Canadian Protesters - Idiots Abroad

Tarek Loubani  and John Greyson...Idiots abroad

Sometimes we forget just how wonderful our country is and we sometimes take for granted the very real liberties and freedoms we have.

While idiot separatists rail on and on about how they are colonized by the evil ROC, I would imagine that 90% of the citizens of the world would switch their circumstances with the enslaved Quebecers.

As we fulminate over the harsh treatment of protesting students at the hands of our over-zealous police, I am reminded of how Egyptian police handle their rioters, not with pepper spray, rather with spraying machine gun fire.

I feel badly for the two Canadian activists, Doctor Tarek Loubani and filmmaker John Greyson, who are presently in jail in Egypt in utterly horrific conditions but have to ask the question that nobody will dare.

What the heck were they doing there? Read their story

"In a statement Saturday, the two men said they were observing an anti-government demonstration Aug. 16 when Loubani heeded a call for a doctor and began treating wounded demonstrators, while Greyson recorded the unrest on video." Link

Egypt was practically in a civil war with the army reconquering the streets with brutal force, making no distinction between observers and participants.

Only idiots would venture out into the melee, just to bear witness and stay out past the 10PM curfew. Perhaps it is their foolhardy activist belief that foreign governments operate under 'Canadian Rules,' where there is no unjust confinement or cruel and unusual punishment.

"The New York Times reports that officials in the current military-supported government are upset at how foreign press has failed to depict the conflict as a war against violent terrorists. Dozens of foreign journalists have been attacked or detained since the announcement." Link

Now their friends and family are clamoring for the Canadian government to get them out of a very serious jam, but who is to blame but themselves, our very own idiots abroad.

The truth is that  Doctor Tarek Loubani and filmmaker John Greyson are dedicated anti-Israel activists who were on their way to Gaza, another place that only idiots would go.
With the current Egyptian military dictatorship at war with Gaza's Hamas government, the border which the two Canadians were to cross is closed and so the lads decided to participate attend a deadly street confrontation, instead of hightailing it out of a city under siege.

After the arrest our two idiots proclaimed from their jail cell that they had witnessed the murder of dozens of innocent protesters, something even a simpleton should understand would anger their jailors.
Claiming that they were beaten, humiliated and forced to sleep on a concrete floor with cockroaches (which I've no doubt is true) is also something that is counter-productive to winning back  their freedom.

Then the two started a hunger strike, more foolishness which, sure as shooting, was to bring on more grief. After the Canadian government complained that the two should be freed because of the lack of criminal charges, the Egyptians took note, and promptly laid trumped up murder charges against the two.

Read their own account of how they ended up in jail and marvel at the utter naivete and stupidity. Link
They close the statement with this absurdity;

"We deserve due process, not cockroaches on concrete. We demand to be released." John & Tarek

Do they really think they are in a position to demand anything? Is there even such a thing as 'due process' in Egypt?

They need to understand that they are now subject to "Egyptian Rules' and when abroad one should always familiarize oneself with local rules and consider the very real consequences of pissing off the local gendarmerie.

By the way, under 'Egyptian Rules,' nobody is going to force feed hunger strikers, because the authorities actually don't care if they die. It would serve as an example to others activists.
The more arbitrary the arrest, the more cruel the conditions of incarceration and the more unjust sentencing, the more foreign journalists will mind their P's and Q's.
This is 'Egyptian Rules.'

I don't know if the two really understood the risks they were taking. Many will say that they bravely chose to face danger in support of what they believed was a good cause, but I suspect that they never fathomed as even remotely possible, that which has befallen them.
If they had, would they really have set out on their adventure?

I wish that the two would have screened Midnight Express before embarking on their mission to poke the eye of the beast. If you've never seen the harrowing tale of imprisonment in a foreign Hellhole, here's a link where you can watch the movie. Watch Midnight Express

And now to the case of more idiots abroad, Canadians Paul Ruzycki of Port Colborne, Ont. and Montrealer Alexandre Paul, who are part of a group of Greenpeace activists, who thought it would be peachy to storm an oil platform owned by the Russian state-controlled firm Gazprom. Link

Unlike in Canada where the police would allow Greenpeace protesters to unfurl their banners and block traffic for hours and hours on a bridge, resulting in a heroic trip to court and a fifty dollar fine, the Russians don't appreciate an attack on their reputation.

And so they sent commandos in by helicopter to board and seize the Greenpeace ship, the Arctic Sunrise, arresting the activists, and trundling them off to Murmansk where they are now facing charges of piracy.

"Greenpeace has called the charges "irrational, absurd and an outrage". Link 

Ya think?......Welcome to 'Russian Rules'

Now for the benefit of these imprisoned 'pirates' I would remind them that the "Russian Rules' are very similar to the 'Egyptian Rules' in that the harsh treatment is meant to send a serious message to others considering similar actions.
The more pressure brought to bear by foreign governments, friends, families and media, the harder it will be on the activists.

French secret service sunk the Rainbow Warrior

Greenpeace seems surprised at their harsh treatment at the hand of the Russians, but they shouldn't. I'm sure they're an educated and well-read lot, so I only have two words to say... Pussy Riot.  

And even Western democracies are not immune from bending the rules when it comes to activists as proven by France's secret service sinking a Greenpeace ship, the Rainbow Warrior in 1985, resulting in the death of a crew member.  Wikipedia

Most of the world is uncivilized, the governments little more than fascist fronts, with corruption, illegal detention and a justice system in name only.

'Canadian Rules' just don't apply, so I hope that activists remember that fact when they undertake their foreign adventures.

Once in a foreign jail, there's not a lot that can be done to help. The Canadian government has been doing cartwheels to secure the release of  Loubani and John Greyson, to no avail.

I'm sure the two didn't bargain for what they got, the same for the Greenpeace activists, but in the real world, that's the way it is.

So for those considering going off to face the Israeli military in the Palestinian territories or on the high sea, understand that they are going to face "Israeli Rules"

If the activists are up for it, full speed ahead, but no complaining afterwards.

Still I'm crossing my fingers for all the detained and hope they get out soon and come back safely to the friendly confines of 'Canadian Rules.'

Charter of Values....the Wrong Debate

The debate over the Charter of Values may be but a ploy by the PQ to find some new and fertile land in the electoral landscape, but questions surrounding the direction our society is going in relation to Muslim immigration, is in fact legitimate and one that our society should and must face, sooner rather than later.

Let's be honest, the Charter of Values is all about  forcing Muslims to integrate, the Jews and the Sikhs are irrelevant.

Looking at the polls, opinion seems to be equally split on the Charter of Values, with sound minded people supporting one side of the issue or the other, both able, it seems to me,  to make a good case. 
There is also, I believe, a considerable amount of people who are wrestling with the issue (I for one), those who believe in personal freedom but are afraid that Quebec may end up like France, Germany or Scandinavia, where Muslim immigration has been problematic (to say the least) because too many immigrants are determined to bring the old ways of home to their new country, instead of adapting to western culture.

It is these 'old ways' that many object to, not exactly the religious part, but mostly the social, where women are believed to be chattel to be dominated by the men in their lives.

For those who are concerned about this problem, the veil is perceived as the symbol of female oppression, the thin end of the wedge and so they believe that banning the veil sends a powerful message that Quebecers will no tolerate their society going the way of the aforementioned countries, which are, in varying degrees, gripped in social upheaval based on Muslim versus western values.

I listen and read all the different positions and somehow feel like Teyve in the Fiddler on the Roof, who when asked to referee an argument finds himself agreeing to both opposing positions.

Any thinking person should understand that the issue is difficult, a question of drawing the line between personal freedom balanced by the greater public interest. Where that line is properly placed is a matter of honest debate.

And so I must reject those editorialists who are shocked that such a debate is taking place, I bet those in Europe would wish to turn back the clock and embark on exactly the same process we are undergoing.

What direction would the Europeans have chosen for their countries, if they knew then, what they know now?

 I condemn all those on both sides of the debate with hardline positions, who see those with opposite views  as stupid, naive, traitorous or worse still, racist.

Here is a typical editorial view from the ROC;

"Setting Quebecers against minorities and English Canada is a strategy Marois hopes will resonate with supporters and clear a path to majority government in the next election. It is cynical but typical. If this is the fight the PQ has chosen, Canadians, including many in Quebec, should not shirk from it. From banning hijabs and turbans from soccer fields to blaming money and ethnic votes for the 1995 referendum defeat, trampling on minority rights has become a Quebec pastime. If ever there was a time to draw a line under official discrimination, this is it. The Quebec charter is an affront to everything we hold dear in Canada." Ottawa Citizen

While there is nary an article in English Canada supporting the Charter of Values, paradoxically, the numbers of Canadians who believe that religious limitations are reasonable is remarkably similar to sentiments in Quebec..

Here, the National Post was surprised by reader responses;

"Quebec’s proposed secularist Charter of Values has not proven to be popular with pundits — but a surprising number of National Post readers like it. That became evident as readers answered this week’s Letters-page question: “Do you support Quebec’s proposed ban on religious symbols in the workplace?”
A full page of responses will fill Monday’s Letters page, with the notes falling into three main groups. The largest is from readers who feel religion has no place in a public workspace. Here are a few examples:
“God or Allah or Jehovah or Vishnu are supreme, all-knowing deities,” wrote J. Bakker. “They know what is in your heart and soul. It is a true faith that will get you to the wonderful afterlife, not what you wear. Religious symbols should be worn in the home or in a place of worship only.”
“Premier Pauline Marois at least has the intestinal fortitude to express her feelings publicly,” added Don Forbes. “I believe the majority of Canadians have similar feelings, but are reluctant to say so. The rest of Canada should extend the ban to all places outside of the home and places of worship, especially in schools.” Link{PW}

There are plenty of these hard-line bashers, on both side of the debate, those who spew venomous insults in print and on the air. 
They are singularly obtuse, spouting their opinion as if it is holy gospel (excuse the reference) and that those opposed are to be humiliated and shamed.

On the opposite side, here is a nasty screed from the singularly vapid, vacuous, and vicious Richard Martineau of Le Journal de Montreal, who writes nugatory articles on a high school level, which do however unfortunately appeal to his target audience of low-brows.

I don't usually write to humiliate, but since Martineau seeks to humiliate individuals who have an opinion other than his, someone should stand up to a simpleminded schoolyard bully.

The Missionary Position
The saddest of all, are the feminists - like Francine Pelletier, who just the other day, assailed  'secular extremism' on Radio-Canada, the official anti-charter organ. 

Francine Pelletier, damn it! 
One of the founders of La vie en rose! (feminist magazine-editor)

Defending the right to wear the veil! 
It's like Françoise David becoming the president of the Kim Kardashian Fan Club or a judge in a Mini Miss contest.

It reminds me of the 65,000 black soldiers who fought in the Confederate Army during the Civil War ...Uh ... Didn't they see that they were fighting on the wrong side?

RED SUBURBS
A few years ago , I went to La Courneuve, to interview a young Arab actress. La Courneuve is a steamy suburb of Paris which exploded in 2005. When I arrived, thugs put to torch a brand new cultural center. 
Local youth had not even had time to enjoy it - it was destroyed before it even opened its doors. In short, not a beautiful part of the country.
The young actress lived in a very dilapidated public housing project, inhabited by a majority of Muslim immigrants. She wasn't quite 18, but already had a woman's body, curves, a luscious mouth,  feline hair ...
THE MADONNA AND THE WHORE
The young woman told me that when she left her home, she had to "show decency" and dress 'discreetly'  because she was being harassed by boys. In her neighborhood, there were two kinds of girls. Those who covered up (and who were worthy of respect) and the others, easy girls, whores that guys would grope because they did not obey the principles of the Qur'an and didn't respect themselves.

That's the veil. 
It serves to distinguish the good girls from whores and that's what Françoise David and Francine Pelletier defend? I'm must be hallucinating .
The pioneers of feminism must be turning in their graves. It shows how the Trudeau philosophy has contaminated the elite. Muslims have their Koran, we have the Charter of Rights. Each their own prayer book.

KNOW YOUR PLACE 
The girl had fully bowed to the will of the young Muslims who were the law in neighbourhood. 
She wore baggy clothes to hide her sensuality. She walked the neighborhood, head down, without make-up. 
They told her what her place was and she had accepted, obediently while saying that it was her choice and that nothing had been imposed

Shame on those Western feminists who defend the veil. 
You may say that women have the right to do what they want with their bodies - prostitution, injecting botox in the lips, or sporting huge breast implants. 

But name me a country where women who refuse to dress up like a babe risks whipping, imprisonment and death. 
There is none.
In defending the veil, you turn your back to women throughout the Muslim world, who are  fighting for their freedom .

Shame on you . LINK{fr}{PW}

So according to Mr. Martineau, it is the veil that is the problem and like Samson's hair, it too is magical, in this case, a divine source of fundamentalism.

If we'd just ban the veil, observant Muslim women would instantly become emancipated, embrace poutine and maple syrup and hopefully (cross your fingers) become committed sovereigntists.
Hmm...
It's like believing that if your punk daughter would remove her piercings and change her hairstyle from spiked florescent pink to something more conventional, all would be well... Ah!..If only life was that simple. 

Mr Martineau starts his piece by telling us that Muslim women who wear the veil are as misguided as the 65,000 Black soldiers who fought for the South in the American civil war.
It would be an interesting analogy, unfortunately it is utter rubbish, there is absolutely no historical evidence that Blacks, in any number fought on the Secessionist side. None...zip...nada!

It's hard to take seriously an article where a feature writer in Quebec's largest newspaper can tell us a blatant untruth, a falsehood worthy of the The Protocols of the Elders of Zion

How utterly discourteous and arrogant can one writer be to repeat an internet myth without undertaking the most rudimentary of fact-checking!
In the comments under the story Martineau is challenged on this falsehood, but another reader provides a link that 'proves' that it is indeed a fact that thousands of Blacks did indeed fight for the South.

I checked out the link, which leads to the reader section of the Huffington Post in France, which prominently displays a disclaimer that the article is unverified by editors.  In it, the author also claims that the American Civil War wasn't even fought over the issue of slavery and quotes the discredited writer, who propagated the myth.  Hmmm...

"The Washington Post reported last week that a textbook used by fourth-graders in Virginia had a startling inaccuracy about the Civil War. Our Virginia: Past and Present by Joy Masoff tells students that thousands of African-American soldiers fought for the Confederacy during the Civil War and that two battalions of African-American soldiers served under Confederate General Stonewall Jackson. Masoff, who told The Washington Post that she is a "fairly respected writer," has written previous books, including history texts aimed at children on the colonial period and the American Revolution.
Masoff is not a historian, however. We could debate the merits of a school system using a textbook written by a non-professional, but more interesting is how Masoff got into trouble in the first place: she relied on the Internet, home to all sorts of misinformation and refuge for all sorts of conspiracy theories, junk science, and racist scholarship. It was the website of the Sons of Confederate Veterans, a Confederacy "heritage" organization, where Masoff gleaned her information." Read more

The Washington Post had an interesting article debunking the myth of Blacks fighting for the South.

I hope Mr. Martineau reads the above stories and makes a retraction, but of course it will never happen because to admit the moronic mistake would be just too embarrassing.
I would however suggest in the future he use more trustworthy sources, otherwise he may as well quote from the Onion,  or the  Le Journal de Mourréal

At any rate, the naive and infantile notion that banning the veil will somehow change the faith of those so inclined to wear it, is nothing but deflection.

The greater issue is whether Quebec can dodge a bullet that no western country in Europe has managed to do, that is to transform ultra-observant Muslims into models of integration, instead of a sinister fifth column.

An apology to Canadian Muslims who have done their darndest to assimilate, veiled or not. The problem lies with the minority who wish to live apart.
I honestly don't know what proportion of Muslims in Canada are unwilling to accept our society for what it is and the truth is that nobody else seems to know either.
It's too bad, because it is fundamental to the debate,
Perhaps the whole issue may just be a Tempest in a Teapot, because the PQ government itself has absolutely no idea about how many Islamic fundamentalists there are in Quebec, nor do they know how many government employees wear the veil.
By the way,  outside the medical profession, I think that you could count the number of government employees who wear a kippah or turban to work, on your fingers and toes....er...Maybe just your fingers...and maybe on just one hand.

But there is a larger issue, we don't have to be prescient to see where the self-exclusion of a minority of Muslims may lead, the European example is ominous.

That is the real debate, one that charter supporters refuse to embrace, because simple answers to complex questions is what the readers of Richard Martineau really want.

French versus English Volume 93

PQ's Andre Boisclair accused of steering contract to friend

André Boisclair: You've got a lot of 'splaining to do!

In a revelation at Quebec's Charbonneau crime commission, an entrepreneur, Paul Sauvé, who had ties to the Hells Angels revealed that he received the go-ahead for a $2.5 million contract by his friend, the then PQ minister André Boisclair, just four days  before the provincial election that would see the PQ defeated by Jean Charest's Liberals. Link

What's wrong with this?
Once an election is called it is traditional for ministers to act as caretakers and refrain from making any new undertaking that would bind the future government.

When the CAQ got a hold of the letter confirming that the subsidy to renovate a historic downtown church in Montreal, all Hell broke lose with the CAQ's Jacques Duchesneau accusing Boisclair, now Quebec's delegate-general in New York, of directing a lucrative contract to his friend in the dying days of the PQ government, a government that at that point was trailing badly in the polls and was sure to lose the general election to be held a few days later.

But Duchesneau went farther, questioning publicly if Boisclair's admitted cocaine use had anything to do with his decision to grant the contract. He then made a dubious connection over the fact that the entrepreneur was connected to the Hell's Angles.

It was a classic smear attack, framed in the innocent 'I'm just asking' context' which may or may not have backfired because it gave Boisclair and the PQ a different set of talking points.

An indignant Boisclair fired off a legal letter to Duchesneau threatening legal action for defamation, but Duchesneau seems unperturbed, he doesn't threaten easily as demonstrated in the past.

Boisclair really didn't have any choice but to react forcefully, but the prospect of a lawsuit  would be devastating to him and his office. Any  subsequent lawsuit would revisit his cocaine use in painful detail, something he has never done. Boisclair has admitted using cocaine while a minister but has successfully put that chapter in his life behind him.

Taking the witness stand, facing an aggressive cross examination by a shark lawyer over his cocaine use would be humiliating and possibly ruinous.

Here's the type of questions he might expect.

"How many times did you do cocaine?"
"Describe the circumstances"
"With whom?"
"Who was your dealer and how much was your habit costing"
"Were you ever blackmailed or threatened by anyone relating to your addiction?"
"Did the entrepreneur in question know about your cocaine use and did you give him the contract to shut him up?"
"Tell us about the people you did cocaine with?"

Readers, you've seen enough TV court room drama to understand that Boisclair would be dragged through the mud, very publicly,  guilty or innocent. The process would be devastating.

Duchesneau displays letter confirming subsidy

The truth is that Boisclair wants to shut down the debate and nothing does it better or faster than a lawsuit.
Once the lawyers get involved, litigants are forced to cease debating the issue in public and if in a year or so Boisclair drops the suit, it will have served its purpose.
Let us remember the infamous Tony Accurso and how he used this exact strategy to shut up Radio-Canada reporters who he also sued for defamation.  Link

In a desperate and utterly pathetic move, Boisclair started an online petition denouncing Duchesneau, urging citizens to support him.

In the back of everyone's mind, is the fact that  Duchesneau has made some pretty outrageous accusations in the past, for one, claiming that 70% of political donations were 'dirty,' a shocking allegation at the time, which ultimately turned out to be completely true.

Duchesneau has been the go-to guy for whistle blowers, a political version of Claude Poirier, Quebec's most famous crime reporter.
If there is dirt on Boisclair, (and I'm sure there is) Duchesneau knows of it or will know of it.
For Mr. Boisclair, all I can say is be afraid, be very afraid.

Late developing.....
It's started already, Eric Caire a member of the CAQ is demanding that Boisclair reveal who supplied him with cocaine.

"Me, I went shopping to Métro yesterday and didn't see any cocaine on the shelves, so I imagine that if one wants to buy cocaine it has to come from an illegal source, regardless of whether you're a minister or a junkie.. Link{fr}

Sheesh!......

Why did police really visit Liberal leader Philippe Couillard's home?

I've thought long and hard about publishing this piece of speculation, because I very much want the Liberals and the Philippe Couillard to succeed.
But in the end, it would be hypocritical to hold back and so here goes.

I don't have any inside knowledge about fraud, influence peddling or the culpability of any members of the Liberal party or the attendant entourage.
The only political personality I can comment upon is ex-Premier Jean Charest who will never be implicated in any question of corruption because he wasn't corrupt.  I know this personally and from my experiences with him.
You can believe me or not.

Now recently we heard about UPAC raiding the Quebec Liberal party headquarters and so there is little doubt that some sort of investigation is going on.
Leaks in the press indicate that certain ex-Liberal MPs are under investigation, including ex-minister Nathalie Normandeau.
Last week UPAC, the anti-corruption unit met with Marie-Ève Ringuette, the directer-general of the Quebec liberal party.
The interview took place  at the offices of the Sûreté du Québec in Montreal, which is significant because it tells me that Madame Ringuette is not the subject of the investigation and is providing background or explanations about how things work within the party.
How do I know this?
Because targets of criminal investigations aren't usually called in, they are surprised at their homes, usually early in the morning by investigators who don't want to give the suspect time to consult with a lawyer or cohorts in order to get their stories straight.

And that readers, is exactly what happened to Phillippe Couillard, who had a visit to his home, early in the morning, not by UPAC investigators, but by two policeman attached to the 'Marteau Squad' the police arm attached to UPAC.
Mr. Couillard described the visit as 'a disagreeable human experience' I would imagine it was... Link{fr}

Given the fact that Mr. Coulliard is a new leader and that the supposed investigation he refers to hearkens back to a time when he was out of politics, (he retired in June 2008,) one can only speculate on exactly how Mr. Couillard can help police with the current investigation.

It is not unfair to speculate that the visit actually had to do with another investigation, that of the famous Arthur Porter/SNC-Lavalin affair, where it is alleged that the engineering firm paid about $22 million in bribes to hospital officials.
Given Coullard's very close relationship with Porter at that time and his position as Minister of Health, it would be remiss of police not to interview Couillard.
I earnestly hope that Couillard is as innocent as a jaybird in all this, but ignoring the fact that he was interviewed aggressively in his home, cannot be ignored or passed over as trivial.
So that's all I'm saying.

Arthur Porter could make a lot of people happy by dying quickly

Reports in the press indicate that Arthur Porter won't live out the year, so serious is his metastasized cancer.
If the reports are true, and he delays his extradition for a couple more months, he will never see the inside of a court room and believe me, a lot of people are crossing their fingers for exactly that to happen.

The players involved are charged with offering and accepting $22 million in bribes allegedly paid by engineering firm SNC-Lavalin  to Arthur Porter and friends, in order to secure the contract to build the billion dollar super hospital, presently under construction in Montreal.

It was revealed this week that Riadh Ben Aissa, the SNC-Lavalin executive who is the alleged facilitator in the deal is to be returned to Canada from Switzerland where he has been in detention over the affair for the last 17 months.

"Canadian investigators allege that Mr. Ben Aissa “orchestrated the transfer” of $22.5-million from SNC-Lavalin to a company called Sierra Asset Management in the Bahamas, according to a police affidavit. Investigators suspect the money was used to bribe public officials in order to win the hospital contract." National Post

Those charged along with Arthur Porter, the former chief executive of the MUHC, were Yanaï Elbaz, the former MUHC executive in charge of the real estate deal, as well as former SNC-Lavalin CEO Pierre Duhaime and SNC-Lavalin, executive Riadh Ben Aissa.
As well as the above gentlemen, Jeremy Morris, believed to be a principal with Bahamas-based Sierra Asset Management was also arrested when he voluntarily returned to Canada to face charges as did Arthur Porter's wife Pamela, charged with money-laundering.

But central to the investigation is Arthur Porter who like the proverbial keystone, holds everything together.
If he dies the case will become infinitely harder to prosecute and these sophisticated players are not likely to crack.

Quebecers across the entire province are going to the polls this November to elect local city councils and mayors.Of course the long shadow of corruption is casting quite the pall and many of those mayors under investigation for corruption are actually running for office once again.

There are 55 current investigations of sitting and former mayors underway and of these, of the 27 mayors that are still in power, 16 are re-running for office again. Link[fr}
Perhaps they can use this campaign slogan;

"Vote for me, I haven't been convicted yet!" 

The strangest case of all is that of Guy Landry,  the head of the Parti des Lavallois, running for mayor in Quebec's third largest city, Laval.
Mr. Landry is accused of accepting welfare payments illegally, between 2005 and 2009. He is contesting the $40,000 that the welfare department wants back. Link{fr}

Ritalin use in Quebec skyrockets

In 2010, Quebec children consumed 35% of all the Ritalin (attention deficit disorder medication.) prescribed in Canada.

It seems that this trend is only getting worse, with usage up by 25% since then, from $25 million worth of pills in 2010 to $30 million in 2012, rising a staggering 12% and 13% in the last two years.

Why the increase"
According to an expert, quoted in the article,  it's all caused by video games... Link {fr}

SSJB launches mobile app to fight English in stores

" If you've ever wanted to know which stores and businesses in town are considered "franco-responsible" — well, there's an app for that.
Montreal's Société St-Jean-Baptiste has launched a mobile app called "Moi, j'achète en français", which identifies businesses the group says does its business in French." CJAD

 

Employer Council publishes dismal 2013 report on Quebec prosperity

"For the fourth consecutive year, the Employers Council has released its Report Card on Quebec Prosperity, which aims to evaluate and compare Quebec's economic positioning in terms of prosperity and wealth creation.

At today's press conference announcing details of the 2013 Report Card, Employers Council president Yves-Thomas Dorval, appealed to members of the National Assembly - from every political party - to act diligently, in tandem with businesses and other vital forces in society, to help Quebec meet the many challenges it currently faces, in a concerted effort to improve the province's economic performance.

"As clearly noted in the 2013 Report Card on Quebec Prosperity and in many other more recent economic indicators, as well as in some of the news headlines of late, there is an urgency to collectively combine our efforts so that Quebecers can aspire to a better long-term future," stated Mr. Dorval. "Courageous and responsible decisions must be made today to ensure sustainable prosperity for future generations, enabling them to continue to enjoy an unequalled quality of life. Accordingly, we believe attacks against business investment projects, or adopting moratoriums or holding debates that aren't a priority should be avoided. Instead, there should be an encouragement of constructive action, whether it pertains to manpower, taxation, or business environment regulations. Quebec also needs to implement a business plan that would enable the province to excel in the global market." Link

Odds'n Ends

A Montrealer, Alexandre Paul,  has been arrested in Russia in relation to a Greenpeace stunt meant to embarrass Russia over drilling in the Arctic, by scaling a drilling platform. Link{fr}
The Russians don't take kindly to these efforts and have charged him along with others with piracy and I don't mean downloading Lady Gaga illegally.
Piracy as in 'shiver me timbers,' which carries a penalty of up to 15 years in jail.

Mr. Paul should have realized that the Russians have no use for Greenpeace and that they would deal as harshly as they have with the organization.
Check out this Moscow arrest;

The Canadian Press has erroneously reported that the activists were sentenced to two months in jail, when in fact they were ordered held for two months, while prosecutors mulled piracy charges.
It was an amateur mistake for a national news agency.

Russian photographer Denis Sinyakov was remanded

Canadian Press;
"As of noon Thursday, Paul had yet to be seen by a judge, but seven other militants and members of the Arctic Sunrise environmental team had been judged by a tribunal and each sentenced to two months in jail on charges of piracy." Link

New York Times:

A Russian court ordered on Thursday that 10 Greenpeace activists, including an American ship captain and a photographer who was accompanying the group, be held in custody for two months while the authorities investigate whether a demonstration at an offshore oil rig in the Arctic was an act of piracy. Link

BBC

A Russian court has remanded 20 activists from a Greenpeace ship in custody for two months for allegedly trying to seize an oil platform.

 Under Russian law the prosecution can ask a judge to detain people pending further investigation...

...The charge of piracy carries a prison term of up to 15 years in Russia. Link

RT (Russian news service)

Eleven people who were aboard Greenpeace’s ship Arctic Sunrise will spend two months in pre-trial detention, a Murmansk court ruled. The ship's crew faces charges of piracy for boarding an Arctic oil rig.
In addition, five activists are to be held for three days ahead of a new hearing.
The 30 defendants in the dock include four Russians and foreigners from 19 countries, including the US and Canada. Link

*************

The Canada Revenue Agency is acknowledging that it “incorrectly” sent a $382,000 tax refund to mob boss Nicolo Rizzuto in 2007, vowing to crack down on any wrongdoing inside the tax-collection agency.

The Minister of National Revenue, Kerry-Lynne Findlay, refused on Thursday to directly address statements by retired CRA officials who said the cheque raised questions about the integrity of the tax system, and questioned the CRA’s decision to shut down a unit that specifically audited criminal figures. Link

 ******************

A report from the Canadian Institute (CIHI) states that a quarter (24.9%) of the approximately 75,000 doctors in the country earned a doctorate in medicine from abroad. Saskatchewan has the highest in this area with 46.5% of the actual proportion.
Physicians practicing in Quebec, but trained elsewhere, come mainly from France (411), Lebanon (156), Vietnam (126), Egypt (109) and United States (91).

Quebec with 18,990 doctors, has a proportion of only 10.9% of foreign trained doctors. In the 1980s, the proportion was about 16%. Link{fr}

I wonder why?

 ******************

Quebec City may step in over Bixi money woes

Here's two strange ones;

Mouvement Québec français denies supporting the Charter of Quebec values

Former SSJB president slams values charter


Seen at a pro Hijab rally:

"My veil ...or welfare"...yikes   More pics here

Finally Some good news..sort of!

"Montreal's subway system may end up with one the most advanced wireless networks in the world, equipped with state-of-the-art technology that allows commuters to use cellphones, laptops and tablets.
Four major telecom companies announced jointly on Wednesday a $50 million project to provide wireless communications for the Montreal subway, including in stations and tunnels, within seven years. Read more:

Seven years....really?

I bet the average techie could set up a WiFi router in an afternoon.
How about contracting out to  the Geek Squad?

*******************

Some real good news:

McGill students win $1-million prize for idea of using insects to battle hunger

"..a team of MBA students from McGill University has won a $1-million dollar prize for trying to advance this idea. The Hult Prize, handed out Monday by former U.S. president Bill Clinton, is the culmination of a year long social-entrepreneurship competition involving thousands of students.The McGill team, consisting of Mohammed Ashour, Gabe Mott, Jesse Pearlstein, Shobhita Soor and Zev Thompson – won for their plan to produce and promote insect farming for food consumption in urban slums.."  Read more

Some real good news:

Breakfast television hits Montreal

We are so used to seeing things leaving Montreal that it is refreshing to welcome the  new Montreal  TV affiliate of CITY TV in Montreal.

I particularly like the newest version of Montreal's version of Breakfast Television with ex-Olympian Alexandre Despatie and veteran Joanne Vrakas.

Vrakas sparkles, exuding that certain sophisticated Montreal dry humour, playing off straight man Despatie. It works!

Here's a bit of unsolicited advice, lose the orange juice or take a sip now and then or alternately spill a bit out off camera. ITS CHEESY, but perhaps necessary.Try to be a bit more subtle with product placement.
Also a bit more content would be nice, but I imagine the show is a work in progress, but one  which I give an enthusiastic thumbs up.

I particularly like the music at fade in or out, but I would recommend a bit more caution on the part of the musical director.
Sitting at the breakfast table with BTV playing on the TV in the background, my daughter eyes lit up.
"What the Hell is that !" she asked.

She grabbed the remote control, rewound a bit and sure enough the explicit lyrics of a song by Mackeore & Ryan Lewis' "Thriftshop" boomed out over the airwaves.

"♪ ♫ This is F**king Awesome!" ♪ ♫ "

Yikes!

Final laugh of the week

..and the moral of the story in this picture?.....

Have a great weekend!

Bonne fin de semaine!

Poll Exposes Sad Truth about Race Attitudes in Quebec

A new poll conducted by Radio-Canada and the CBC puts paid to the notion advanced by the PQ that Quebecers are for a secular society that equally bans all visible religious symbols from being worn by public and para-public employees.

The poll, a logical extension of the debate was the first to ask ' la question qui tue  'a phrase which simply describes an uncomfortable question that begs a response.

And so we get to the heart of the issue.
Is the public against all religious symbols or just some. Link{fr}

"Elsewhere, 90 per cent of Quebecers said they’d be at ease with a doctor wearing a cross, while only 65 per cent of them said they’d be equally at ease with a doctor wearing a kippa.
The disparity could be owed to confusion about what a kippa actually is, said SOM Research Vice-President Éric Lacroix.
Considering that the kippa, a skullcap worn by Orthodox Jewish men, is actually the least visible of the headwear mentioned in the poll, Lacroix said it’s possible some respondents confused it with “kirpan.”: Link

 Confused? I don't know whether to laugh or cry...

Let's just consider the first figure, the one that indicates that 90% of Quebecers are fine being treated by a doctor wearing a crucifix.
All of a sudden the rationale that it is all religious symbols that upsets people is utter hogwash. It is the non-Christian symbols that are in dispute.

Let me wade in on the comment by the SOM researcher who seemed a little embarrassed by the fact that the kippah came in dead last, saying that perhaps those questioned mixed up the kippah and the kirpan.
It's not as stupid as it sounds, voters are notoriously opinionated and stupid at the same time.
Let us remember a recent story that indicated that almost half of Quebecers are functionally illiterate.
I'll bet dollars to doughnuts that 50% of the people being polled never saw a kippah or kirpan in their life or for that matter met a Jew or a Sikh in person, I'm not exaggerating.

Back in the day, as a political organizer, over many campaigns, I developed a 'dirty' polling technique whereby I would organize four or five campaign workers to poll nightly, to see where our candidate stood.
Obviously we couldn't get a large sample and so we carefully targeted those who were representative AND WHO INTENDED ON VOTING.
We'd pick from the voting list a fair sample of names that represented the ethnic and linguistic and as well as a socioeconomic cross section of the riding.

It's a fancy way of saying that in a riding like Westmount we'd poll voters in the poorer areas in proportion to their numbers as well as language.

Our pollsters would first qualify those they called with a first important question.

"There is an election coming up. How would you rate the chances of you voting?"
"Probably not - Maybe - Probably -Very likely."

If the caller answered anything but 'Very Likely,' the pollster terminated the call, experience has taught me that the caller would not be voting and therefore his or her opinion was moot.

If the caller told us that she or he was very likely to vote, we'd ask for which party, not which candidate they'd be voting for. Some people vote for the candidate, but all vote for a specific party.
This rule has been validated in the last federal election where NDP nobodies were elected in Quebec on the basis of party affiliation.

CBC Internet Poll about Montreal as a City State- Reliable?...err.

At the end of the night, after three or four hours of calls, we'd tally up the total, but also by voter category.
If we didn't have enough of say, francophone responses, we'd go back to the phones and interview francophones until our ratios were complete.

We'd sometimes have as little as a hundred responses, but they were quality responses and I'd put up my system any day over lazy Internet polls that get a thousand responses but are  completely unreliable.

So my problem with the SOM poll is that it is a lazy poll.

Only real pollsters on the phone can ascertain the intentions of the responder.

If the person hasn't seen or doesn't understand what a kippah or kirpan is, the opinion should be ignored.
As John Diefenbaker said... "Polls are for dogs"

By the way, the lazy polling techniques used today make results completely unreliable, as we've seen in many, many of the last elections.

Give me a small team of trained and dedicated pollsters and I'll out-poll the big boys any day of the week.
At any rate, the only thing we can take away from this poll,  is that the public has a problem with religious symbols, as long as they are not Christian.

That is where we are, not a pretty place.

One last thing, I'd like to touch on what is what I call the polling 'uncertainty principle," whereby asking a question has a unintended effect on the answer.
An example: "Did man really land on the Moon?"
Just asking the question makes the responder consider what he or she would perhaps never have considered as a possibility in the first place.
So asking a responder if they objected to being treated by a doctor wearing a kippah, falls directly in this category. The question itself will skew the results.
Perhaps we should delve into  the work of Werner Heisenberg, to see how he dealt with this quantum mechanics dilemma.

At any rate, we are plowing into dangerous territory, but for the PQ it is a question of damn the torpedoes, they have nothing to lose, while we have everything to lose ...

Quebec Charter of Rights....'panem et circenses'

Robert Heinlin

For those without Latin, the phrase translates as 'Bread and Circuses" a metaphor that describes superficial means of appeasement.
"In the case of politics, the phrase is used to describe the creation of public approval, not through exemplary or excellent public service or public policy, but through diversion; distraction; or the mere satisfaction of the immediate, shallow requirements of a populace, as an offered "palliative." Juvenal decried it as a simplistic motivation of common people.The phrase also implies the erosion or ignorance of civic duty amongst the concerns of the common man."  Wikipedia

Perhaps the simplest example of 'bread and circuses' was the action of Emperor Nero who blamed the Christians for a fire in Rome which he himself started. He then arrested the Christians and fed them to the lions in a public spectacle known as Damnatio ad bestias ('condemnation to beasts") which was for all intents and purposes was a simple distraction, one that blinded the public from the truth that in fact, their city had been destroyed.
No different than a preschool teacher who runs her students ragged in a series of high energy games in an effort to tire them out and calm them before nap time.

It pains me to write about Quebec's Charter of Stupidity at all, because to do so falls into the neatly laid trap set by the PQ to shift focus away from a dysfunctional province with a dismal record of failure, dishonesty and shiftlessness, led by an incompetent government of self-important, yet witless fools.

Given the dismal state of affairs, it is easy enough to understand why the government would choose to switch focus away from the real problems which are hard to solve, to imaginary problems with the attendant simple solutions.
Because the government occupies so high a public profile, it can easily spread any message it wishes, all with an air of authority,  and so the PQ is filling the airwaves with nonsense, paranoia and fear. It is not a particularly difficult feat, but a horrific betrayal of our Western values.
Any decent and honourable government resists the very real temptation to descend into the fiery cauldron of demagoguery and manipulation, usually out of self-respect, pride,  decency and the dedication to the democratic principle that was instilled in all of us.

It is no different than deviant parents who school their offspring in racist, cruel, evil and dishonest values, a dubious yet not particularly difficult accomplishment,  something no self-respecting parent  or decent citizen would do.
Just because you can do something, doesn't mean you should.

But the PQ has decided in selfish pursuit of power and sovereignty to cross the line of decency, playing the race religious card in order to create a panic where none exisits.
And so the ends justify the means.

In this respect the PQ is traveling down the same line as the Germans and the Russians who blamed the Jews for economic woes, as did Uganda's Idi Amin who scapegoated the Asians as well as Robert Mugabe who blamed the Whites. It goes on and on, today  Christians are blamed for the fall of Mosrsi in Egypt today.

Scapegoating is a game that's been played for time immemorial and ever since Adam blamed Eve,  scapegoating had been a consistent human trait.

"The scapegoat, Campbell suggests, tends to be an outsider, someone we believe to be “incapable of suffering” and who can be readily dehumanized."  -Scapegoat, by Charlie Campell 

And so Quebec's campaign against the religious symbols can be judged in the same light, quite simply because it is a non-issue, turned into a raging problem for crass politcal gain. Curiously, we've never been told how many individuals actually wear the dastardly symbols, probably because there are so few.

But the reality is that the civil service is less that 7% minority and  of that minority, only a mere fraction wear religious symbols. The problem, if a problem at all, is but a trifle.

The same goes for religious 'accommodations.' The PQ has never really detailed the problem or spelled out the instances of religious confrontation in any detail.
Independent verification by journalists reveal that there are less than half a dozens complaints lodged with the Quebec Human Rights Tribunal over accommodations per year.
And so the government proposes a solution to problems that don't exist.

Let's look a little more closely at those civil servants and the problem of religious headwear.
The chart  over here indicates that the civil service is 91.5% white francophones, 2% Anglophone and 7.1% visible minorities.

So how many of these visible minorities wear religious headwear?
Let's do some sums, I'm pretty sure you won't find too many Jews in kippahs, dishing out licenses at the SAAQ , the same for Sikhs with turbans.

This issue is about Muslim women who wear the Hijab, who have been roundly vilified in the separatist media, portrayed as medieval oppressed objective lackeys.

So it boils down to figuring out how many of these Muslim women wear the hijab to work at their government job. 

Muslims make up about 25% of Quebec's visible minorities, so 7.1% divided by 25%= 1.77% of which, about 60% are women, or 2.4% x 60% = 1%
Of the 1% of Muslim women who work for the government, about (20%) according to Minister Drainville actually wear the hijab, leaving a grand total of less than ⅓ of one percent or about 220 of Quebec's 78,000 civil servants.

A veritable crisis....
This is called 'manufacturing dissent,' creating an issue out of a non-issue.

Now for another argument put forward by the PQ, the one that says  that state employees in positions of power, including police, guards, judges and teachers can give the impression of partiality.

Cases in point, a young Muslim appears in court charged in the firebombing of a Jewish school and who faces a judge who is wearing a kippah.
 or...
A Hasid car accident victim is treated by a turban wearing emergency room doctor.
 or...
A young mother who is concerned that the daycare teacher  is  wearing a hijab and may be inclined to fill her daughter with non-Christian nonsense.

How will making these people remove their religious symbols change the fact that if they are so inclined, they will change their attitude because they've been stripped of a religious symbol?

If the Jewish judge has it in for the school bomber based on his religious convictions, then kippah or not, he shouldn't be  a judge.
If a turbaned Sikh doctor who removes his turban during work hours, harbours certain prejudices and lets it affect his work, he shouldn't be a doctor.
And a teacher who removes her hijab during class, but continues to proselytize in favour of Allah, shouldn't be allowed to teach.
By the logic above, a white driver given a speeding ticket by a black policeman could wonder as to the motives of the policeman.
Should a divorced judge who was badly beaten in his own divorce be allowed to decide a divorce case?
Should a female judge physically battered by her husband in the past be allowed to hear a domestic dispute case?

The government's logic in all this is that those who wear kippahs, hijabs or turbans are by nature partial and unfit for certain positions of power.
Magically taking off their hats, doesn't change who they are. It is preposterous.

People who are unprofessional should be weeded out of the system, but not based on their skin colour, sex or religious affiliation, overtly demonstrated or not.

We all bring our personal feelings and history to work, it remains that we do our jobs impartially and whether our personal baggage is hidden or plain to see, is of  no matter.

But in telling Quebecers that religious symbols are unacceptable, the government is telling the public that the wearers of those symbols are unworthy and that signal is a dangerous sign that cannot but lead to  discrimination, dangerous confrontation and polarizing ostracization .

A big ado about nothing.....
A crisis that isn't a crisis and a circus led by  ringmaster Drainville  who will say and do anything to distract the public from the sad reality at hand.

If a few Muslims suffer the consequences, well.... you can't make an omelet without breaking a few eggs.

In the meantime the mayor of Quebec Regis Lebaeume unloaded on Minister Agnes Maltais  demanding that she face the $5 billion shortfall that cities face in relation to their municipal employees pensions plans. Madame Maltais wasn't overly concerned, telling the mayor (as the school boards were told before) to just increase taxes.
A furious Leabeaume was forced to admit this week, that the PQ government gave in to the union demands and put the issue on hold once again.

How serious is the pension debacle?
I was at a family BBQ and met an ex-fireman from the city of Montreal who retired at the sweet age of fifty.
I imagine he started working at eighteen and had 32 years on the job.
But taking a pension at fifty means he could collect until he's ninety, an impossible burden for the taxpayer.
The very able fireman now works as a salesman while collecting his pension, all the time reminding us that 'them's the rules.'

I bet you haven't even heard of the explosive pension issue, because the media is obssessed with Hijabs and Kippahs.

Lebaume is looking to change the rules that dictate when one can retire and when one can collect, pushing the notion that no government or municipal pension can kick in before 65 years old.

It's an important hot button issue that deserves our attention, but alas, let us by all means put these discussions to the side and face off with nonsensical issues of distraction.


Welcome to the circus, pass the bread.