For My Democracy Today I am Remembering Why This Country is so Great

"The greatness of Canada will be measured not by the level of the gross national product but rather by the way in which we use our resources to solve our human problems." Pierre Elliot Trudeau

For my democracy today I am taking immense pride in this beautiful country. I can say that without reservation. We forget that sometimes, I'm afraid. And even those in the neo-conservative movement, that promotes a survival of the fittest philosophy, forget that it was because of what this country had to offer that they were able to rise to the top.

Without things like public education and universal health care, many would not have had the success they now enjoy.

But everyone should share in that success, and in a country with such vast natural resources, no one should go hungry or be homeless.

With Harper now unfettered by our elected representatives, he is busy dismantling that social safety net that has helped define who we are as a nation. To him we're a European welfare state, a second class country.

He once bragged that he was often sought out to speak out against public money being spent in the name of child poverty. I can't tell you how un-Canadian I think a statement like that is.

My husband picked up a book for me "One Thousand and One Reasons for Being Proud to be a Canadian" It's filled with quotes from Canadian leaders in all fields, including the one above from Pierre Trudeau.

What quote of Harper's could possibly stand the test of time? What will his legacy be? What profound and patriotic pearls of wisdom will he leave us with?

I repeat this often on my blog, because it sticks me. It's a description of the Reform Party, that sums up the difference between us and them:

"Reform is somewhat un-Canadian. It's about tidy numbers, self-righteous sanctimoniousness and western grievances. It cannot talk about the sea or about our reluctant fondness for Quebec, about our sorrow at the way our aboriginal people live, about the geographically diverse, bilingual, multicultural mess of a great country we are." (Vancouver Sun, April 8, 1994)

I want a party and a leader who can talk about the sea.

The following comes from the book, I mentioned above, and is dated, so the references are to 'man', etc.; but it still has a wonderfully Canadian message.

I am Proud to be a Canadian

Because of the beauty of our land; the majesty of the
mountains: the far horizons of the prairies, the sweep of the
shorelines, the abundance of the farm lands, the sparkle of ten
thousand lakes and, rivers, even the forbidding barrens of the North.

Because of the rich diversity of our people. We are not a
melting pot, but a unique union of minorities: each of is proud of
his origins but prouder still to be a Canadian.

Because we are a multilingual country, two basic languages
and woven through the fabric; and enriching it, -the sound of other
tongues, all united in praise of 'the true North, strong and free.'

Because our country was not born in nor does it live in violence,
we harbour no hate, we covet no territory, we envy no other people.

Because our heritage confers such bounty. Our laws and our
traditions have been built on faith in God and man, on an unflagging
love of freedom, and respect for the rights of others. Our physical
resources have not yet been fully contemplated much less measured.

Because in Canada the operative word is Tomorrow, not yesterday
our greatness rests not in our history but in our future.
Our destiny has not yet been fashioned.

Because my pride in Canada does not cause me to respect
other nations or other people less. I am a Canadian, yes. I am also
a citizen of the planet earth and a brother of every other man.

Canadians Want the 'Yes' Side and Say 'No' to Harper's Inaction on Climate Change

I'm currently reading Climate Cover-Up: the Crusade to Deny Global Warming, and it has made me even more aware of the well crafted campaign to steer us away from our concern for the planet, to think only of the economy.

However, I was pleased that a recent poll concluded that we haven't been dragged completely to the dark side yet and in true Canadian spirit, we have chosen "yes" to action.

Who knows what they're going to hit us with next, but simply ignoring this is not going to make it go away, despite Stephen Harper and his Reformers.

Tories trail public on climate change: poll
By Bruce Cheadle
THE CANADIAN PRESS

OTTAWA — Rich countries such as Canada need to commit to aggressive new targets to curb global warming, regardless of what less-developed nations do, say a majority of respondents to a new poll.

The Canadian Press Harris-Decima survey suggests voters may be out in front of the Conservative government when it comes to negotiating a new global treaty on climate change.

By a two-to-one margin (62-27), respondents said they believed Canada and the United States have a responsibility “to set higher and harder targets” for greenhouse-gas reductions than “fast-growing” countries such as China and India.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper and his ministers have consistently argued that the Kyoto Protocol was seriously flawed and that the next global agreement must include all developing nations if it is to be effective.

Environment Minister Jim Prentice was quoted this week saying he’s not optimistic that such a deal can be completed in December at a United Nations conference in Copenhagen.

“I have to take a realistic view that, given the amount of work that remains to be done, we’re running out of time,” Prentice told the Globe and Mail.

Fifty-six per cent of the more than 1,000 Canadians surveyed by Harris-Decima didn’t believe Canada’s approach to climate change is ambitious enough or aggressive enough, with 34 per cent saying it was about right and seven per cent saying it was too ambitious.

Pollster Doug Anderson suggested Friday the Conservative climate-change argument has been heard by Canadians, and rejected.

“I think (the poll) is Canadians trying to send a message themselves,” Anderson said in an interview.

Almost three-quarters of respondents said the current focus on the environment is not going far enough.

Environmental polls have been influenced by strong emotions for years now, said Anderson: “One of the emotions we hear from people is that this is such a serious issue that we really want to see action.”

That emotion, added the pollster, can drive opinion responses that “aren’t totally rational.”

Canada, the United States and Australia are among developed nations who want to ensure the next climate-change treaty leverages global buy-in — and a global effort is broadly endorsed by Canadians, Anderson argues.

But the poll found that a strong majority of respondents in every region except Alberta endorsed the notion of developed countries doing more, rather than waiting to commit “until fast-growing countries like India and China do the same.”

Albertans were evenly split on the question, while self-identified Conservative supporters only marginally favoured early Canadian action.

In terms of influencing government support, Anderson said the environment remains high on Canadians’ priority list but has been superseded by economic concerns.

“Right now I don’t think environment is the issue that necessarily makes (voters) say ‘that’s why I think these people should be running the place.”’

He doesn’t see the Dec. 7-18 Copenhagen summit as a make-or-break time for the Harper government. “I think Copenhagen is probably going to refocus attention,” said the pollster.

The telephone survey, conducted Oct. 15-19, has a margin of error of plus or minus 3.1 percentage points, 19 times in 20.

New Concerns Over War in Afghanistan

Our War in Afghanistan has hit the news again with the mishandling of the repatriation of the latest Canadian victim of Harper's foreign policy, Karine Blais.

I recently watched a movie called Taking Chance and was amazed at the respect given to fallen U.S. soldiers when they are brought home by their military escort, and naturally expected that we would do the same. Apparently not.

Defence minister sorry for repatriation 'error'
Edmonton Sun
Sat, April 18, 2009
By THE CANADIAN PRESS

HALIFAX -- Defence Minister Peter MacKay is apologizing for the way the military handled the repatriation of a soldier killed in Afghanistan, and he says such a mistake won't happen again.

MacKay said yesterday an "operational error" was made when a plane carrying the remains of Trooper Karine Blais, 21, stopped in Ottawa and then carried on to Canadian Forces Base Trenton.

Military officials say about 117 soldiers got off the plane in Ottawa before the flight continued on for the repatriation ceremony in Trenton, Ont., on Thursday. MacKay said he believes officials wanted to allow the soldiers to return home faster, rather than have them land in Trenton and then make the trip back to Ottawa.

It is customary, as a sign of respect, that no one leaves the transport plane before the deceased has been removed.

"Clearly it was a mistake."

MacKay said Canada's chief of defence staff apologized immediately. The minister said he spoke with the family of Blais, who died when the armoured vehicle she was riding was struck by a roadside bomb.

"Certainly the last thing we would ever want to do is show any disrespect to our fallen heroes," he added. "I don't think it was meant to be insensitive or to show any disrespect. I think it was an operational decision that was meant to get soldiers home sooner.

If he is really dedicated to getting soldiers home sooner, he should give the orders to withdraw.

This war has gone on too long and we must now work toward diplomacy, not further combat missions. When Stephen Harper was elected in 2006 one of the first things he did was change our mandate from a 'Peacekeeping' initiative to a 'Peacemaking' one, and the devastating results were immediate.

Afghanistan – Harper imitates Bush's cut-and-run, support-the-troops rhetoric

Canada became involved in the NATO occupation of Afghanistan to placate the Americans for not sending troops to Iraq. The nature of Canadian involvement changed radically, however, once Stephen Harper's minority government was elected in January 2006.

Harper has always backed the aggressive military behaviour of the United States. He enthusiastically supported the US invasion of Iraq and complained bitterly when Canada did not send troops there. "I don't know all the facts on Iraq, but I think we should work closely with the Americans," he told Report Newsmagazine, March 25th 2002. He voted against a motion urging the Canadian government not to participate in the US military intervention in Iraq on March 20, 2003.

Most Canadians, however, did not support Canadian involvement in Iraq. Prime Minister Jean Chrétien arranged to send a few troops to relatively safe parts of Afghanistan as a quiet, face-saving endorsement of America without high costs. Later under Prime Minister Paul Martin and Defence Minister Bill Graham, Canadian troops were deployed to more dangerous southern regions on the advice of newly-appointed chief of Canada's land forces Rick Hillier. When the Harper Conservatives won their minority government, things intensified.

Canada rapidly became involved in the same kind of high-stakes, high-risk war-fighting activities as the US. With this new emphasis came casualties. "As Canada's troop casualties in Afghanistan mounted in the summer and fall of 2006, so did the calls for us to stay the course and 'rally behind our troops.'" writes Toronto Star columnist Linda McQuaig in her 2007 book Holding the Bully's Coat: Canada and the U.S. Empire, "With each new death there were new pledges not to 'cut and run,'" echoing the rhetoric of George W Bush.

McQuaig points out that the war in Afghanistan was an illegal war of aggression at the outset with questionable status today. It was launched without regard for international convention, negotiation attempts made by the Taliban government or the human rights abuses of its Northern Alliance allies. By definition it is illegal. She quotes Canadian international law professor Michael Mandel as saying that Afghan civilian deaths represent "'very serious crimes, in fact supreme international crimes,' because according to international law asserted at the post-World War 2 Nuremburg Trials, 'To initiate a war of aggression... is not only an international crime; it is the supreme international crime... '."

"The Harper government claims (among other things) that the fight in Afghanistan is about the establishment of a democratic government that respects human rights, in particular the rights of women. In fact, this fight is not about human rights and never has been," wrote political scientist James Laxer in Straight Goods in February 2007.

"The Taliban and Al Qaeda grew out of the earlier struggles of the Mujahideen from the 1970s to the 1990s to overturn the pro-Soviet regime that was kept in power by Soviet troops. The United States provided enormous financial aid and direction to the Mujahideen, knowing that they were virulently opposed to the rights of women. Now the US and its NATO allies are fighting the political forces Washington helped create.

"While the human rights record of the Taliban government was atrocious... we must never forget that the US played a large role in creating the Taliban. Moreover, the Northern Alliance and other allies of the US in the struggle to overturn the Taliban government have been guilty of major human rights abuses including rape, public executions, bombing of civilians and the massacre of prisoners."

From the beginning of Harper's new campaign of aggression he followed George Bush's lead, including his ridiculous "cut and run" mentality. But like his U.S. Counter part he tried to hide the results of his horrendous policies.

Canadian Govt bans media coverage of return of soldiers bodies

Tories won't lower flag for troop deaths

This war has not only been a financial drain, but a human one. The recent death of Karine Blais has brought the total number of Canadian soldiers killed to 117, more than one hundred of those during the 'reign' of Stephen Harper and his Conservatives.

Mr. Obama has a new strategy for Afghanistan, that includes a massive push to rout out insurgents in both Afghanistan and Palestine. This may be a too little too late, or too much too soon, but there definitely needs to be a new direction. But what role can Canada expect to play in this?

It's clear that we can no longer focus on combat. Our top general, Lieutenant-General Andrew Leslie, has stated that our troops are ill-equipped and battle weary, and the Prime Minister himself has openly declared that we can't win this war. When Fox News broadcast the parody on our military situation with the news from our military leader that we may need a year off to revamp; many Canadians were outraged, especially those in the Harper government.

However, it should have been an eye opener for us as well. The tank boondoggle and over ambitious goals of military might, need to be addressed, not swept under the rug. Fox apologized, but I don't think they needed to. Sadly, they were right.