One of the gravest assaults on civil liberties by George Bush II was the idea of "free speech zones" in which protest would be allowed - in blatant violation of the right to free speech contained in the First Amendment to the Constitution of the United States. And now these abominations on freedom have come to Canada.
For the G20 summit taking place in Toronto in late June, the Integrated Security Unit (a concretion of the Toronto Police Service, the Ontario Provincial Police and the RCMP have declared a "designated speech zone" for protests. This is obscene. The Canadian Charter of Rights and Freedoms declares that all of Canada is, subject to reasonable limits, a designated speech zone. The notion that only in certain areas are the people to be free to exercise their constitutional rights is antithetical to free expression. Protesters are supposed to be mollified by the fact that there will be a "live feed" to the convention centre where the high priests of capital will be meeting so that the protests will be "visible." A few monitors showing protesters does not recompense us for our lost liberty.
I was prepared to accept the idea that there might be an area in which protests would be prohibited. I wasn't happy about the idea, but I was prepared to go along with it. But the notion that the entire city, with the exception of Queen's Park, is going to be an area in which free expression is to be suppressed is intolerable. The G20 has the right to meet, but they don't have the right to meet out of sight and out of mind of the people objecting to them. Shame on the police for going out of their way to curb our liberty. What a great commitment to constitutional governance they have.
Friday, May 14, 2010
Thursday, May 06, 2010
The IMF, Structural Adjustment and Greece
The IMF and its boosters like to bill it as having 'seen the light.' Nowadays, we hear all about the IMF that has learned its lesson and is warm and cuddly. We are told that the IMF understands the importance of maintaining governance and government capacity. Why, we are even told they have a focus on poverty reduction. For a sterling example of this, you can see a discussion at enmasse.ca between me and several other posters going under the handles thwap, Rufus Polson, elmateo, Senor Magoo and A_J about the IMF, structural adjustment and whether or not Haiti should accept the loans offered by the IMF after the earthquake. You can read it here.
The notion that the IMF is not a heartless profit machine is, frankly, absurd. The conditions being imposed on Greece now prove this and put the lie to the notion that the IMF has changed from the cruel master of the 1980s and 1990s. All you have to do is look at the package of "austerity" measures that the Greek government (a quisling "Socialist Party" government at that) is trying to put through the parliament. The BBC has the details (see here and here), and the thing that is immediately noticeable is that the vast majority of the pain from these reforms is going to be felt by disadvantaged groups: the poor and the elderly.
In a crisis, the government needs to look to both its income and cost situation. Clearly, the IMF and the European Union are demanding action on the cost side of the ledger. But the government is doing almost all of its actions on this side, trying to cut expenditure without substantially increasing long term revenue. These measures don't even include a hike in income taxes, the most progressive way a government has of raising revenue. The government ought to be hiking taxes on its top income brackets to ease its balance of payments crisis, not cutting services and raising taxes that have disproportionate impacts on the poorest people in society. The government should also be raising taxes on banks and other corporations - the ones who actually caused the crisis. Instead, all there is is a one-off tax on profits and hikes in VAT (the Greek sales tax) and increased taxes on fuel, alcohol and tobacco. For the elderly, these cuts will be a double-whammy as they will see their pensions cut, and their costs rise.
The BBC also mentions privatization. Privatization is stupid at the best of economic times, killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. In times like these it would be a fire sale, giving away valuable state enterprises for pennies on the Euro. Privatization represents just another way of transferring capital accrued by the people in common to the owning class. Transferring control away from democratically accountable institutions like Parliament to the kleptomanic classes that caused this problem. But this is another hallmark of the reckless profit-lust of the IMF. It seems that in their view and Naomi Klein's words, the state should be nothing more than a conveyor belt moving public money to private interests.
The IMF remains the same villain it has been for decades. What is happening now shows no indication that the IMF cares a whit about reducing poverty, in fact these actions will without a shadow of a doubt increase poverty in Greece. The IMF cannot viably claim to be new, warm and fuzzy when it is pursuing policy options that could well have been tailored to cause more poverty and misery. The IMF should just admit that it is what it is, a shill for the global capitalist class, seeking to open countries to exploitation by capital.
The notion that the IMF is not a heartless profit machine is, frankly, absurd. The conditions being imposed on Greece now prove this and put the lie to the notion that the IMF has changed from the cruel master of the 1980s and 1990s. All you have to do is look at the package of "austerity" measures that the Greek government (a quisling "Socialist Party" government at that) is trying to put through the parliament. The BBC has the details (see here and here), and the thing that is immediately noticeable is that the vast majority of the pain from these reforms is going to be felt by disadvantaged groups: the poor and the elderly.
In a crisis, the government needs to look to both its income and cost situation. Clearly, the IMF and the European Union are demanding action on the cost side of the ledger. But the government is doing almost all of its actions on this side, trying to cut expenditure without substantially increasing long term revenue. These measures don't even include a hike in income taxes, the most progressive way a government has of raising revenue. The government ought to be hiking taxes on its top income brackets to ease its balance of payments crisis, not cutting services and raising taxes that have disproportionate impacts on the poorest people in society. The government should also be raising taxes on banks and other corporations - the ones who actually caused the crisis. Instead, all there is is a one-off tax on profits and hikes in VAT (the Greek sales tax) and increased taxes on fuel, alcohol and tobacco. For the elderly, these cuts will be a double-whammy as they will see their pensions cut, and their costs rise.
The BBC also mentions privatization. Privatization is stupid at the best of economic times, killing the goose that lays the golden eggs. In times like these it would be a fire sale, giving away valuable state enterprises for pennies on the Euro. Privatization represents just another way of transferring capital accrued by the people in common to the owning class. Transferring control away from democratically accountable institutions like Parliament to the kleptomanic classes that caused this problem. But this is another hallmark of the reckless profit-lust of the IMF. It seems that in their view and Naomi Klein's words, the state should be nothing more than a conveyor belt moving public money to private interests.
The IMF remains the same villain it has been for decades. What is happening now shows no indication that the IMF cares a whit about reducing poverty, in fact these actions will without a shadow of a doubt increase poverty in Greece. The IMF cannot viably claim to be new, warm and fuzzy when it is pursuing policy options that could well have been tailored to cause more poverty and misery. The IMF should just admit that it is what it is, a shill for the global capitalist class, seeking to open countries to exploitation by capital.
Wednesday, May 05, 2010
The Oil Industry is Psychopathic
In the days following the revelation of just how monumentally disastrous the Gulf of Mexico oil spill is going to be, it has emerged that the oil industry is asking the government of Canada to loosen restrictions and regulations for safety on drilling in Canada's arctic waters. Are they insane? If nothing else, did their entire PR departments take an unscheduled mass vacation? To suggest that measures to protect the environment should be loosened now, when it is becoming clear to even the most thickheaded and troglodytic supporter of offshore drilling that it represents a colossal threat to the environment, is moronic. To make the suggestion at all is verging on psychopathic.
This isn't something that I am suggesting lightly. The people in charge of the oil industry are exhibiting the classic lack of empathy and emotion that characterizes psychopaths. They are actively endangering the health and wellbeing of millions, if not billions, of people for their own gratification. When confronted, they cry crocodile tears, as the CEO of BP did after his company's heinously negligent behaviour placed one of the most biodiverse ecosystems in the world in peril. They don't care about other people, though as explained in the film The Corporation this is an inherent defect of the corporate form and a not so inherent defect of the system of legislative regulation of corporations in North America and western Europe. Their only motivation is profit, the basic gratification of the capitalist.
The disaster in the Gulf is as bad as it is because the gusher can't be capped. It can't be capped because the pressure is far to high. The pressure can't be reduced until a relief well is completed. And it is going to take ninety days, NINETY DAYS, to drill the relief well. So oil is going to keep pouring into the Gulf of Mexico for ninety days!! That is fundamentally unacceptable, yet there is nothing that can be done about it. Canadian regulations require that in Arctic Ocean waters, relief wells must be drilled within the same season as the main well. This sensible precaution means that if a Deepwater Horizon-type incident were to have occurred in Canada's arctic waters (touch wood that it doesn't) it would have been much more easily sealed off, because a relief well would already have been drilled and could be put into use immediately to allow the capping of the main well. If there absolutely must be drilling in arctic waters, this is at least the most sensible way of doing it.
The same-season relief well requirement is expensive though. It means the oil companies have to put in a lot of money to make sure that the relief well is finished before the end of the season. Accordingly, they don't like it. And now they want the government of Canada to scrap it. I say fuck that and fuck them. Fuck them and the horse they rode in on.
Even now, when the oil industry has been caught with its lies on safety exposed in a spill so massive it is visible from space, they are playing a game of musical chairs over who is responsible. BP is trying to foist as much blame as it can off on other players. It remains to be seen how much of the financial burden of trying to clean up this gigantic mess is going to be foisted onto American tax payers, many of whom have had their livelihoods stripped away as a result of BPs uncaring and callous negligence, but you can bet it will be a lot. If there was any justice in this world, a fine would be levied against BP big enough to put them and their affiliates out of business forever.
The oil industry's behaviour, seeking to avoid all but the most basic repercussions of their actions, and to seek to eliminate measures that might prevent it from happening again, demonstrate the basic principle of capitalism: do whatever you have to do, no matter how down and dirty, sleazy, underhanded and hurt whoever or whatever you have to hurt to make as much money as you can. That's why I fundamentally reject capitalism. As a system of social organization, it is the embodiment of psychopathy. Greed is good. Harm is good. Responsibility and ethics are bad. Even after the Exxon Valdez catastrophe, the oil industry had to be dragged kicking and screaming into mandatory double-hulling on oil tankers. I am willing to bet that even now, after the Deepwater Horizon disaster, the oil industry and their bought-and-paid-for slugs in the US Congress are going to fight tighter regulation on offshore drilling every miserable step of the way. Because heaven forfend that anything should get in the way of the almighty dollar, be it plants, animals or people. Because other things just don't count. That's the psychopathy of capitalism.
This isn't something that I am suggesting lightly. The people in charge of the oil industry are exhibiting the classic lack of empathy and emotion that characterizes psychopaths. They are actively endangering the health and wellbeing of millions, if not billions, of people for their own gratification. When confronted, they cry crocodile tears, as the CEO of BP did after his company's heinously negligent behaviour placed one of the most biodiverse ecosystems in the world in peril. They don't care about other people, though as explained in the film The Corporation this is an inherent defect of the corporate form and a not so inherent defect of the system of legislative regulation of corporations in North America and western Europe. Their only motivation is profit, the basic gratification of the capitalist.
The disaster in the Gulf is as bad as it is because the gusher can't be capped. It can't be capped because the pressure is far to high. The pressure can't be reduced until a relief well is completed. And it is going to take ninety days, NINETY DAYS, to drill the relief well. So oil is going to keep pouring into the Gulf of Mexico for ninety days!! That is fundamentally unacceptable, yet there is nothing that can be done about it. Canadian regulations require that in Arctic Ocean waters, relief wells must be drilled within the same season as the main well. This sensible precaution means that if a Deepwater Horizon-type incident were to have occurred in Canada's arctic waters (touch wood that it doesn't) it would have been much more easily sealed off, because a relief well would already have been drilled and could be put into use immediately to allow the capping of the main well. If there absolutely must be drilling in arctic waters, this is at least the most sensible way of doing it.
The same-season relief well requirement is expensive though. It means the oil companies have to put in a lot of money to make sure that the relief well is finished before the end of the season. Accordingly, they don't like it. And now they want the government of Canada to scrap it. I say fuck that and fuck them. Fuck them and the horse they rode in on.
Even now, when the oil industry has been caught with its lies on safety exposed in a spill so massive it is visible from space, they are playing a game of musical chairs over who is responsible. BP is trying to foist as much blame as it can off on other players. It remains to be seen how much of the financial burden of trying to clean up this gigantic mess is going to be foisted onto American tax payers, many of whom have had their livelihoods stripped away as a result of BPs uncaring and callous negligence, but you can bet it will be a lot. If there was any justice in this world, a fine would be levied against BP big enough to put them and their affiliates out of business forever.
The oil industry's behaviour, seeking to avoid all but the most basic repercussions of their actions, and to seek to eliminate measures that might prevent it from happening again, demonstrate the basic principle of capitalism: do whatever you have to do, no matter how down and dirty, sleazy, underhanded and hurt whoever or whatever you have to hurt to make as much money as you can. That's why I fundamentally reject capitalism. As a system of social organization, it is the embodiment of psychopathy. Greed is good. Harm is good. Responsibility and ethics are bad. Even after the Exxon Valdez catastrophe, the oil industry had to be dragged kicking and screaming into mandatory double-hulling on oil tankers. I am willing to bet that even now, after the Deepwater Horizon disaster, the oil industry and their bought-and-paid-for slugs in the US Congress are going to fight tighter regulation on offshore drilling every miserable step of the way. Because heaven forfend that anything should get in the way of the almighty dollar, be it plants, animals or people. Because other things just don't count. That's the psychopathy of capitalism.
Wednesday, March 10, 2010
Surprise! The Liberals are also Complicit in Detainee Torture
Up until today, the public evidence indicated only that Conservative ministers had known, and done nothing about, the fact that detainees were being tortured by the Afghan authorities. Well not any more.
CBC is reporting that a Canadian diplomat, Eileen Olexiuk, raised concerns that detainees were being tortured in 2005, while Mr. Dithers himself (Paul Martin) was still in office. And apparently her concerns were ignored. As Ms. Olexiuk put it, based on the response she got from the government, she didn't think that anyone cared.
Shame on the Liberals. There are MPs in the Liberal caucus now who were ministers in 2005. Why haven't they sounded the alarm? Oh right, because that would make their party look bad. I shouldn't have expected anything different out of the Liberals. Two leaders later and its still the same thing. I guess with the Liberals the old aphorism holds true: plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
CBC is reporting that a Canadian diplomat, Eileen Olexiuk, raised concerns that detainees were being tortured in 2005, while Mr. Dithers himself (Paul Martin) was still in office. And apparently her concerns were ignored. As Ms. Olexiuk put it, based on the response she got from the government, she didn't think that anyone cared.
Shame on the Liberals. There are MPs in the Liberal caucus now who were ministers in 2005. Why haven't they sounded the alarm? Oh right, because that would make their party look bad. I shouldn't have expected anything different out of the Liberals. Two leaders later and its still the same thing. I guess with the Liberals the old aphorism holds true: plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose.
Tuesday, March 09, 2010
A Timeline of Revelations on Torture in Afghanistan
I put together this timeline of revelations on the issue of Afghan detainees for the enMasse discussion board. I thought I might as well post it here too. There is a continuing thread on detainee abuse at enMasse, and it and Google News were invaluable in putting this together. Just a warning, it is long, depressing and probably partially incomplete. If you have more events to add, please by all means do so in the comments and I will add them into the main entry.
December 2005 – Amnesty International and the BC Civil Liberties Association file an application in the Federal Court seeking to stop the practice of transferring detainees from Canadian custody to Afghan authorities
Feb. 6, 2007 – Military officials begin investigation of three complaints by Afghan prisoners that they were abused while in the custody of the Canadian forces.
Feb. 21, 2007 – Amnesty and the BCCLA again seek to stop the transfer of detainees
March 2, 2007 – Three detainees at the centre of a probe into abuse of detainees by the Canadian forces disappear. They are never found.
March 9,2001 2007 – Amir Attaran reveals a covert agreement signed in 2005 to transfer detainees to Afghan secret police
April 23, 2007 – Globe and Mail reveals thirty allegations of abuse by Afghan authorities of prisoners transferred by the Canadian Forces, contradicting earlier claims by the government that no complaints had been made
April 25, 2007 – Then Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor says that Canada will monitor detainees for signs of abuse. The same day, the Globe and Mail reveals that a report on the treatment of Afghan detainees was circulated to Cabinet Ministers in 2006 which was censored to remove information damaging to the government. The government had previously denied the existence of this report.
April 26, 2007 – The Globe and Mail reports that Michael Byers and William Schabas sent a letter to the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court requesting an investigation into Gordon O'Connor and then Chief of the Defence Staff Rick Hillier on the grounds of possible crimes committed against Afghan detainees.
April 27, 2007 – Stockwell Day insists Canada has had access to detainees since the beginning of the mission, and that all allegations of mistreatment by Afghan authorities are false. He also insists that the existing agreement provides sufficient protection for Afghan detainees.
April 30, 2007 – The government denies that there have ever been any specific allegations of prisoner abuse. Later the same day, Stockwell Day says that Canada has received at least two specific allegations of torture.
May 2, 2007 – A source inside the Ministry of Foreign Affairs revealed that the original prisoner transfer agreement was drafted primarily by the Canadian Forces, and that Foreign Affairs was largely frozen out, suggesting that Hillier acted without government authority. Later the same day, the National Post reports that negotiations for a prisoner transfer agreement were initiated approved Paul Martin and Bill Graham in May of 2005 showing that the government was directing policy on detainee transfers.
May 3, 2007 – Canadian government signs new detainee transfer agreement with Afghanistan. The agreement includes substantially increased protections for detainees, at least on paper.
May 18, 2007 – Amir Attaran testifies before a committee of the House of Commons and reveals a cover-up of reports indicating that detainees transferred by Canada were tortured by Afghan authorities. Lieutenant-General Walter Natynczyk, then Chief of the Land Staff, now Chief of the Defence Staff, says that there is no proof any detainees transferred by Canada have been tortured.
June 6, 2007 – Stockwell Day tells the parliamentary committee that they shouldn't care about abuse allegations because the people making the allegations are “terrorists.”
June 9, 2007 – CBC reports that the Department of Foreign Affairs now acknowledges six specific claims of torture or abuse
June 25, 2007 – The Globe and Mail reports that one of the investigations into the fate of Afghan detainees transferred by Canada won't be allowed to look into whether or not they were tortured or abused
July 9, 2007 – The Globe and Mail reports that the Department of National Defence has been systematically and illegally refusing access to information requests on the topic of the treatment of transferred detainees on the grounds of national security, including information as innocuous as the number of detainees transferred
Sept. 22, 2007 – The Globe and Mail reports that fully one quarter of the detainees transferred to Afghan authorities by the Canadian Forces have disappeared and cannot be found
Oct. 29, 2007 – La Presse reports that prisoners at Afghan jails in Kandahar province continue to be tortured. The government dismisses the report as Taliban propaganda.
Nov. 6, 2007 – The Federal Court dismisses the government's motion to strike the application by Amnesty and the BCCLA for documents relating to prisoner transfers
Nov. 15, 2007 – The Toronto Star reports that the government admits that one of the allegations of torture is “credible.”
Nov. 22, 2007 – Peter MacKay asserts that suggesting that the Canadian Forces are involved in war crimes is “un-Canadian”.
Jan. 24, 2008 – The Globe and Mail reports that the government stopped transferring detainees to Afghan authorities on November 5, 2007, but didn't tell anyone.
Jan. 25, 2008 – A government spokeswoman says that the government was not told that the Canadian Forces were suspending prisoner transfers. Later the same day, she says she mispoke on that point. Stephane Dion reveals that he and Michael Ignatieff were informed the prior week but were sworn to secrecy.
Feb. 1, 2008 – The Globe and Mail reports that the government was aware in the spring of 2007 that the governor of Kandahar was personally involved in torturing prisoners. The allegations against the governor were reported to the International Red Cross by Canadian diplomats, but not to the House of Commons.
December 10, 2008 – Amnesty once against files suit in the Federal Court claiming that the new detainee transfer agreement has not stopped torture.
Oct. 7, 2009 – Richard Colvin files documents with the Military Police Complaints Commission which is holding hearings on the question, in an attempt to get around the government's attempts to stop him from testifying to the Commission. Colvin claims that the Canadian government was aware of torture as early as 2006.
Oct. 14, 2009 – The Toronto Star reports that Colvin warned the government in writing in May 2006 about the risk of torture with transfers to Afghan detainees.
Nov. 18, 2009 – Colvin testifies to the parliamentary committee that the government knew it was likely that all detainees transferred by the Canadian forces were tortured.
Nov. 19, 2009 – Peter MacKay denies that there has been a single proven allegation of torture, and that Colvin got his information directly from the Taliban.
Nov. 22, 2009 – Yahoo News reports that the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission has documented at least 400 cases of torture across Afghanistan. The vast majority of these claims were made in 2006 and 2007, when Colvin was in Afghanistan. The same day, Peter MacKay repeats his assertion that there is no proof that any detainees have been tortured.
Nov. 25, 2009 – The government bars Colvin from handing over documents supporting his claims to the parliamentary committee investigating detainee abuse on the grounds of national security. On the same day, the Toronto Star reports that e-mails sent to the office of Peter MacKay as early as 2006 expressed alarm about the treatment of Afghan detainees. This is contrary to MacKay's claim that he never heard anything about it until May of 2007.
Nov. 26, 2009 – Former Afghan MP Malali Joya backs up Colvin's claims. Later the same day, Luis Moreno Ocampo, the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, begins an investigation into the complicity of NATO troops in the abuse of Afghan detainees. The news makes almost no splash in the Canadian media.
Nov. 27, 2009 – Three top generals claim that they were not worried because the Colvin memos never used the word torture, despite the fact that they have been shown to contain descriptions of treatment that amount to torture. Later the same day, in a humiliating new low for Canada, China lectures the government of Canada for its participation in torture.
Dec. 2, 2009 – The Canadian Press reports that in June of 2006 the Red Cross warned Canadian diplomats in Kandahar that detainees were being abused by Afghan authorities
Dec. 7, 2009 – The Globe and Mail reports that documentary evidence and the sworn testimony of Canadian officers proves at least one instance in 2006 in which Afghan authorities so badly beat a detainee that the Canadian Forces took him back into their custody. This evidence makes a liar of both Peter MacKay and Walter Natynczyk.
Dec. 11, 2009 – The House of Commons votes to require the government to turn over all relevant documents in an unedited form to the parliamentary committee. The government flatly refuses on the grounds of national security.
Dec. 14, 2009 – Lawrence Cannon admits that some of the detainees transferred by Canada have gone missing and cannot be accounted for because the Afghan authorities refuse to account for them to Canadian officials in defiance of the 2007 agreement.
Dec. 18, 2009 – CBC reports that documents prepared for Peter MacKay in 2008 indicate that the military police launched six separate investigations into allegations of abuse involving members of the Canadian Forces.
Dec. 30, 2009 – Stephen Harper prorogues Parliament, dissolving the parliamentary committee investigating the abuse of detainees.
Jan. 25, 2010 – The Toronto Star reports that the government is refusing to pay Colvin's legal fees after they were the ones to summon him to testify.
Jan. 28, 2010 – The government agrees to pay Colvin's legal fees.
Mar. 6, 2010 – Amir Attaran reveals that the documents that the government is resisting releasing will reveal that the Canadian government made a policy decision to transfer detainees to Afghan authorities for the purpose of the detainees being tortured.
Mar. 9, 2010 – CBC reports that Canadian officials began preparing a public relations strategy as early as March 2007, several months before the first documentation of widespread abuse in the Globe and Mail.
December 2005 – Amnesty International and the BC Civil Liberties Association file an application in the Federal Court seeking to stop the practice of transferring detainees from Canadian custody to Afghan authorities
Feb. 6, 2007 – Military officials begin investigation of three complaints by Afghan prisoners that they were abused while in the custody of the Canadian forces.
Feb. 21, 2007 – Amnesty and the BCCLA again seek to stop the transfer of detainees
March 2, 2007 – Three detainees at the centre of a probe into abuse of detainees by the Canadian forces disappear. They are never found.
March 9,
April 23, 2007 – Globe and Mail reveals thirty allegations of abuse by Afghan authorities of prisoners transferred by the Canadian Forces, contradicting earlier claims by the government that no complaints had been made
April 25, 2007 – Then Defence Minister Gordon O'Connor says that Canada will monitor detainees for signs of abuse. The same day, the Globe and Mail reveals that a report on the treatment of Afghan detainees was circulated to Cabinet Ministers in 2006 which was censored to remove information damaging to the government. The government had previously denied the existence of this report.
April 26, 2007 – The Globe and Mail reports that Michael Byers and William Schabas sent a letter to the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court requesting an investigation into Gordon O'Connor and then Chief of the Defence Staff Rick Hillier on the grounds of possible crimes committed against Afghan detainees.
April 27, 2007 – Stockwell Day insists Canada has had access to detainees since the beginning of the mission, and that all allegations of mistreatment by Afghan authorities are false. He also insists that the existing agreement provides sufficient protection for Afghan detainees.
April 30, 2007 – The government denies that there have ever been any specific allegations of prisoner abuse. Later the same day, Stockwell Day says that Canada has received at least two specific allegations of torture.
May 2, 2007 – A source inside the Ministry of Foreign Affairs revealed that the original prisoner transfer agreement was drafted primarily by the Canadian Forces, and that Foreign Affairs was largely frozen out, suggesting that Hillier acted without government authority. Later the same day, the National Post reports that negotiations for a prisoner transfer agreement were initiated approved Paul Martin and Bill Graham in May of 2005 showing that the government was directing policy on detainee transfers.
May 3, 2007 – Canadian government signs new detainee transfer agreement with Afghanistan. The agreement includes substantially increased protections for detainees, at least on paper.
May 18, 2007 – Amir Attaran testifies before a committee of the House of Commons and reveals a cover-up of reports indicating that detainees transferred by Canada were tortured by Afghan authorities. Lieutenant-General Walter Natynczyk, then Chief of the Land Staff, now Chief of the Defence Staff, says that there is no proof any detainees transferred by Canada have been tortured.
June 6, 2007 – Stockwell Day tells the parliamentary committee that they shouldn't care about abuse allegations because the people making the allegations are “terrorists.”
June 9, 2007 – CBC reports that the Department of Foreign Affairs now acknowledges six specific claims of torture or abuse
June 25, 2007 – The Globe and Mail reports that one of the investigations into the fate of Afghan detainees transferred by Canada won't be allowed to look into whether or not they were tortured or abused
July 9, 2007 – The Globe and Mail reports that the Department of National Defence has been systematically and illegally refusing access to information requests on the topic of the treatment of transferred detainees on the grounds of national security, including information as innocuous as the number of detainees transferred
Sept. 22, 2007 – The Globe and Mail reports that fully one quarter of the detainees transferred to Afghan authorities by the Canadian Forces have disappeared and cannot be found
Oct. 29, 2007 – La Presse reports that prisoners at Afghan jails in Kandahar province continue to be tortured. The government dismisses the report as Taliban propaganda.
Nov. 6, 2007 – The Federal Court dismisses the government's motion to strike the application by Amnesty and the BCCLA for documents relating to prisoner transfers
Nov. 15, 2007 – The Toronto Star reports that the government admits that one of the allegations of torture is “credible.”
Nov. 22, 2007 – Peter MacKay asserts that suggesting that the Canadian Forces are involved in war crimes is “un-Canadian”.
Jan. 24, 2008 – The Globe and Mail reports that the government stopped transferring detainees to Afghan authorities on November 5, 2007, but didn't tell anyone.
Jan. 25, 2008 – A government spokeswoman says that the government was not told that the Canadian Forces were suspending prisoner transfers. Later the same day, she says she mispoke on that point. Stephane Dion reveals that he and Michael Ignatieff were informed the prior week but were sworn to secrecy.
Feb. 1, 2008 – The Globe and Mail reports that the government was aware in the spring of 2007 that the governor of Kandahar was personally involved in torturing prisoners. The allegations against the governor were reported to the International Red Cross by Canadian diplomats, but not to the House of Commons.
December 10, 2008 – Amnesty once against files suit in the Federal Court claiming that the new detainee transfer agreement has not stopped torture.
Oct. 7, 2009 – Richard Colvin files documents with the Military Police Complaints Commission which is holding hearings on the question, in an attempt to get around the government's attempts to stop him from testifying to the Commission. Colvin claims that the Canadian government was aware of torture as early as 2006.
Oct. 14, 2009 – The Toronto Star reports that Colvin warned the government in writing in May 2006 about the risk of torture with transfers to Afghan detainees.
Nov. 18, 2009 – Colvin testifies to the parliamentary committee that the government knew it was likely that all detainees transferred by the Canadian forces were tortured.
Nov. 19, 2009 – Peter MacKay denies that there has been a single proven allegation of torture, and that Colvin got his information directly from the Taliban.
Nov. 22, 2009 – Yahoo News reports that the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission has documented at least 400 cases of torture across Afghanistan. The vast majority of these claims were made in 2006 and 2007, when Colvin was in Afghanistan. The same day, Peter MacKay repeats his assertion that there is no proof that any detainees have been tortured.
Nov. 25, 2009 – The government bars Colvin from handing over documents supporting his claims to the parliamentary committee investigating detainee abuse on the grounds of national security. On the same day, the Toronto Star reports that e-mails sent to the office of Peter MacKay as early as 2006 expressed alarm about the treatment of Afghan detainees. This is contrary to MacKay's claim that he never heard anything about it until May of 2007.
Nov. 26, 2009 – Former Afghan MP Malali Joya backs up Colvin's claims. Later the same day, Luis Moreno Ocampo, the Chief Prosecutor of the International Criminal Court, begins an investigation into the complicity of NATO troops in the abuse of Afghan detainees. The news makes almost no splash in the Canadian media.
Nov. 27, 2009 – Three top generals claim that they were not worried because the Colvin memos never used the word torture, despite the fact that they have been shown to contain descriptions of treatment that amount to torture. Later the same day, in a humiliating new low for Canada, China lectures the government of Canada for its participation in torture.
Dec. 2, 2009 – The Canadian Press reports that in June of 2006 the Red Cross warned Canadian diplomats in Kandahar that detainees were being abused by Afghan authorities
Dec. 7, 2009 – The Globe and Mail reports that documentary evidence and the sworn testimony of Canadian officers proves at least one instance in 2006 in which Afghan authorities so badly beat a detainee that the Canadian Forces took him back into their custody. This evidence makes a liar of both Peter MacKay and Walter Natynczyk.
Dec. 11, 2009 – The House of Commons votes to require the government to turn over all relevant documents in an unedited form to the parliamentary committee. The government flatly refuses on the grounds of national security.
Dec. 14, 2009 – Lawrence Cannon admits that some of the detainees transferred by Canada have gone missing and cannot be accounted for because the Afghan authorities refuse to account for them to Canadian officials in defiance of the 2007 agreement.
Dec. 18, 2009 – CBC reports that documents prepared for Peter MacKay in 2008 indicate that the military police launched six separate investigations into allegations of abuse involving members of the Canadian Forces.
Dec. 30, 2009 – Stephen Harper prorogues Parliament, dissolving the parliamentary committee investigating the abuse of detainees.
Jan. 25, 2010 – The Toronto Star reports that the government is refusing to pay Colvin's legal fees after they were the ones to summon him to testify.
Jan. 28, 2010 – The government agrees to pay Colvin's legal fees.
Mar. 6, 2010 – Amir Attaran reveals that the documents that the government is resisting releasing will reveal that the Canadian government made a policy decision to transfer detainees to Afghan authorities for the purpose of the detainees being tortured.
Mar. 9, 2010 – CBC reports that Canadian officials began preparing a public relations strategy as early as March 2007, several months before the first documentation of widespread abuse in the Globe and Mail.
Friday, January 22, 2010
Wednesday, January 06, 2010
Prorogation, Again
So, prorogation, and my working myself into a stew over it, is what has dragged me back to blogging. I never intend to take breaks from it, but then the force of inertia keeps me quiet. Anyhow.
Harper has, as I'm sure everyone knows, prorogued the House and Senate again. After just a year. But I suppose this is longer than the 13 sitting days before the 2008 prorogation. Thank goodness for small blessings?
The decision to prorogue is crass, cynical political manipulation. Much of the speculation about the reason for the prorogation is that it allows the government to avoid the hideously embarrassing revelations that were coming daily from the Special Committee on Afghanistan. I have no doubt that this was a significant part of the decision, but I don't think it was the primary motivation. Those revelations, as terrible as they were (especially considering that they were leading down the road to a Somalia-like situation where Canadian troops will, one day, be shown to have been involved in the torture of Afghans) were not sticking the government. Frankly, and disgustingly, most Canadians do not care. We have become so insular and inward looking that we simply don't care that this government has been committing blatant violations of Canada's obligations at international law under the Geneva Conventions.
No, I believe that the primary reason Harper got our incompetent nitwit of a Governor-General to prorogue the Parliament was because Parliamentary committees are reconstituted after a prorogation. This is important because shortly Harper will be appointing five new Senators (all doubtless Conservative flacks and lackies) and will have achieved a working plurality in the Senate. This will be reflected in the composition of the new Senate committees, allowing the government to force items through the Senate and eliminate the ability for the Liberals to two-facedly support legislation in the Commons and delay it to death in the Senate. Because the Commons liberals are spineless little twits, and refuse to oppose Harper's legislative agenda on anything this now means that Harper's reactionary legislation will go through unobstructed.
As an aside, how did it only take four years of appointments for Harper to undo the effects of 13 years of Liberal appointments to the Senate? Were the Liberals appointing doddering old folks for most of that time?
Regardless of the motives, this prorogation is a baldly undemocratic move. Whether or not doing so was the primary intention behind obtaining prorogation, it did in fact wipe out the Special Committee on Afghanistan and its inconvenient daily revelations. But that is not out of the ordinary for this government. Whether it is muzzling public servants who are inconveniently serving the public rather than the Party (see, for example, Kevin Page the Parliamentary Budget Officer, or the entire Military Police Complaints Commission or the head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission), stopping Olympic critics at the borders, proroguing Parliament, circulating a dirty tricks handbook to stymie the works of Parliamentary committees or bringing the House to a shamefully low level of decorum, this government has taken a dump on democracy at every turn. I don't know how long the Canadian people will stand for it. I can only hope that at some point they will say "enough!" Then again, socialists like me have been waiting for that kind of moment for a long time.
Harper has, as I'm sure everyone knows, prorogued the House and Senate again. After just a year. But I suppose this is longer than the 13 sitting days before the 2008 prorogation. Thank goodness for small blessings?
The decision to prorogue is crass, cynical political manipulation. Much of the speculation about the reason for the prorogation is that it allows the government to avoid the hideously embarrassing revelations that were coming daily from the Special Committee on Afghanistan. I have no doubt that this was a significant part of the decision, but I don't think it was the primary motivation. Those revelations, as terrible as they were (especially considering that they were leading down the road to a Somalia-like situation where Canadian troops will, one day, be shown to have been involved in the torture of Afghans) were not sticking the government. Frankly, and disgustingly, most Canadians do not care. We have become so insular and inward looking that we simply don't care that this government has been committing blatant violations of Canada's obligations at international law under the Geneva Conventions.
No, I believe that the primary reason Harper got our incompetent nitwit of a Governor-General to prorogue the Parliament was because Parliamentary committees are reconstituted after a prorogation. This is important because shortly Harper will be appointing five new Senators (all doubtless Conservative flacks and lackies) and will have achieved a working plurality in the Senate. This will be reflected in the composition of the new Senate committees, allowing the government to force items through the Senate and eliminate the ability for the Liberals to two-facedly support legislation in the Commons and delay it to death in the Senate. Because the Commons liberals are spineless little twits, and refuse to oppose Harper's legislative agenda on anything this now means that Harper's reactionary legislation will go through unobstructed.
As an aside, how did it only take four years of appointments for Harper to undo the effects of 13 years of Liberal appointments to the Senate? Were the Liberals appointing doddering old folks for most of that time?
Regardless of the motives, this prorogation is a baldly undemocratic move. Whether or not doing so was the primary intention behind obtaining prorogation, it did in fact wipe out the Special Committee on Afghanistan and its inconvenient daily revelations. But that is not out of the ordinary for this government. Whether it is muzzling public servants who are inconveniently serving the public rather than the Party (see, for example, Kevin Page the Parliamentary Budget Officer, or the entire Military Police Complaints Commission or the head of the Canadian Nuclear Safety Commission), stopping Olympic critics at the borders, proroguing Parliament, circulating a dirty tricks handbook to stymie the works of Parliamentary committees or bringing the House to a shamefully low level of decorum, this government has taken a dump on democracy at every turn. I don't know how long the Canadian people will stand for it. I can only hope that at some point they will say "enough!" Then again, socialists like me have been waiting for that kind of moment for a long time.
Sunday, June 21, 2009
Iran Protests are Increasingly Revolutionary
I'm taking a break from a weekend full of articling applications (ugh) to note a new development in Iran. There seems to have been a sea-change in the protests there. They have gone from being about an election result to about bringing down the government. This is a good thing. Iran's system of theocracy is deeply corrupt and needs to change. A revolution is the only true way to do that.
Persiankiwi (http://twitter.com/persiankiwi) has some very interesting tips on how to disable the Iranian government, which indicate this trend.
I promise I will try to get to something on domestic politics, but that might be a few days off. Suffice to say, Iggy = Stephane II.
Persiankiwi (http://twitter.com/persiankiwi) has some very interesting tips on how to disable the Iranian government, which indicate this trend.
I promise I will try to get to something on domestic politics, but that might be a few days off. Suffice to say, Iggy = Stephane II.
Monday, June 15, 2009
Developments in Iran
The situation in Iran seems to continue to degenerate. I am getting worried for the tweeter at Change_for_Iran since he last tweeted that he was going to the Mousavi rally and hasn't tweeted since. I hope he is alright. Another excellent twitter is persiankiwi. He has been reporting increasing violence by both state police and civilian militias. It sounds like the opposition is not backing down. New marches are planned for tomorrow. This is beginning to resemble a revolutionary moment. This may be the chance that Iran needs to throw off the shackles of their reactionary theocracy.
My hope now is for a relatively peaceful revolution, but that is looking increasingly unlikely, as the state appears to be using steadily increasing violence as it attempts to maintain control. This uprising is driven by new media, and increasingly resembles the lead up to the massacre in Iiananmen Square in 1989. That uprising was driven by cellphones and faxes. This one appears to be driven by Twitter, as students share information and knowledge. I haven't heard anything more about the members of Ansar-e Hezbollah captured at Tehran University.
I'm doing my best to keep abreast of the situation.
Later tonight I will try to put together something on today's developments in federal politics.
My hope now is for a relatively peaceful revolution, but that is looking increasingly unlikely, as the state appears to be using steadily increasing violence as it attempts to maintain control. This uprising is driven by new media, and increasingly resembles the lead up to the massacre in Iiananmen Square in 1989. That uprising was driven by cellphones and faxes. This one appears to be driven by Twitter, as students share information and knowledge. I haven't heard anything more about the members of Ansar-e Hezbollah captured at Tehran University.
I'm doing my best to keep abreast of the situation.
Later tonight I will try to put together something on today's developments in federal politics.
Sunday, June 14, 2009
I'm Back
It's been far to long, but I'm back.
I stopped blogging for a while because of school and then got caught in the intertia. I've been dragged back in by the events in Iran.
I've been monitoring a twitter feed by a student in Tehran. It is something that could turn out to be to the stolen election what Riverbend's blog was to the occupation of Iraq. You can find it at twitter.com/change_for_iran
The latest tweets from him suggest that he is being attacked by pro-government militias:
This sounds like an increasingly brutal crackdown in progress.
As I've said elsewhere, I could see Ahmedinejad winning, but not with a ridiculous margin like that claimed. To suggest that he got 63% of the vote is absurd and smacks of vote rigging.
I'm going to keep following this. In the coming days I'll also blog about my response to the Nova Scotia election.
Update: Iranian Student is now reporting that two paramilitaries from Ansar-e Hezbollah (the group leading the siege of Tehran University) have been captured by students. Not sure what this will mean, but it's a big event.
I stopped blogging for a while because of school and then got caught in the intertia. I've been dragged back in by the events in Iran.
I've been monitoring a twitter feed by a student in Tehran. It is something that could turn out to be to the stolen election what Riverbend's blog was to the occupation of Iraq. You can find it at twitter.com/change_for_iran
The latest tweets from him suggest that he is being attacked by pro-government militias:
bastards just attacked us for no reason, I lost count of how much tear gas they launched at us!
my friend saying more than 100 students arrested, I can't confirm this but the numbers are high
to other sources: this isn't the police! police is still outside! we're under attack by Ansar-Hezbolah
unfortunately the entrance door is completely destroyed and there is no way of barricading it
typing as fastest as I can in both English & Farsi, Still we need outside help, I really don't want to be captured by Ansar
For some unknown reason there is still power in here and DSL line is working. but there is no dial tone
Stop burning tires & trash cans! come to our aid it's getting worse than 18tir already!
We're trying to stop Masood from going outside! there is no way they will listen to us right now.
the other buildings are now chanting "Ey Iran" song
This sounds like an increasingly brutal crackdown in progress.
As I've said elsewhere, I could see Ahmedinejad winning, but not with a ridiculous margin like that claimed. To suggest that he got 63% of the vote is absurd and smacks of vote rigging.
I'm going to keep following this. In the coming days I'll also blog about my response to the Nova Scotia election.
Update: Iranian Student is now reporting that two paramilitaries from Ansar-e Hezbollah (the group leading the siege of Tehran University) have been captured by students. Not sure what this will mean, but it's a big event.
Wednesday, February 25, 2009
I Deeply and Sincerely Hate My Computer
Sorry in advance, but this is going to be a rant.
I hate my fucking computer. About five days ago, it started acting weirdly, refusing to access certain sites, sites that have nothing to do to each other, as different as www.tsn.ca and www.halifax.ca. Now at first, it seemed like Flash might be a common denominator. But no. I can open some pages that have Flash elements, like www.addictinggames.com. So then I think it might be a virus of some kind. Run a full system scan with McAfee (or try to, that software takes forever), give up on that, get new anti-virus software which is much faster, and there is no virus. So then I figure something deeper must have changed. So I use the Windows Vista (how I hate Vista) restore tool. I go back 48 hours before I started having problems. But no good. I just can't figure out what is going on.
Then I hit on the idea that it might be a problem with my internet connection, so I plug my laptop into the connection (same ethernet cable, same modem, same everything) and it works just fine. Fuck. That means something is wrong with my computer itself.
So then, I physically open up the tower, and reseat the network card, something I have never done before, but I pulled it off, giving the interior a good cleaning with the blow-function of the vacuum cleaner while I'm at it to get rid of the dust. Turn the computer back on, and still nothing happening. GAH!
At that point, I give up for a few days out of frustration. After all, only some websites aren't working, the Internet is still usable.
Today I come back to it, and get on the phone to my ISP to see if they have any idea what might be wrong. They run me through a batter of tests that solve nothing. Then they suggest that I can almost definitely fix the problem by reinstalling Windows Vista. Well doesn't that just sound like a fun proposition. But if it's what I have to do, it's what I have to do. Now, my computer didn't come with a rescue disk, but it did come with a restore utility that says it will reset everything to factory settings. Surely this should fix the problem.
So I go through the entire rigmarole of backing up my files on an external hard drive, and reinstalling Vista on my computer. All the while, I'm thinking great, when all this hassle will be done, everything will be fine. After about an hour, it's all done. I open up Internet Explorer (since reinstalling got rid of Firefox), and check one of the sites that wasn't working for me. Son of a bitch! It still doesn't work! All that work, all those programmes that have to be reinstalled, and it still doesn't fucking well work.
I am now utterly and completely at wits end. I'm approaching the point of giving up and dragging the demonic machine down to the store where I bought it and getting them to fix it. The problem with this is that whenever I take a computer with a problem to be fixed, they can never replicate the problem, so it doesn't get fixed (and reappears when I get it home) and they charge me anyhow. It's extremely annoying.
The urge to throw this machine off my balcony is steadily rising, but I am restraining myself because I can't afford to replace it.
If anyone reading this thinks they might know what is wrong, and what I can do to fix it, please leave a comment or e-mail me at ts-blog@live.ca.
Update on Feb. 26: I officially give up trying to understand computers. Over night, without me doing anything, the problem resolved itself. I don't understand, but I'm not going to question it. If only it had corrected itself before I reset my computer to factory.
I hate my fucking computer. About five days ago, it started acting weirdly, refusing to access certain sites, sites that have nothing to do to each other, as different as www.tsn.ca and www.halifax.ca. Now at first, it seemed like Flash might be a common denominator. But no. I can open some pages that have Flash elements, like www.addictinggames.com. So then I think it might be a virus of some kind. Run a full system scan with McAfee (or try to, that software takes forever), give up on that, get new anti-virus software which is much faster, and there is no virus. So then I figure something deeper must have changed. So I use the Windows Vista (how I hate Vista) restore tool. I go back 48 hours before I started having problems. But no good. I just can't figure out what is going on.
Then I hit on the idea that it might be a problem with my internet connection, so I plug my laptop into the connection (same ethernet cable, same modem, same everything) and it works just fine. Fuck. That means something is wrong with my computer itself.
So then, I physically open up the tower, and reseat the network card, something I have never done before, but I pulled it off, giving the interior a good cleaning with the blow-function of the vacuum cleaner while I'm at it to get rid of the dust. Turn the computer back on, and still nothing happening. GAH!
At that point, I give up for a few days out of frustration. After all, only some websites aren't working, the Internet is still usable.
Today I come back to it, and get on the phone to my ISP to see if they have any idea what might be wrong. They run me through a batter of tests that solve nothing. Then they suggest that I can almost definitely fix the problem by reinstalling Windows Vista. Well doesn't that just sound like a fun proposition. But if it's what I have to do, it's what I have to do. Now, my computer didn't come with a rescue disk, but it did come with a restore utility that says it will reset everything to factory settings. Surely this should fix the problem.
So I go through the entire rigmarole of backing up my files on an external hard drive, and reinstalling Vista on my computer. All the while, I'm thinking great, when all this hassle will be done, everything will be fine. After about an hour, it's all done. I open up Internet Explorer (since reinstalling got rid of Firefox), and check one of the sites that wasn't working for me. Son of a bitch! It still doesn't work! All that work, all those programmes that have to be reinstalled, and it still doesn't fucking well work.
I am now utterly and completely at wits end. I'm approaching the point of giving up and dragging the demonic machine down to the store where I bought it and getting them to fix it. The problem with this is that whenever I take a computer with a problem to be fixed, they can never replicate the problem, so it doesn't get fixed (and reappears when I get it home) and they charge me anyhow. It's extremely annoying.
The urge to throw this machine off my balcony is steadily rising, but I am restraining myself because I can't afford to replace it.
If anyone reading this thinks they might know what is wrong, and what I can do to fix it, please leave a comment or e-mail me at ts-blog@live.ca.
Update on Feb. 26: I officially give up trying to understand computers. Over night, without me doing anything, the problem resolved itself. I don't understand, but I'm not going to question it. If only it had corrected itself before I reset my computer to factory.
Wednesday, February 18, 2009
Tell Me Again how the Occupation is Going Well
The New York Times is reporting that in 2008 civilian deaths in Afghanistan rose by forty percent. 40%!
This should put the lie to the bullshit spun by imperialists and colonialists who support the occupation of Afghanistan. When we look at these numbers, we also need to bear in mind that the occupying powers routinely deflate the number of civilian dead by citing many of those killed by the occupation powers as suspected enemy combatants. Killed a child? He was holding a grenade. Blew up a wedding? It was actually a terrorist cover. Shot up a car full of kids? They refused to stop when you screamed at them in English which they don't understand.
The occupation is a colossal scam job. It is a neo-colonialist adventure inscribed on the bodies of the Afghans, whether it is those killed by high altitude bombs, or those tortured into psychosis at Bagram Airbase or Guantanamo Bay. Installinga former Unocal executive a man with highly limited experience (his highest post in any government before 9/11 being deputy foreign minister) as President, and then keeping him in place through elections organized and run by occupying powers is a sham. You can't have free and fair elections under occupation.
But of course, the interest in free and fair elections is part of the myth. If they tried to sell the occupation as securing a pipeline route for oil from the Caspian Sea or as a device to hand over colossal amounts of money to private contractors running a private war, the public would have none of it. Only by running a campaign of lies has public consent for the occupation been mobilized.
Bring the occupation army home now. No more death, no more lies for capitalism.
Thanks to anonymous for the comment below, and I've edited this piece to incorporate that, as well as for a few little spelling errors.
This should put the lie to the bullshit spun by imperialists and colonialists who support the occupation of Afghanistan. When we look at these numbers, we also need to bear in mind that the occupying powers routinely deflate the number of civilian dead by citing many of those killed by the occupation powers as suspected enemy combatants. Killed a child? He was holding a grenade. Blew up a wedding? It was actually a terrorist cover. Shot up a car full of kids? They refused to stop when you screamed at them in English which they don't understand.
The occupation is a colossal scam job. It is a neo-colonialist adventure inscribed on the bodies of the Afghans, whether it is those killed by high altitude bombs, or those tortured into psychosis at Bagram Airbase or Guantanamo Bay. Installing
But of course, the interest in free and fair elections is part of the myth. If they tried to sell the occupation as securing a pipeline route for oil from the Caspian Sea or as a device to hand over colossal amounts of money to private contractors running a private war, the public would have none of it. Only by running a campaign of lies has public consent for the occupation been mobilized.
Bring the occupation army home now. No more death, no more lies for capitalism.
Thanks to anonymous for the comment below, and I've edited this piece to incorporate that, as well as for a few little spelling errors.
Monday, February 16, 2009
Chavez Wins Venezuela Referendum
Just a quick note to say that Hugo Chavez has won the referendum in Venezuela. This is great news, and an excellent step toward making the revolution in Venezuela permanent. Now the people will be free to re-elect Chavez if they wish.
Congratulations, Venezuela.
Congratulations, Venezuela.
Sunday, February 15, 2009
The American Stimulus Package
Otto von Bismark said "laws are like sausages. It's better not to see them being made." That maxim definitely applies to the excruciating process of watching the American stimulus package wind its way through the Congress. If anyone still wonders why the Democrats need that 60 vote majority in the Senate that they came ever so close to, this was why.
The Republicans took a good run at destroying everything good in Obama's proposed package. They reduced the overall value by $80 billion. They stripped out the limits on pay for employees of companies receiving a government bailouts. They turned something like $100 billion of the spending proposals into tax cut proposals instead. They stripped out the heart of the "buy American" clause (more on this in a bit). And the Democrats capitulated. But I'll give them credit for at least proposing some decent measures.
The Republicans seem set to filibuster everything with which they disagree in the Senate. And the bad news - the Senate Repugs are far more ideological on average than the House Republicans. Essentially, everything comes down to the two Maine Senators, both Republican and both relative moderates. Right now, and until Al Franken gets seated as the Senator for Minnnesota, the Democrats need two votes to break a fillibuster. This means that the two Republicans must be appeased. Even once Franken is seated, and it really is a matter of when not if, they will still need one Republican.
One of the biggest losses was the meat of the "buy American" clauses. It cracked me up to hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth coming out of Europe particularly, but also the Canadian centre and right about this. I wanted to smack some of them upside the head. Seriously. The point of a stimulus package in the US isn't to send money to European and Canadian business who employ European and Canadian workers, it is to send money to American workers, put Americans to work and support demand for American products. The people wailing about it are stupid idiots. Now, I know that stupid =/= conservative necessarily, but conservative = stupid a surprising percentage of the time. Why, for gawd's sake, would the American government be sending borrowed money overseas to support foreign economies when the US economy going into the shitter is what caused the current recession, and the US economy getting out of the shitter is the only thing that will make it better? Honestly these people are morons. It shouldn't be a surprise really, that the same people who gave us $100 = daycare think that stimulus money should be flowing out of the country. Stupid, stupid, stupid. And now, just for a change, I won't hold back and I'll tell you how I really feel. Oh. Wait.
To go back to Bismark's bon mot at the beginning, watching laws get made really is like watching sausages gets made (I am making an assumption about the making of sausages, since I have never seen it done). Both will make you nauseated, and eliminate your desire to have anything to do with the end product.
One post I am planning to write in coming days is about the inquiry into the extra-judicial execution of Robert Dziekanski by the RCMP, and how it is exposing a major web of lies. One outrage at a time though.
The Republicans took a good run at destroying everything good in Obama's proposed package. They reduced the overall value by $80 billion. They stripped out the limits on pay for employees of companies receiving a government bailouts. They turned something like $100 billion of the spending proposals into tax cut proposals instead. They stripped out the heart of the "buy American" clause (more on this in a bit). And the Democrats capitulated. But I'll give them credit for at least proposing some decent measures.
The Republicans seem set to filibuster everything with which they disagree in the Senate. And the bad news - the Senate Repugs are far more ideological on average than the House Republicans. Essentially, everything comes down to the two Maine Senators, both Republican and both relative moderates. Right now, and until Al Franken gets seated as the Senator for Minnnesota, the Democrats need two votes to break a fillibuster. This means that the two Republicans must be appeased. Even once Franken is seated, and it really is a matter of when not if, they will still need one Republican.
One of the biggest losses was the meat of the "buy American" clauses. It cracked me up to hear the wailing and gnashing of teeth coming out of Europe particularly, but also the Canadian centre and right about this. I wanted to smack some of them upside the head. Seriously. The point of a stimulus package in the US isn't to send money to European and Canadian business who employ European and Canadian workers, it is to send money to American workers, put Americans to work and support demand for American products. The people wailing about it are stupid idiots. Now, I know that stupid =/= conservative necessarily, but conservative = stupid a surprising percentage of the time. Why, for gawd's sake, would the American government be sending borrowed money overseas to support foreign economies when the US economy going into the shitter is what caused the current recession, and the US economy getting out of the shitter is the only thing that will make it better? Honestly these people are morons. It shouldn't be a surprise really, that the same people who gave us $100 = daycare think that stimulus money should be flowing out of the country. Stupid, stupid, stupid. And now, just for a change, I won't hold back and I'll tell you how I really feel. Oh. Wait.
To go back to Bismark's bon mot at the beginning, watching laws get made really is like watching sausages gets made (I am making an assumption about the making of sausages, since I have never seen it done). Both will make you nauseated, and eliminate your desire to have anything to do with the end product.
One post I am planning to write in coming days is about the inquiry into the extra-judicial execution of Robert Dziekanski by the RCMP, and how it is exposing a major web of lies. One outrage at a time though.
Wednesday, February 04, 2009
Ignatieff Disgraces the Liberal Party, Harper Helps
I know it takes some doing, but Iggy has disgraced the Liberal Party of Canada once again. By voting in favour of the budget, he and his party voted in favour of the roll back of pay equity for women. The Liberals are now against equal pay for work of equal value. It's a sad day.
Pay equity is not some frill that can be cut in hard economic times. It is the absolute right of all women. The Harper-Ignatieff proposal cuts off women's access to the courts. Their alternative? The collective bargaining table. Bzzzt, sorry, try again. This proposal leaves behind all the women who work in non-union workplaces, a staggering 41% of all women who work outside the home.
Obviously, it would be nice if all women worked in unionized work places, but even if they did, denying access to the courts is not an acceptable approach to pay equity.
The Conservative-Liberal attack on pay equity also plays the ostrich when looking at the history of pay equity at the bargaining table. Federal civil servants negotiated pay equity almost twenty years ago, but since then have had to fight tooth and nail in the courts to force successive Liberal and Conservative governments to honour that pledge. Why would anyone be taken in and believe that now will be different. The corporate world is no more friendly to pay equity than our corporate government. They will fight as hard as can be to avoid pay equity obligations.
When pay equity is something to be gained at the negotiating table, it becomes something that can be negotiated away. That is an unacceptable possibility. Further, when pay equity is the subject of negotiation, it loses its rights-based aspect. It occurs to me that this is precisely what the Conservatives and their Liberal lackeys want. They want to move the discussion of equal pay for work of equal value away from a rights discourse. Because they don't seem to favour women's rights at all. Oh, the Liberals mouth the words when the camera is on, but their actions belie them. If they had any positive principles at all, they would have refused to vote for a budget containing the attack on pay equity, especially when they could have had it excised in exchange for their support.
The Liberals are lying, hypocritical assholes, at least their party brass is. We should be ashamed that our country has vacillated between dumb and dumber for better part of 150 years.
Pay equity is not some frill that can be cut in hard economic times. It is the absolute right of all women. The Harper-Ignatieff proposal cuts off women's access to the courts. Their alternative? The collective bargaining table. Bzzzt, sorry, try again. This proposal leaves behind all the women who work in non-union workplaces, a staggering 41% of all women who work outside the home.
Obviously, it would be nice if all women worked in unionized work places, but even if they did, denying access to the courts is not an acceptable approach to pay equity.
The Conservative-Liberal attack on pay equity also plays the ostrich when looking at the history of pay equity at the bargaining table. Federal civil servants negotiated pay equity almost twenty years ago, but since then have had to fight tooth and nail in the courts to force successive Liberal and Conservative governments to honour that pledge. Why would anyone be taken in and believe that now will be different. The corporate world is no more friendly to pay equity than our corporate government. They will fight as hard as can be to avoid pay equity obligations.
When pay equity is something to be gained at the negotiating table, it becomes something that can be negotiated away. That is an unacceptable possibility. Further, when pay equity is the subject of negotiation, it loses its rights-based aspect. It occurs to me that this is precisely what the Conservatives and their Liberal lackeys want. They want to move the discussion of equal pay for work of equal value away from a rights discourse. Because they don't seem to favour women's rights at all. Oh, the Liberals mouth the words when the camera is on, but their actions belie them. If they had any positive principles at all, they would have refused to vote for a budget containing the attack on pay equity, especially when they could have had it excised in exchange for their support.
The Liberals are lying, hypocritical assholes, at least their party brass is. We should be ashamed that our country has vacillated between dumb and dumber for better part of 150 years.
Wednesday, January 28, 2009
The Coalition is Dead
Ignatieff has, today, killed the chance to remove the Conservatives from power. He has killed the coalition by supporting the Conservative budget, and that means that the NDP will no longer enter coalition with the Liberals. With the coalition option off the table, then the only choice when Harper falls is an election, which the Liberals are unprepared to fight and have no money to fight it with. This means we are set for a re-run of Milquetoast Dion propping up the Conservatives while they run roughshod over Canadian values.
Iggy has failed the test of leadership, and has ended that moment of hope that there was in late 2008.
Iggy has failed the test of leadership, and has ended that moment of hope that there was in late 2008.
Tuesday, January 27, 2009
The Budget is a Bust
As I feared, there are major tax cuts in this budget. The Conservatives are cutting taxes by $1.9 billion this year, and $2 billion on a continuing basis by moving the tax brackets upward. I will admit, that these are not the worst tax cuts there could have been, there could have been corporate income tax cuts, or cuts for the top tax bracket. The cuts that are in this budget do help to fight bracket creep, and that is generally speaking a good thing. These cuts are not, however, targeted to help the poorest of the poor, and those earning the least, those for whom tax cuts flow directly back into the economy in the form of spending on staples like food and clothing.
Also bad, is $4 billion over two years in tax credits for home renovations. This is a stupid way of doing things. Firstly, the credit isn't tied to any environmental objective. Someone expanding their monster home to build a heated swimming pool would get this credit the same as someone who is renovating their home to put in solar panels, geothermal heat sinks and improved insulation. Secondly, this programme requires individuals to outlay, and then claim back on their tax returns. This is stupid and produces unnecessary paper shuffling. The better way is simply for the government to directly reimburse for costs of pro-environmental renovations.
A good thing is to see extended EI benefits, to fifty weeks. But very bad is that there is no expanded eligibility. Part of the problem with the EI programme now is that only a tiny percentage of people who pay into it will ever be able to collect. The government should have expanded eligibility rules to ensure that more laid-off workers have access to the plan.
The budget includes $4 billion over two years for new infrastructure projects. This is paltry compared to the demand that is out there, and the massive infrastructure debt that this country faces. Public transit projects alone could gobble up all of this money.
Where is the money for social housing? Where is the money for retraining programmes for laid-off workers?
The deficit for this year is expected to be $33.7 billion, for 2010-2011 $29.8 billion, for 2011-2012 $13 billion and for 2012-2013 $7.3 billion. That means that the government expects to lose $83.8 billion over the next four years. That undoes almost a decade of debt repayment that was bought with the suffering of Canadians from slashed healthcare transfers, cuts to education, the outright theft of the EI surplus and a myriad of other cuts.
This budget is a bust, and if the Liberals support it, as far as I am concerned the coalition is dead.
Update: On further review, this budget is even more garbage than I thought it was. It places a huge load on the provinces and the municipalities to provide matching funds for infrastructure projects, which is insane since cities can't run deficits. The feds can borrow at a much lower interest rate than provinces. Those jurisdictions that cannot come up with the matching funds will be unable to access the federal money. This budget is a sham. Further, it is based on the 2008 fiscal statement (you know, the one that produced the first major constitutional crisis in a decade), and therefore includes by reference the elimination of pay equity, the attack on workers' rights and the ending of public campaign financing.
With regard to EI, I should add that the lack of increased eligibility is a disgrace, since the government blatantly stole $50 billion from the EI surplus during the 1990s and 2000s to pay for corporate tax cuts.
For an excellent explanation of why this budget will not stimulate the economy, see The Progressive Economics Forum.
Also bad, is $4 billion over two years in tax credits for home renovations. This is a stupid way of doing things. Firstly, the credit isn't tied to any environmental objective. Someone expanding their monster home to build a heated swimming pool would get this credit the same as someone who is renovating their home to put in solar panels, geothermal heat sinks and improved insulation. Secondly, this programme requires individuals to outlay, and then claim back on their tax returns. This is stupid and produces unnecessary paper shuffling. The better way is simply for the government to directly reimburse for costs of pro-environmental renovations.
A good thing is to see extended EI benefits, to fifty weeks. But very bad is that there is no expanded eligibility. Part of the problem with the EI programme now is that only a tiny percentage of people who pay into it will ever be able to collect. The government should have expanded eligibility rules to ensure that more laid-off workers have access to the plan.
The budget includes $4 billion over two years for new infrastructure projects. This is paltry compared to the demand that is out there, and the massive infrastructure debt that this country faces. Public transit projects alone could gobble up all of this money.
Where is the money for social housing? Where is the money for retraining programmes for laid-off workers?
The deficit for this year is expected to be $33.7 billion, for 2010-2011 $29.8 billion, for 2011-2012 $13 billion and for 2012-2013 $7.3 billion. That means that the government expects to lose $83.8 billion over the next four years. That undoes almost a decade of debt repayment that was bought with the suffering of Canadians from slashed healthcare transfers, cuts to education, the outright theft of the EI surplus and a myriad of other cuts.
This budget is a bust, and if the Liberals support it, as far as I am concerned the coalition is dead.
Update: On further review, this budget is even more garbage than I thought it was. It places a huge load on the provinces and the municipalities to provide matching funds for infrastructure projects, which is insane since cities can't run deficits. The feds can borrow at a much lower interest rate than provinces. Those jurisdictions that cannot come up with the matching funds will be unable to access the federal money. This budget is a sham. Further, it is based on the 2008 fiscal statement (you know, the one that produced the first major constitutional crisis in a decade), and therefore includes by reference the elimination of pay equity, the attack on workers' rights and the ending of public campaign financing.
With regard to EI, I should add that the lack of increased eligibility is a disgrace, since the government blatantly stole $50 billion from the EI surplus during the 1990s and 2000s to pay for corporate tax cuts.
For an excellent explanation of why this budget will not stimulate the economy, see The Progressive Economics Forum.
The Budget, and the Coalition's Last Chance
Tomorrow, Finance Minister and Flim-Flam-Artist-in-Chief Jim Flaherty will deliver the federal budget for the 2009-2010 fiscal year. Much of the budget has already been leaked, in defiance of long-standing trends of budget confidentiality. The Conservatives appear to be set to spend like drunken sailors on a variety of areas. The spending seems, for the most part, to be focussed on good things (though as the NDP has been pointing out all day, the Conservatives can't really be trusted to deliver on this stuff, since they keep re-announcing the same money over and over). Concerningly, however, is that it has been indicated that the budget will contain broad-based tax cuts.
As I wrote a while ago, tax cuts are not stimulus, no matter how much the government would like us to believe the Chicago School, neo-liberal orthodoxy that if you free the market, greater prosperity will follow. That has been proven time and again, from the Southern Cone of Latin America to the post-Communist economies of the former Soviet Block, to the former Asian Tigers. Neo-liberal orthodoxy produces fantastic riches for an elite few, but produces planned misery for the vast bulk of the population. Neo-liberalism produces a massive wealth transfer from the poor to the rich, and produces the most astonishingly unequal societies on the face of the earth.
If this budget includes broad-based tax cuts, those will not be stimulus, those will drag the federal curent accounts budget into a structural deficit. Reducing revenue is the most astonishingly inappropriate thing for the government to do when major fiscal stimulus is needed.
The Liberals have this one opportunity to prove that they have grown a spine. If they vote for this budget, and for the con artists who have put it together, they will have proven themselves cowards, shrinking in the face of Conservative lies and bullying. However if they vote against, they will have proven a willingness to find an alternative within our constitutional structures, and without forcing the expense of another election on the people of Canada. Of course, all of that depends on the Governor General not disgracing herself again when Harper asks her for dissolution and a new election.
If the Liberals knuckle under, that will be it for the coalition. There is no point in any kind of cooperation with a Liberal Party that is staggering drunkenly to the right under Michael Ignatieff who is quickly proving once again that the Liberals will say anything and stand for nothing.
Tomorrow will be interesting.
As I wrote a while ago, tax cuts are not stimulus, no matter how much the government would like us to believe the Chicago School, neo-liberal orthodoxy that if you free the market, greater prosperity will follow. That has been proven time and again, from the Southern Cone of Latin America to the post-Communist economies of the former Soviet Block, to the former Asian Tigers. Neo-liberal orthodoxy produces fantastic riches for an elite few, but produces planned misery for the vast bulk of the population. Neo-liberalism produces a massive wealth transfer from the poor to the rich, and produces the most astonishingly unequal societies on the face of the earth.
If this budget includes broad-based tax cuts, those will not be stimulus, those will drag the federal curent accounts budget into a structural deficit. Reducing revenue is the most astonishingly inappropriate thing for the government to do when major fiscal stimulus is needed.
The Liberals have this one opportunity to prove that they have grown a spine. If they vote for this budget, and for the con artists who have put it together, they will have proven themselves cowards, shrinking in the face of Conservative lies and bullying. However if they vote against, they will have proven a willingness to find an alternative within our constitutional structures, and without forcing the expense of another election on the people of Canada. Of course, all of that depends on the Governor General not disgracing herself again when Harper asks her for dissolution and a new election.
If the Liberals knuckle under, that will be it for the coalition. There is no point in any kind of cooperation with a Liberal Party that is staggering drunkenly to the right under Michael Ignatieff who is quickly proving once again that the Liberals will say anything and stand for nothing.
Tomorrow will be interesting.
Friday, January 23, 2009
Obama Going in the Right Direction
I must say, I've been pleasantly surprised by President Obama's first days in office. He has issued an executive order to close down the torture camp at Guantanamo Bay within a year (good, but not perfect - it should close now), he has frozen all of Bush's "midnight regulations" ordered between Nov. 4 and Jan. 20. which would have done enormous damage, and today the FDA cleared the way for the first study on embryonic human stem cell therapy, and more importantly Obama lifted the global gag rule that stops US government funding from going to groups that discuss abortion abroad.
Ending the global gag rule is particularly important, because it denied so many women around the world access to the full array of family planning options. According to International Planned Parenthood, they've lost more than $100 million because of this rule.
This is a very encouraging sign that Obama will take a stand to protect the rights of women from the encroachments of conservatives, and I applaud him for that. Well done!
Ending the global gag rule is particularly important, because it denied so many women around the world access to the full array of family planning options. According to International Planned Parenthood, they've lost more than $100 million because of this rule.
This is a very encouraging sign that Obama will take a stand to protect the rights of women from the encroachments of conservatives, and I applaud him for that. Well done!
Tuesday, January 20, 2009
Na Na Na Na, Na Na Na Na, Hey Hey Hey, Goodbye
This is going to be my last post before George W. Bush leaves office, and with it I will retire my personal countdown that I've been running at the end of each post since before I was blogging at Blogger.
George W. Bush has been the most disastrous President in American history, leading an unprecedented assault on the American Constitution, on regulation of the economy, and on progressive taxation. He has ripped to shreds whatever remnants of credibility the United States had on the world stage, and has turned the entire Muslim world vehemently against citizens of Western nations. He has turned a projected 10 year surplus of $5.6 trillion into a projected 10 year deficit of $10 trillion, a $15.6 trillion swing in eight years. His reckless lack of regulation has killed Americans through tainted food (and through regulatory harmonization efforts has dragged down similar standards in Canada and Mexico), led to a collapse of capitalism parallelled only by the Great Depression, and privatized enormous swathes of formerly public services.
George W. Bush also invaded and occupied two countries, supported brutal dictators in a dozen others and dramatically worsened the AIDS crisis through mandating abstinence only education to get access to US money.
While Obama will not fix all of these problems, he seems to intend to take a swing at most of them. And that will be a refreshing change.
Goodbye, Mr. Bush. It's been depressing.
George W. Bush has been the most disastrous President in American history, leading an unprecedented assault on the American Constitution, on regulation of the economy, and on progressive taxation. He has ripped to shreds whatever remnants of credibility the United States had on the world stage, and has turned the entire Muslim world vehemently against citizens of Western nations. He has turned a projected 10 year surplus of $5.6 trillion into a projected 10 year deficit of $10 trillion, a $15.6 trillion swing in eight years. His reckless lack of regulation has killed Americans through tainted food (and through regulatory harmonization efforts has dragged down similar standards in Canada and Mexico), led to a collapse of capitalism parallelled only by the Great Depression, and privatized enormous swathes of formerly public services.
George W. Bush also invaded and occupied two countries, supported brutal dictators in a dozen others and dramatically worsened the AIDS crisis through mandating abstinence only education to get access to US money.
While Obama will not fix all of these problems, he seems to intend to take a swing at most of them. And that will be a refreshing change.
Goodbye, Mr. Bush. It's been depressing.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
Posts
