion or merely a hijacking of the original, alleged benign agenda (as Amir Taheri , Daniel Pipes and others keep trying to tell us). I am swinging towards the "inherent defect" theory while trying to hang onto diminishing hope it will yet prove false. How else is it possible to explain the increasing popularity of this fanaticism today?

I am less convinced all the time by arguments such as those offered by Taheri and Pipes. When "moderate" Canadian Muslims stand up to be counted on any Islamist spawned outrage, be it 9/11 or Yassar Arafat's intefadah, They always start with a brief condemnation ... then comes the word "BUT" and a lengthy and convoluted apologia that leaves you thinking "Well, they do seem to feel it was too bad some more people had to die but, on the other hand, they are supporting the motives and the goal". Recall Elmasry's two-faced commentary on 9/11. Even in the western world, where there is little risk of retaliation from fanatics (although try telling that to Theo Van Gogh if you can find him in the hereafter), moderate Muslims hedge their bets or condemn Islamist crimes with faint disapproval and crocodile tears.

The good news for now is that the Crown has no intention of prosecuting The Western Standard or The Jewish Free Press for printing the cartoons in Calgary. Elmasry should go back to doing the job he is being paid for rather than spending his time trying to foist the teachings of a discredited shaman on Canadians with his legal threats and preposterous ramblings in the press. This isn't dhimmi "Khanuckistan" just yet.

February 18, 2006:  Threat of violence trumps free speech.

Well, the notorious cartoons have appeared in The Western Standard and the Jewish Free Press without significant incident. I doubt more than 2 or 3 Arabs know where Calgary is and it probably helped we had a few days of weather at -25C to keep any local Islamo-fascists indoors and close to their thermostats. Most people writing letters to the papers here have condemned publication in the aforementioned magazines as "outrageous" or used other indignant language while praising the newspapers and TV stations for "good sense" in not showing the cartoons. These are probably the same people who kept silent (or praised) the news media for pictures of the "Piss Christ" and another of the Virgin (alleged) Mary smeared with elephant dung - both creations claimed by their authors to be "works of art" and at one time gracing the entertainment/arts sections. Christians don't issue fatwahs or burn down embassies when their icons are trashed so they are fair material for the bold exercise of free speech.  In 2000 Muslims desecrated Joseph's Tomb in Shechem but Jews did not kill anyone nor torch any embassies either.

The cartoons have already been determined by the courts not to be hate literature so it is perfectly legal to publish them. There can, therefore, be only three reasons not to do so:

1. Not newsworthy -  But there was just about nothing else in the news for days.

2. Sensitivity - This is the one we heard every day from abstaining media but it doesn't wash. Since when has offensive information ever kept them from reporting the news with plenty of images so people can see for themselves? If something is deemed liable to shock you can count on the newscaster to utter a warning before proceeding but proceed he will. In the papers you just take your chances turning the pages.

3. Fear - Here we have it, of course, and no amount of "spin" about being "sensitive", "responsible", etc. can change that fact.

February 15, 2006:  Picking on Kinsella for a change. He's our own, homegrown "mullah" ... thin-skinned and vengeful.

Anyone wanting to understand this rather sad individual should read his book "Kicking Ass in Canadian Politics".  Don't buy it.  Just pick up a copy at the library. It's very poorly written but mercifully short. Kinsella spends most of his time in there bragging about his exploits as an unprincipled political muck-raker and Liberal bagman. Imagine "The Art of War" if it had been written by that obnoxious little sycophant who lived in the fat-folds of Jabba the Hut in "Star Wars". There's a real irony in his complaint "Words  have the power to wound and hurt ..." when there are few to rival him when it comes to wounding and hurting others. He denies having been parachuted into Vancouver to defeat a Reform candidate there but the fact is, almost immediately after his ignominious defeat, he high-tailed it back to Ottawa to work his revenge while hiding behind the skirts of a similarly thin-skinned and vindictive person:  "Jabba" Chretien.

One of the more laughable recommendations he makes is that you must always tell the truth when tearing someone down. I counted at least a couple of dozen lie-, sorry ... mistakes in the book. So now he's going to sue some hapless blogger for libel? Has he nothing better to do? He has no reputation to defend anyway. Who can forget his tasteless (and possibly actionable) attack on Gomery and his referring to the Justice as "Gomery Pyle"?  He's more childish even than Rick Mercer.  Kinsella's big problem is his personality, about which he can probably do nothing. In the Myers-Briggs paradigm he rates as in intense "feeler" - someone who reacts emotionally to life's challenges and finds comfort in petty vindictiveness and revenge. Maybe he should move to the Middle East where hyper-sensitivity to criticism and talent for dishing out what you can't take are in high demand.

February 15, 2006:  The ghost of Neville Chamberlain stalks Europe. Brussels grovels before Islamo-fascism.

It is almost beyond belief the European Union is considering measures to have the United Nations curb blasphemy and other expressions of free speech deemed disrespectful of religion. Let's consider just some of the consequences:

• If this initiative succeeds does anyone in his right mind think the rules will be observed in Muslim countries which frequently publish material intended to incite hatred toward Jews and Christians? We all know the "thought police" will be summoned only to harass western news media any time they criticize Islamic nonsense.

• Copernicus, Galileo and Martin Luther (to name just a few who made history) changed the world and how we view the universe by challenging church teachings. Not were they only "disrespectful" of church dogma but their published ideas were so outrageous they were persecuted as "heretics".  If we think Islam or any other religion is teaching nonsense, we have to be able to point that out, challenge it, and yes - make fun of it if that's what it takes. If Islam wants us to accept that its teachings are so sacred we can't do any of this then that's just another thing about which it is dead wrong.

• The teachings of one religion that deny the credibility of another would automatically become  blasphemy under these new international laws. For example, Christians believe and teach "... no one comes to the Father but by me".  This is a direct, provocative assault on Jewish and Muslim beliefs and, therefore, actionable under the proposed new international law. Of course, we know enforcement would be demanded only in western nations and not in the case of Islam insisting (which it does) it is the "one true" religion.

Europe is terrified of its Muslim populations and the very real possibility Iran will soon have a nuclear tipped "El-Shahib" missile capable of reaching Paris or Bonn (remember - they have the North Koreans helping them with this). It hopes that by rolling over and playing dead it will save itself (sound familiar?). This is a fool's fantasy. Islam has vowed it will return to Europe as "conqueror" and the ambitions of its fundamentalists go far beyond that.

And, of course, lots of Khanuckistanis are down on their knees too ...

Along with this Euro-groveling we have the usual crowd in Canada condemning The Western Standard for printing the cartoons, on the grounds this will endanger our troops in Afghanistan. I don't want to sound callous about this but aren't our troops already in danger and isn't part of the reason they are there to defend our interests and those of our allies? Some of this sounds like the bafflegab we got from Chretien a couple of years ago - that Canadian troops would remain in Afghanistan for only so long as no one shot at them. Well, we have a long tradition of this sort of thinking. Remember when Diefenbaker allowed Bomarc ant-aircraft missiles on Canadian soil - so long as they did not have warheads?

Come to think of it ... it probably endangered our troops during WWII as well when Canadians criticized Hitler.

How about this, straight from the horse's mouth? ... "All those who study jihad will understand why Islam wants to conquer the world . . . Those who know nothing about Islam pretend that Islam counsels against war. [They] are witless!" : Ayatollah Khomeini.

February 13, 2006:  Dictating to Canadians.

The Western Standard has published the notorious cartoons in context of a discussion concerning the significance of free speech and the right to criticize elements of ideas we find problematic. Good.

Tarek Fatah, of the Muslim Canadian Congress, called the Standard's decision to publish "totally unnecessary and provocative."  So what. Since when have necessity and avoidance of controversy been the criteria by which we determine whether or not something should be published? By such standards most of these blogs would be abolished and anything else at all resembling an opinion. And just whose standards of necessity and controversy are we supposed to go by anyway? Well, it is pretty evident Islam thinks it has the moral authority to stand in judgement, at least where its own fragile and often preposterous beliefs are concerned.

Welcome to the secular state, Islam. So far, "dhimmi" rules do not apply here. Canada is not a nation ruled by priests, witch doctors or anyone else practicing religious mumbo-jumbo on behalf of a non-existent Allah, God or whatever you want to call your favorite illusion aimed at mitigating fear of mortality. If you don't like the cartoons, don't look at them. It's as simple as that. I'm not a Muslim and will look at whatever I want. Your "truth" is not mine.

As for Mohammed Elmasry (CIC) intending to launch legal proceedings against the Standard under Canada's anti-hate legislation, this is a joke. The only hatred demonstrated so far in response to the cartoons has come from Islamo-fascists themselves. What can he be thinking of?  Remember, this is the same man who defended the 9/11 attacks and now he is going to take Ezra Levant to court for publishing a few cartoons? Give me a break!

This whole incident is very timely and should serve as a warning to the politically correct. Muslims are by far the major group of immigrants to Canada. With only 2% or so of the total population their organizations are already presuming to tell Canadians what they can and cannot read, see or criticize and are pushing to have their crackpot religious laws legitimized within the framework of the Charter and the Constitution. Can the "dhimmi Khanuck" be far off?

February 11, 2006:  The Clay Feet of Islam

Yet more proclamations today from the Islamic community here that theirs is the religion of "peace, tolerance and humanity". So prove it. Where is this "tolerance" when an "infidel" may not enter Mecca or when infidels in Muslim states must submit to dhimmi status? Where is this love of peace when Muslims in India are rioting to demand the state abolish Valentine's Day observance? Where is this humanity when their own prophet, Mohammed is a proved pedophile and the religion itself condones pedophilia?

To be fair, few if any religions bear close scrutiny of their sacred documents and history. The Old Testament of the Christian Bible advises believers to "slay your disobedient sons" and "stone your adulterous daughters" among numerous other outrages but - the big difference between Christianity and Islam is that the former has moved on. Most Christians possess the maturity of thought to realize that a good deal of the Old Testament is anachronistic nonsense and simply slide past these uncomfortable elements to embrace the New Testament where the teachings of hippie/communalist Christ can be interpreted almost any way you want in the context of a free society. Consider that the Catholic church strictly considers abortion=murder, but still has not ex-communicated Jean Chretien or Paul Martin (avowedly devout Catholics) for supporting "abortion on demand". Forgiveness and redemption go a long way when it comes to present-day Christianity.

But what of Islam? If anything, it is getting worse, going so far as to insist its dogma must be inflicted upon citizens of nations where Islam is not the fabric of society.

February 11, 2006:  Taking a Chance - At least some Canadians won't be intimidated.

With their next issues the Jewish Free Press and The Western Standard (both published in Calgary, a city in western Canada (for you easterners;-)), will print the notorious cartoons. It's about time someone in this pseudo-nation decided to test what we mean by the right of free expression other than a lot of hot air bragging about it. Could be interesting times in cowtown.

The last time Muslims marched in Calgary they screamed "Death to all Jews!". Not one was arrested or even restrained by the cops who later explained this would only have encouraged more outbursts. But put up a cartoon making fun of this same fanaticism and there's an officer at your door. You have to wonder just what our anti-hate legislation really means. It seems in Canada if you parade your hatred with a sufficient threat of violence the authorities will back-off.

The Calgary Herald (Calgary's principal newspaper) has been doing an amazing job burying reports of Islamo-terrorism on the inside pages and headlining sports stories on the front page and in editorials. I guess this is "responsible journalism". If an Iranian missile were to land on Copenhagen one can imagine them headlining "Cut Gretzky Some Slack".

When UA flight 93 was hijacked by Islamo-Fascists some of the passengers put together a plan to obstruct them and "Let's roll!" came to symbolize their resistance to terrorism.

But when there is even a remote possibility Canada might attract Islamic rage by exercising its values  the rallying cry is "Roll over!".

February 10, 2006:  Canada Goes Limp

This new government is off to rocky start although it's not all their fault:

• The Emerson/Fortier appointments are a "nit" and do not warrant all the fuss in the press. There was nowhere near the uproar when Chretien brought Stefane Dion, un-elected, into cabinet. And if Emerson has crossed the floor - well - so did Stronach and at a much more critical moment in the party's career. Compromise is the essence of politics and it's difficult to understand the uproar.

• Some of us Albertans are crabbing there aren't enough Albertans in Cabinet. It's time for us to shut up. Based on population, Alberta looks fairly represented to me, especially since the PM is also from here. Remember, Harper has promised to be "inclusive" regarding all regions of the country - something we are not used to as a nation. If Harper wants to try governing for all of Canada, I am for it. Let's cut him some slack just the way we did Martin.

• Now it gets sticky ... Peter McKay (foreign affairs) has stepped up to the plate declaring - amongst other crap - that Canada must do more to support understanding of Islam internationally. This is baffling. Shouldn't we be doing more internationally to acquaint Islam with Canadian values? Aren't we always yakking about "Canadian values" here at home and to the US? Since when did the Islamo-fascist mullahs tell Canada what values it should be promoting internationally? The real problem we have with Islam today is that its dominant faction is stuck back in 1759 or thereabouts when crazy Sheik Wahhab started running off at his ecclesiastical mouth. There's not much wrong with our values, unless one of them happens to be cowardice.  Just what do we have to be apologetic for? Hand-in-hand with this unfortunate signal sent abroad we learn the police are raiding professor March's offices in Halifax looking for cartoons and other evidence the good professor might have an opinion the mullahs would disagree with.  What are they going to do? Charge him with offences under Islamic law? Will Canada bring back the guillotine to satisfy Middle East demands for death penalties against blasphemers?

McKay is doing real harm. By sending this sort of message he lends credibility to fanatics the next time they blow up an embassy or a school bus or when they launch a nuclear-tipped missile toward a European city (it's not if, but when). Might be time for Peter to hit the road and patch up that romance with Belinda.

It is said that when the going gets tough, the tough get going. Canada hides in the bushes.

Canada: a nation in need of Viagra.

February 6, 2006:  Mullah Madness

Does anyone seriously doubt that if Iran had "the bomb" and if its North Korean engineers had finished their work for the mullahs that there would be a missile headed for Copenhagen at this very moment (if not already arrived)?  Yet, we still hear "tolerant" people in the West (and Canada in paricular) insisting it isn't "fair" that Europe and the US are pressuring Iran to abandon its nuclear weapons program. This isn't about being fair - it's about keeping doomsday weapons out of the hands of religious fanatics and you have to do what it takes.

Canadian newspapers are bending over backwards in their efforts to avoid reporting the No.1 story ... Islamist crazies violently protesting a few innocuous cartoons. For example, this morning's Calgary Herald featured the Pittsburgh Steelers victory on its front page (as if more than 2 or 3 Calgarians really care) and not one word about mullah madness there or on the editorial page. A one page report is buried on the inside. The press brags about being "free" in this country when reporting football scores or firemen retrieving kittens from trees but when there's real news liable to stir controversy it becomes "responsible" and clams up.

February 3, 2006:  Islam Blasphemes

Click here to find the Danish cartoons so offensive to Islam. Share the link. Canadian news media are too timid and/or politically correct to publish the material.

If this is all it takes to have the screaming Islamist hoards promise killings, mayhem and bombs then we have got a serious problem indeed. Welcome to the real world, mullahs. These cartoons are almost pathetically tame by the standards applying to Jewish, Christian and political cartooning we take for granted in the West. Shame on adherents of a religion so insecure in their beliefs they think their "god" and "prophet" require mortals to commit terrorism and murder on their behalf. This may be the worst blasphemy of all - to have no faith or confidence in the omnipotence of your god.

Muslim suicide bombers are convinced they will be treated in heaven to 70 virgins. Is there such a shortage of Muslim virgins that men must seek them in the after-life? If Allah exists and if he really is the sort of wise and just deity they claim he is he will do the right thing and unload on these fools a clapped-out old infidel whore who will give them a proper dose. Maybe they should consider the possibility before strapping on that belt of explosives. After all, it's not as if someone has ever returned from heaven to report what really goes on up there.  Come to think of it, someone who has just blown off his privates has poor prospects for sex anyway (something else to think about, Abdullah).

Every day now seems to bring more proof that George Bush is doing exactly the right thing by putting his foot in some Middle East necks. Better to nip this witless fanaticism in the bud before it gets too out of hand. Maybe now the Euros will understand why they should be helping George.

February 1, 2006:  When the People are Wrong

There's a serious misconception cropping up in a lot of news media commentary having to do with the Hamas victory in the recent Palestinian election. The gist of it is that since Hamas was democratically elected, we must accord it legitimacy as a governing body. This is nonsense. Democracy is a process for determining the will of the people, whatever that might be, not an end in itself. If a bloody butcher is able to persuade the people his way his best, a properly functioning democratic process could very well set him on the road to office. Even Hitler was elected.

The outcome of a democratic process cannot be allowed to trump principles having to do with justice, freedom and other rights most civilized people recognize as somehow fundamental and inalienable. It is recognized in most democracies there must be constraints and limitations on what "the people" might want to do in the heat of the moment. Like it or not, that's what our Charter of Rights and Freedoms is all about and the constitutions of other countries such as the US. It is by no means inconceivable (although highly improbable) a majority of Canadians might approve at the polling booth a political party wanting to restrict employment rights on the basis of racial origin or language but the Charter would make implementation of such policies impossible.   Majority rule is not absolute, nor should it be.

The founding documents of both the PLO and Hamas call for the destruction of Israel and its replacement with an Islamic state.  Hamas goes so far as to call for eradication of the Jewish culture world-wide. Neither the PLO nor Hamas has made the slightest concession regarding this agenda despite international pressure, the Oslo Accord and the Camp David Agreement. On the contrary, Hamas has just re-affirmed commitment to its offensive policies. Efforts by western nations to have it renounce this religious and cultural bigotry as a condition for continuing financial aid are termed "blackmail". It does not matter how resounding the victory at the polls ... a political movement defined by a policy of genocide and elected in large part because of that policy cannot claim legitimacy merely because it was "democratically chosen". If this is how Palestinians want to be represented, and that seems to be the case, then by any reasonable standard they have also chosen to exclude themselves from the community of civilized nations. No one is morally obligated to honor and respect Hamas just because it was "elected".

January 31, 2006:  The Chretien Minefield

 Interesting how the presumed front-runners (Manley, McKenna) in a forthcoming Lib leadership contest have withdrawn even before the race begins. Now even Tobin and Rock have beaten a retreat. Who could blame them? It's very likely ADSCAM, AIRSCAM, HRDC, Shawinigate, etc. are merely the tip of the dungheap of corruption and possible criminal activity that is the Chretien legacy. Being heir to this mess could easily prove a career disaster. Paul Martin couldn't survive the stench and who knows how much more of this stuff is liable to stick on anyone else who gets close? The smart Liberal will want to distance himself from the party for a good while yet - at least until the cops and the judges have done their work. Perhaps some loser with nothing more to lose (how about Carolyn Parrish?) will come forward to claim the crown of nettles Chretien left lying on the floor. McLellan's name pops up once in awhile but she lost her seat. Time for her to dust off that parachute again?  Maybe the Liberal Party needs the equivalent of Black Rod to force someone into the chair.

January 27, 2006:  Waking the Brain-Dead

 Palestinians have just given control of their so-called parliament to Hamas, a terrorist organization dedicated to the destruction of Israel and "the eradication of Jewish culture wherever it may be found on the earth" (quoting from their own documents).  I wonder if the Europinks, lefty North Americans and Chomsky-ites will finally pull their heads out of their backsides and recognize the situation for what it has been for several decades: WWIII. Armed with modern technology, many of their leaders educated in the West and fuelled with petro-dollars the Wahhabites and Safists are getting serious about eliminating the infidel.

And as a side-issue, watch these fanatics play right into the hands of the puppet-master, China, already pulling the strings in Sudan and Iran and pouring missile technology into the mid-east.

At least the Bush administration understands the gravity of the threat. We can only hope (there has been no action so far) that Canada will one day act to protect its interests as well. Write-off the Euros. The way it is going over there they will be tearing down their cathedrals and churches to make way for mosques within 20 years.

January 25, 2006:  Canadians Vote: The Good, The Bad, The Ugly, The Downright Peculiar and the Inexplicable.

• The Good: Finally, a PM who is not from Quebec and a governing party (sadly, a minority) that does not have its roots in Central Canada. There's faint hope in this, but faint it is. Also good: Anne "Screech" Mclellan, Liberal parachute artist, laid low at last by a resounding margin in Edmonton. Alberta goes 100% Tory blue.

• The Bad: A minority government. Harper will be held hostage by the likes of Jackass Layton ("Khanucklehead of 2005" award winner) and the Bloc. The only thing in his favor will be the reluctance of anyone in opposition to force another election any time soon.

• The Ugly: Attack ads by the Bloc in Quebec, warning Quebecers "Don't let Calgary decide for Quebec". Hasn't Quebec been "deciding" for the rest of Canada for decades? Duceppe onc more earns candidacy in my annual "Khanucklehead of the Year" awards. Also ugly: the NDP doubling its number of seats. There'll be no holding back that jumped up little twerp Layton. Just goes to show you how many "Liberals" are really socialists at heart.  Even more ugly: a non-national secessionist party (the Bloc) sitting in Parliament with 50 or so seats when they should be left standing in the hallway at best. What a shame we put up with this! Ugliest of all: that enough Canadians still find the Liberals so appealling - after all the harm they have done Canada - to reward them with standing as Official Opposition.

• The Peculiar: 10 Tory seats in Quebec. This has to be the result of Harper making some very injudicious promises regarding Quebec special status within Confederation. This will come back to haunt him - guaranteed. Also peculiar: The BC popular vote resulting in a hefty number of seats going to the NDP and Liberals. Isn't this the province perpetually belly-aching about "Cascadia", independence and how it has been wronged by confederation? When push comes to shove they line up to side with the centralist lefties. Go figure. At least Alberta puts its money where its mouth is.

• The Inexplicable: Hedy Frye retains her seat. Second choice among these befuddled voters in the Lower Mainland just arrived, perhaps, from another planet?  Big-ticket shoplifter and crybaby Svend Robinson. Message to some BC voters at least: Quit smoking so much pot, soak your heads in the Pacific for awhile and act like you want to make a real difference.

Doubtless, Martin is on the way out to make way for some heavy-weight like Manley or Ignatieff. Chretien, meanest bastard to dominate Canadian politics since confederation, simply laid too many booby-traps for a rival who otherwise demonstrated significant merit.

I bear the CBC no love but they did a great job covering the election live on the Internet ... much welcomed by the traveller abroad. Let's give credit where it is due;-)

January 20, 2006:  Grease the Skids: Stand Up for Canada

It's looking like Stephen Harper really does stand a slim chance of forming the next government although, if he does, it's liable to be a minority. This will prove "interesting" because he won't have a single member elected from Quebec. So what will he do about all the disproportionate number of cabinet and committee appointments so routinely expected by Quebecers? Will he really appoint that many un-elected members or separatists? That's not going to sit well in the West where we expect to be democratically goverend.

It's time for a Prime Minister to bite the bullet and precipitate a constitutional crisis which will happen sooner or later anway. Better to take the initiative so as to have some control over the process:

• Refuse to bring into cabinet or parliamentary committee anyone who is not elected and/or who does not endorse the Canadian Constitution. Surely Canadians outside Quebec deserve this much. If we can't get at least this from Ottawa, what is the point in having a constitution at all? Just how do we define our sovereignty and what it means to have a country?

• Make it very clear to Quebecers that if they insist upon representing themselves federally by electing secessionists they cannot expect these representatives to have any say whatsoever in what happens in the rest of Canada. The Bloc does not run candidates outside Quebec so having their people sit on defence, finance etc. committees is tantamount to rule by a foreign power. This is a sad, sick joke and much to our shame we put up with it.

• Furthermore, advise Quebecers that if this is how they want to represent themselves in future, they should do the honorable thing and secede. We'll help them do it (that is, grease the skids) in as orderly a fashion as possible.

We are ruining what's left of our country and our international credibility wih this dysfunctional approach to Quebec's nationalist nonsense. Let's get off the pot and quit kidding ourselves that what we are doing is achieving some sort of progress on behalf of national unity. It isn't. Just review Buzz Hargrove's recent comments - that central Canadians should be supporting the Bloc rather than the Conservatives. The rot is spreading and there's not much time left to stop it.

January 17, 2006:  Boiled Dogs

It's been awhile. Down here in southern Texas there's a refreshing absence of Canadian news.  About the only thing that has made it through is brief mention of the "boiled dog's head" fracas. Hilarious. Now, who could really deny that Jackass Layton's humorless grimace, furry lip, terrier-like excitability and hoisting of a leg whenever he can to piss all over his rivals is not reminiscent of Fido, boiled or otherwise?  Does anyone think Paul Martin does not look -and act (stunned, bewildered, confused)- like a calf just hit between the eyes with a 2 x 4? Could Duceppe have been separated at birth from a ferret? And while Chinese culture (i.e., the "boiled dog" item) is at issue amongst the politically correct, doesn't Harper resemble and behave like "the careful tiger" - wily, seldom seen and, to some, scary?  A few more caricatures might enliven a dull campaign and even incite faint interest in the outcome amongst the beer and popcorn crowd. More, Khanuckies! Dare to be funny. You practically invented SNL. You take yourselves far too seriously when the plain fact is you are not taken seriously by anyone else at all.

January 1, 2006:  2005 Top Picks - various categories

• Khanucklehead of the Year (hereby instated as an annual feature of this site): Awarded with enthusiasm to Jack Layton for showing up in Edmonton to threaten Alberta over health care when it is Quebec where all the NHA violations occur. It doesn't get any dumber - or more typical of this loser. "Hit the road Jack and don't you come back no mo', no mo', no mo', no mo'!" Exactly the sort of smug, arrogant centralist politician we despise out here. A 100% perfect example of what's wrong with the country. Second Prize ... close - but no cigar: Paul Martin for dodging questions on private health care in Quebec when interviewed by Alberta journalist Don Martin. Disqualified ... for being just too silly: "Silly Gilly" Duceppe, for saying an independent Quebec would "get tough" with Alberta. What's he going to do? March in the "Surete" with popguns and Inspector Clouseau in the lead?

• Most important issue - ignored in Canada: The continuing determination of Islamo-Fascism to overthrow Western democracies. This one won't be going away anytime soon as Iran presses ahead with plans to become "The Sword of Islam". There are now so many North Korean and Chinese ballistic rocket engineers in Iran the government there has had to build them their own city and resorts on the Caspian sea. Only the US seems to appreciate the gravity of the threat. Viva George Bush!

• Politically Most Correct ... and most asinine comment: Paul Martin following the latest killings in Toronto and excusing the perpetrator on grounds his behavior was the result of "exclusion". What about the thousands of other "excluded" youths who do not find it necessary to pick up a gun but prefer constructive life-choices?

• Most Vexing Phenomenon: Continuing popularity of the Liberals - no matter what outrages they perpetrate against the Canadian people. Is there even a remote possibility Canada will ever have a PM who is not from Quebec or a government that is not Liberal? (Well, ok, it happened January 23, 2006 but the scandal-ridden Liberals still racked up amazing support to finish a close 2nd as official Opposition.)

• Least Surprising Disclosures: The Gomery report. Did anyone seriously doubt the Liberals and their friends in Quebec had not been robbing us blind for years? Corollory: No surprise that most Canadians don't care. The "moral conscience" of the world has none.

• Least Missed Departing Politicians: Shiela Copps and Carolyn Parrish. Crude, rude, vindictive and bigoted loudmouths. Remember that children's ditty? ... "We're sorry to see them go, we're sorry to see them go. We hope to heck they never come back, we're sorry to see them go!"

• Most Hopeless Cause: The Marxist-Leninists running candidates in Calgary.

• Best Blogger Presence: Blogging Tories;-) Much thanks to the organizers of this enterprise.
   

A prosperous and happy New Year to all!

December 29, 2005:  Only in Canada

A few weeks ago income trust investments took a paper loss of many billions when Ralph Goodale announced his department would investigate changing the tax arrangements relating to trusts. Then, trusts mysteriously spiked just shortly before Goodale announced he would reduce taxes on conventional dividends instead. Certain people made a lot of money in a brief period of time based, apparently, on advance knowledge of what was to come. Now we learn the RCMP are investigating the possibility Goodale's second announcement was leaked to benefit friends of the Liberal government.

I doubt very much we will ever learn the truth, as in so many other instances suggesting corruption within the Liberal ranks. Paper shredders and under-the-table packets of money quickly cover the trail.

Behaving much like his old nemesis, Chretien, Paul Martin is standing by his man and insisting Goodale will not resign for duration of the investigation. This is, of course, just more "business as usual" for a regime that parades itself as the "moral conscience" of the world without knowing the meaning of either word..

December 26, 2005:  Phony Sovereignty in Liberaland

There's a lot of wailing and gnashing of teeth lately about a US sub daring to surface at the North Pole, having traversed putative "Canadian" waters unannounced. Was it that Santa might have been disturbed putting together a nice sack of Liberal handouts?  Just who would Khanuckistanis rather have showing up at the Pole? The Chinese communists? Russia (whom we permitted cruising our Arctic during the Cold War with nary a "peep" of protest)?  North Korea? Our own subs are most unlikely to put in an appearance, being suitable for service only in drydock.

Since the days of Trudeau we have worked hard to abolish Canadian sovereignty so what gives with squawking today? Who should care about our hot air? Consider how we consistently fail defending our laws at home and our principles abroad. Herewith, just a few examples:

• Marc Emery, Conrad Black and Abdullah Khadr are all accused of  activities illegal in both Canada and the US yet, it is only the US that holds them accountable. We are considering deportation of Emery to the US to face charges there but will not charge him here ourselves. How can this be explained? Why not prosecute Khadr? Don't his alleged activities threaten Canadian troops in Afghanistan?  Why would we extradite him to the US without hauling his ass into court here first? 

• Whatever happened to Donald Cormie, alleged architect of the "Principal Affair"? He's cooling his heels in Palm Springs but did Canada ever try hauling him back here to face charges?

• What about Bre-X - a massive international fraud perpetrated by a Canadian company? Why is it that only Americans are pursuing this crime in the courts? Why is Felderhof still on the loose?

• What about  Air India Flight 182 blown to bits by Sikh terrorists in Vancouver 20 years ago with foot-dragging/incompetence resulting in full acquittal? What about the Sampson affair?

• What about Zahra Kazemi's brutal torture and execution in Iran? Where is progress on this case? Canada has proved an "empty shirt" here as well.

Canada is not prepared nor even willing to do anything at all to protect its territory, it's citizens or its much vaunted principles abroad yet plays the cry-baby when a vessel from a friendly nation shows up in waters it claims but cannot control. We should be grateful the Yanks show up here once in awhile or we'd soon be a parade ground for foreign armies.

December 25, 2005:  A brick short of a ton (tonne)?

The really interesting thing about this election campaign is that it is neck-and-neck so far between the Tories and the Libs. Caught not just in one, but several, major scandals, selling out to secessionists and with strong rumors linking them to organized crime you'd think the Liberals would be sitting right behind the Greens at maybe 2% approval - among the functionally illiterate and certifiably brain-dead. But no - they still look like a fair bet to win a minority at least. If the sponsorship program (and it was that, not the wrongdoing) had not de-popularized them in Quebec they would be a shoo-in. Really incredible. This is the stuff of bad fiction writing, not evidence we are the world's "moral conscience" as we like to promote ourselves. We have no morals, no conscience and no ethics and are preparing to prove it once again at the voting booth.

Is this a real country or just some place where folks make-believe at being a nation?  Where is the concern for our international reputation and democratic tradition? Although crude and politically incorrect, recent remarks by an American commentator that we seem like a "retarded cousin" are painfully accurate.

December 24, 2005:  La Dindon - fowl play in Edmonton

Jumped-up "Jackass" Layton is proving increasingly offensive and irrelevant. It's no wonder his party never gets more than about 15 votes in Alberta.  Yesterday he blew into Edmonton, jaw flapping like an unsecured outhouse door in a chinook, brain in neutral for a witless (even for him) tirade against Ralph Klein on the subject of - you guessed it - Medicare:

"You (Klein) are not going to destroy public health care" . "New Democrats won't let you."

Ooh! Scary! What's he going to do? March Shirley Douglas and chubby Kiefer into Ralph's office, trailing granddaddy Tommy's ghost? The scariest thing about this is that it could inspire a new Cancon version of "A Christmas Carol" complete with the obligatory bad actors and a politically correct plot. They'd still need a Quebec writer to qualify for a Telefilm Canada grant and tax credit. How about Gilles Duceppe? After all, he promised an independent Quebec would "Get tough with Alberta" and "plots" are his specialty.

Now, just where is Medicare really being challenged by runaway privatization? Quebec! Why doesn't Layton go there to stand on the steps of the National Assembly and make a fool of himself yelling this nonsense at Charest? Is he afraid of the French?  "Le Poulet"  scared the pants off Martin so maybe he is worried about "La Dindon".

Alberta is the least unionized of all provinces. Maybe "the wattled one" was here to provide a holiday boost to the flagging spirits of AUPE (Alberta Union of Public Employees) and their dispirited front organization "Friends of Medicare".  You're wasting your time, Jacko.

About the only way socialists in this province are going to get a boost this season is by heeding the advice "I'd rather have a bottle in front of me than a frontal lobotomy".

October 23, 2005  - Ding(wall)ing the Taxpayer

Didn't Dingwall resign as head of the mint? Last time I checked, the rule in industry was that you might get a settlement if you were dismissed without cause and/or suitable notification (that's a 2 week minimum here in Alberta). I have never heard of anyone quitting and then getting a nice "package". Just what is McCallum frothing about when he says Dingwall is entitled? Was Dingwall forced to resign? If so, why weren't we told so the matter of a "settlement" would be less controversial? It's all just Librano spin. On the one hand we are supposed to believe he left voluntarily, which takes away heat on behalf of a proper investigation, but on the other we are expected to swallow the nonsense he is entitled to half-a-million as if he had been forcibly removed from office.

I'm betting the Libranos will depend on the brief Khanuckistani attention-span to look after this one. In a few weeks they will slip Dingwall his $500,000 - possibly in cash laundered through their "organization" - and find him a nice high-paying job somewhere else.

October 21, 2005  - Double Taxation

As if the Canadian Fed cannot satisfy itself enough at the piggy trough it now proposes taxing "income trusts" at the source as well as the recipients of dividends. Protect your retirement income by protesting this raid on your investments by making it plain to the Libranos you might vote against them in the next election. Or are you too timid? I suspect so. Try taking a stand for once, Khanuckistanis, before it is too late.

October 20, 2005  - The Mouse that Roared

Responding to heat from the left Paul Martin has been making loud noises about retaliating over "softwood lumber", threatening an international incident over just 4% of all our trade with the US. In particular, he promises punishing the Americans by increasing energy exports to China. Let's just take a breather and think how this would work. Only two options seem possible:

(1) Suppose we have excess production capacity (which we don't so who is going to cough up the investment to build it?) and crank up output to satisfy some Chinese demand. How does this hurt the US if their contracts are still being fulfilled? Wouldn't this just earn even more money for Alberta and for American companies who dominate Canadian oil production?

(2) The only way Martin can really hurt the Americans is by reducing exports to the US and diverting the surplus to China, somewhere else or having the wells shut-in. That means Ottawa wading into western Canada to tear up long-term contracts, NAFTA and maybe even violating the Canadian Constitution - surely unprecedented in the annals of trade and economics. He'd go over the top like that for 4% and when the lumber companies aren't even suffering?

And what if he really does any of this? China has the worst human rights record of any nation, increasingly threatens its neighbors and is by no means a friend of the West. Would Martin really antagonize the US while helping fuel Chinese communist aggression and crimes against humanity? What is Martin thinking of? How would this promote "Canadian values" in the eyes of the world? The usual suspects - Jack Layton, closet Chretienites and the Quebec "red brigade" - have to be behind this grandstanding.