Police Collude With Journalists to Target Montreal Hasids

Montreal's Hasidic community (an ultra-religious Jewish sect) is centered in the Outremont district, much to the displeasure of many Christian neighbours, who complain that the community flaunts city bylaws and disrespects neighbours on an ongoing basis.

I sympathize and understand their frustrations.
The Hasids are not particularly cooperative, whether they be in Outremont, Val-Morin, Brooklyn or even in Israel for that matter, where they are routinely in conflict with the majority of the Jewish nation who are mostly secular.

I am, however offended by the treatment of the community at the hands of Rue Frontenac journalists and police who are working hand in hand to humiliate them.

Rue Frontenac is a news website set up by striking journalist from 'Le Journal de Montreal' which has been running negative stories about Hasids flaunting the law.

The affair first came to my attention when a Rue Frontenac journalist, Valérie Dufour, wrote a story about a Hasidic block party celebrating a Jewish holiday, wherein the revelers unwisely and illegally lit a big bonfire in an urban neighbourhood after being denied a permit.
The story was documented by a surprising video, which was obtained, according to the journalist, because;

"A RueFrontenac.com team was in the district by accident and was attracted by the noise coming from a residential neighbourhood. They filmed this scene at 10PM, Monday night" (my translation)

Une équipe de RueFrontenac.com, qui était dans le quartier par hasard, a été attirée par le bruit depuis les quartiers résidentiels. Ils ont filmé cette scène aux environs de 22 heures, lundi soir.

As I read the story, I became sceptical that a team of striking journalists would happen to be working, camera in hand at 10PM, in a Hasidic neighbourhood and quite by accident happen by the celebration. It's highly unlikely and I made a mental note of the story.

Last Tuesday, Rue Frontenac ran another story about the Hasids and included another video, which absolutely defied any pretense that it was the result of happenstance.

Fabrice de Pierrebourg wrote a story about an undercover operation mounted by Quebec's transport police, the SAAQ (a government agency who are charged with monitoring licensing and regulations on Quebec roads), targeting a bus transporting Hasids between Brooklyn and Montreal, allegedly without a valid permit.

This time, no explanation of how a Rue Frontenac journalist was able to film the incident was offered. I guess another 'accident' would be too implausible. The video shot by Rue Frontenac was posted on their site and on Youtube .



I have no problem with journalists writing exposes and protecting their sources. But they shouldn't mislead their readers as to how they got the story.

It's obvious that the SAAQ informed the journalists of the undercover operation, which took place late at night and included an unmarked police vehicle.
There is no plausible explanation for the journalist's presence, except for the fact that they were advised beforehand, which begs the question as to what the quid pro quo was.


While the video posted by Rue Frontenac on Youtube was entitled "Arrestation", no arrest occurred and the bus and it's passengers were allowed to proceed. The word 'arrestation' has more than one meaning in French, but it's clear what is meant. They could have chosen 'Arret' or 'Intervention' which better describes what actually happened.

That the police allowed the stop to be filmed is more proof of collusion.
Try filming a Quebec cop in the act of making an arrest and you'll be told in no uncertain words to scram. Continue filming and you'll find yourself on the ground in handcuffs, charged with obstruction. That's a Quebec reality.
By the way, since when do police offer comments to journalists about ongoing investigations?

For the SAAQ police, it's an unacceptable breach of ethics to collude with journalists in this manner. They need to explain their actions and apologize for the fact that they arranged for the incident to be filmed.

When journalists and police work hand in hand, it becomes a news story in and of itself.
Doing investigative work in exchange for exclusive scoops crosses a journalistic line that needs to be exposed.

Rue Frontenac needs to apologize for the false inference that there was an 'arrest' made and needs to come clean about their 'pas de deux' with the police in targeting the Hasids.

Rue Frontenac opened the door to these questions. They could have said nothing about their sources, as in the second story by Mr. de Pierrebourg and let the public draw their own conclusions, but Valérie Dufour, who wrote the first story claimed that ;

"Une équipe de RueFrontenac.com, qui était dans le quartier par hasard",

If you believe that, you probably believe Mr. Mulroney's story.

We demand an explanation...

Ottawa Should 'Just Say No' To Returning Land

A new firestorm is brewing over the demand by nationalists that certain lands owned by Ottawa in Quebec City be transferred to the province.

Yesterday the Parti Quebecois' motion to demand that Ottawa cede the Plains of Abraham and the land adjacent to the National Assembly (owned by the Feds and rented back to Quebec for the princely sum of $50 a year) was defeated because the Liberals didn't want to get into another 'Plains' fight. Link

But the battle has just begun.

Nationalist groups are always looking for an issue that they can sink their teeth into and the last battle of the Plains of Abraham went their way when they forced the Battlefields Commission to cancel a re-enactment of the famous battle.

Watch for the militant RRQ to take up the cry which will undoubtedly culminate in a noisy summer of sovereignist demonstrations. What fun it will be!

Look for the same sad refrain and for these important watchwords;
Humiliation -Conquest- Colonization- Discrimination- Disrespect

Ottawa needs to draw a line in the sand.
If the land is returned, it won't be long before it will be turned into a Wall-Mart parking lot or better yet, be renamed the "Champs de la Conquete" where each year a wake could be held to commemorate Quebec's very own version of the Palestinian's 'Al-Naqba'.

Liquor Boards Run By Amateurs

Because of the massive profits generated by both the Quebec and Ontario liquor boards, the business plans of both agencies are subject to little government oversight. Managers of the LCBO and the SAQ believe that the profits generated are in some way related to their management acumen, rather than the fact that they run a monopoly that any drug cartel would be jealous of.

The fact is that both organizations are bloated bureaucracies where sound management practices that are normal in private industry, don't apply.

• After years and years of allowing employees to accept gift from suppliers, the LCBO finally decided it was a bad idea and banned the practice this year. LINK

• The SAQ is currently running a campaign to warn teens that they can't buy liquor if they are under eighteen. Someone in management should pay attention to their media buys, as the advertisements have been heard on classical music radio stations, hardly a hotbed of teenage listeners. On the other hand, the whole campaign is of dubious value. Is there a teenager that doesn't know the minimum age required to purchase alcohol? LINK (in French)

• The LCBO recently fired some employees for 'stealing' Air Miles points by sliding their own cards through the reader, when customers didn't present a card. The Air Miles program is designed to keep customers loyal by offering a benefit that competitors can't match. The only problem is that the LCBO is a MONOPOLY and doesn't have competitors. While there are privately owned agency stores, they serve smaller communities where the LCBO doesn't operate. LINK
  

• When SAQ employees went on strike, two years ago, the company kept about 10% of the stores open by sending in managers as replacement workers. Sales were hardly affected by the closure of 90% of the locations, as customers went to where they had to go, in order to buy their booze. The company actually made more money during the strike than before and as a result, the union caved. You'd think that management would realize that they really didn't need so many locations and would scale back. Not so, locations are expanding. LCBO employees, who are threatening to strike this summer, should take heed.

• In a wrongful dismissal suit an LCBO employee claims he was fired for reporting discrepancies in the amount of product leaving the LCBO warehouse and what was delivered to retail locations. According to John Alexopoulos, the LCBO's fired manager of retail accounting, an estimated 55 million dollars of product disappeared, en route. His lawsuit says that after he submitted the report, "harassment and criticism from his supervisor intensified and created a poisoned workplace environment." LINK
  

• Nothing beats the SAQ scandal of three years ago when management actually asked suppliers to raise wholesale prices. It seems that retail prices were tied to wholesale prices and when the Canadian dollar rose, prices in the stores fell, thus lowering profits. Someone had the bright idea that if suppliers raised prices, profits would be restored. What about the customers, who would have to pay more? Not a concern for the SAQ. When forced to resign, the chairman of the board, Raymond Boucher, blamed partisan politics along with the media for creating a 'storm' around the liquor commission, calling the controversy "unbalanced" and out of proportion. LINK

• The removal of bags from the SAQ is another dubious decision, given that the balance of inconvenience falls on the consumer. Asked why they don't accept bottle returns, the SAQ answered that there already enough recycling programs in place. When asked why they don't offer a cork recycling program (which the world-wide supply is suffering an acute shortage of) the Commission's answer was 'We're looking into it.'

• An LCBO executive (who requested anonymity) says the board continues to turn a blind eye to LCBO internal theft of alcohol. "There is so much nonsense going on in the stores," says the source. "There's so much product going out the door, it's really disgusting." LINK

• In a rare two for one scandal, the Quebec government is accused of appointing a crony to the Board of directors of the SAQ. After the interim president was fired for a trying to browbeat an SAQ store employee into giving her another Scratch'n Save coupon (she wanted a chance a a higher discount) her replacement was a big Liberal party contributor.

• How hard is it to sell whiskey, when you're the only one doing so? The LCBO 200 needs over 200 employees that make over $100,000 to do so.

Quebec Gov's Sad Tobacco Ploy

A bill that would allow the province to sue tobacco companies to recover health-care costs related to diseases caused by smoking is to be introduced in the National Assembly today.
A Quebec health department study estimates the direct and indirect costs of smoking in the province at $4 billion a year.... Montreal Gazette

The announcement reminds me of the great scene in Casablanca where Captain Renault closes down Rick's Cafe because, as he is quoted.
"I'm shocked, shocked to find that gambling is going on in here!"...just as a clerk hands him his gambling winnings.

The whole affair smacks of a cynical government attempt to deflect attention away from the current batch of problems it faces with a manufactured issue that is sure to fill newspapers pages and squeeze out negative reporting on issues like the Caisse de Depot.

For over seventy years, the Quebec government has been taking in billions of dollars in tobacco tax and to now proclaim that the tobacco industry should pay for related health care costs is disingenuous.

The saddest part of it all, is that the government has no case.
While smoking leads to premature death and is the cause of much illness and suffering, the lifetime health care costs borne by the government is actually smaller for smokers than for healthy people. That's right, lower.
Incidentally, that also goes for obese people too.

I know it sounds crazy, but for a variety of reasons (mainly that life expectancy is reduced), it costs the government more to provide health care to healthy people, because they live longer.
Here is a translated chart from the excellent blog Republique de Bananes which discusses the different lifetime costs to the public health care system for healthy people, the obese and smokers.


If you'd like to read the detailed study here is a link.

Once the government is calculating costs, they should also consider that the tobacco companies knock off about eight years of life expectancy of their customers, saving the government over a hundred thousand dollars in old age pension money.
I know it's ghoulish, but when you're calculating damages, mitigating factors are to be considered.

Let's remember that car companies also provide a product that is much more harmful than tobacco, should we sue then too?

Tobacco companies have been forced to pay up by American courts, but we should not expect a similar result here. In America, courts are political and activist. Here in Canada a judge will look at the cold hard facts and likely rule against the government.

Fun At The Oliphant Enquiry

Everyone seems to be having a great time at the Oliphant enquiry, everyone except Brian Mulroney, who is a sweating bullets as he spins his implausible defense.

This morning Justice Oliphant regaled the audience with a most interesting adventure (argh..) of missing his flight from Winnipeg and his relief that the replacement flight was not an Airbus.
Ha! Ha! Tres drole.

One of Brian Mulroney's lawyer's then wasted time when he took to the lecturn to gleefully announce the birth of the Commission's first baby. Grinning like a Cheshire cat, he detailed the facts of the birth of a baby girl to one of the staffers. If I was Mulroney, I'd of fired him on the spot for having such a good time on my dime(actually, the Privy Council's dime.)

Fun Fun Fun.

You'd be having fun too if you'd be billing out by the hour or collecting a fat per diem as are all the principle players in this pitiful exercise in futility. Judge Oliphant gets to fly cross-country, whenever he wants, all on the government's dime. Everybody gets top dollar and everyone wants to milk this charade for as long as they can.

How much money have Commission lawyers spent cranking out the many volumes of binders filled with photocopied agenda notes and day planner pages? A lot.
While the volume of material is impressive, it's too bad they uncovered nothing new and certainly no smoking gun. Not much value for the money.

Try as he could, the holes poked in Mulroney's improbable story haven't been wide enough to shake the former Prime Minister.

"That's my story and I'm sticking to it!"

Commission lead counsel Wolson has failed to pierce Mulroney's armour because he brought nothing new to the table.
It's painfully obvious that the Commission won't have an 'Aha!" moment and Mulroney will leave with his tarnished reputation intact.

The public has already made up their mind on his guilt or innocence and the Commission provided nothing new but an expensive re-hash of events. Since it's obvious that no charges will result, it's time to pack it in.
Let the feeding trough be closed. Send out the clowns.

That we actually entertain the ridiculous defense spun by Mulroney is a testament to our naivete. Go....