Bouquets of Gray

Friday, July 31, 2009

Who is responsible for wafergate?

Kady O'Malley discusses a set-to between Warren Kinsella and Lifesite.org over some rather clumsy conspiracy mongering on lifesite's part.

Social conservatives seem eager to diminish or dismiss any concern over the Prime Minister's mistake. Apparently it was anyone's fault but Harper's. Social Conservative activist John Pacheco, for example, had originally blamed the presiding priest for not having given clear instructions , later suggesting that the whole fuss was a Liberal smear. In fact, according to Pacheco, the true desecration here was the Liberals and the Media, who showed disrespect to the Eucharest by making it a political plaything.

So what's one to make of this? Leaving aside the potential for making investment advice ("buy tinfoil futures!"), all this loses sight of the fact that if Harper had not asked for the communion wafer, he never would have been given it.

And responsibility for this, ultimately, falls to the PM and his PMO. Taking communion was a breach of protocol, and the Prime Minister's Office employs hundreds of people in order to, among other things, keep the PM from fucking up on the public stage. If Harper didn't know that he wasn't supposed to take the host in a Catholic service, someone has failed: the person who is supposed to review the PM's itinerary for protocol issues. Now, I have no idea who does this in the PMO, but whoever it is, he or she should answerable to the Chief of Staff, Guy Giorno.

Wednesday, July 29, 2009

Impolitical's greatest hits

Today Impolitical notes AECL comes out in favour of...an AECL decision. This adds to her great posts about the Isotopes Crisis, which you can see in her summary thread, Blog Post Index: Medical Isotope crisis & Chalk River shutdown. There you will find a list of her many posts on the subject together with a brief summary of the contents of each post.

Indeed, I was so impressed by her work on the Medical Isotope issue that it reminded me of the old K-Tel records: "20 original hits! 20 original stars!". Hence:

"What can be better than reliving the old times! Who can forget Lisa Raitt saying "Cancer is Sexy"? Or Jasmine Macdonell's taped conversations with Lisa Raitt? Or heavy water leaks? Maple reactors? Linda Keen being fired? All that and more you can see at Impolical's Power House index of the Isotope Crisis."

the Isotope Crisis. While you're there you can relive the old times! Who can forget Lisa Raitt saying "Cancer is Sexy"? Or Jasmine Macdonell's taped Lisa Raitt? Or Chalk River Maple reactors Linda Keen Isotopes crisis href="http://impolitical.blogspot.com/2009/07/blog-post-index-medical-isotope-crisis.html">medical Isotopes shortage

Wednesday, July 22, 2009

More on Shona Holmes

Shona Holmes has received notoriety in recent days for doing a commercial for an American lobby group in which she claims that she had a brain tumour that threatened her life, that her treatment was delayed in Ontario, and that she had to pay for her own treatment:

"I am a Canadian citizen, and as my brain tumour [sic] got worse, my government health-care system told me I had to wait six months to see a specialist," Holmes says in the commercial. "In six months I would have died."

She is suing the Ontario government for her costs.

Her story, however, is quickly falling apart. She did not have a tumour, but a cyst, as her testimonial at the Mayo clinic shows (link; archive). And, it seems, it was her vision that was threatened, not her life.

So what's the deal? Was Ms. Holmes confused about her own diagnosis and prognosis? This is, I'm afraid, not likely.

Creative Revolution points out that Shona Holme's lawsuit is being funded by the Canadian Constitution Federation, a political advocacy group that funds right-wing legal challenges (they were profiled in the Toronto Star). The CCF's wikipedia article has recently been scrubbed, but if you know the right people you can see both the original article and all of the edits that produced it. Here is what was added on 13 June 2008 by user jamesmclean23:

Who is jamesmclean23? Creative Revolution points out that there is a James Mclean who is co-author of a CCF study, and in the June 2008 CCF newsletter (pdf), a James McLean is described as a CCF staff researcher, at exactly the time the above edits were made to wikipedia article.

The point? A staff-member of the group funding Shona Holmes' lawsuit against the province of Ontario wrote of Holmes' prognosis thus (my emphasis in red):

Shona Holmes was told she would lose her vision forever, unless surgeons immediately removed her growing brain tumour. But Ontario's government monopoly health care system told Shona whe would have to wait for months just to see specialists and obtain treatment. Not willing to risk permanent blindness, Shona obtained surgery at the Mayo Clinic in Arizona. Within ten days, her vision was completely restored.

Given that the only way Mr. McLean would know what Shona Holmes was told was from Ms. Holmes herself, we have here a serious discrepancy, since this is not the story that Holmes told Americans, where she claimed to be facing death, not blindness.

Thursday, July 16, 2009

Contest: Name that tune for Harper's Power House

Impolitical, as many have noticed, has pulled together a great index thread for the Isotope Crisis. While you're there you can relive the old times! Who can forget Lisa Raitt saying "Cancer is Sexy"? Or Jasmine Macdonell's taped conversations with Lisa Raitt? Or heavy water leaks? Maple reactors? Linda Keen being fired? All that and more you can see at her index thread for the Isotope Crisis. It's reminiscent, isn't it, of a "greatest hits" album?

This all reminded me of the old TV commercials for K-Tel. So I thought it would be fun to put one together. And you can contribute by suggesting a tune! Enter early, enter often. The best entry will win a prize — Canadian Cynic will say something nice about the winner. (Or maybe he won't, I don't really know.)

Anyway, here's the cover art. Go to town!

Thursday, July 09, 2009

Open letter to Russ Hiebert about the CHRC, Dean Steacy, and wifi hacking allegations

Dear Mr. Hiebert,

In a recent letter to the National Post you wrote the following.

Further, uncontradicted expert evidence presented before the hearing demonstrated that investigator Steacy illegitimately used an unsuspecting private citizen's wireless Internet service to post his offensive comments.This contains several mistakes.

You are referring to the allegation that on Dec. 8, 2006, Dean Steacy logged into Stormfront using the IP 70.48.181.203.

The "expert evidence" to which you refer is that of a Bell technician who testified on March 25, 2008. If you had bothered to read the transcripts of that testimony, you would know that he did not testify that Steacy had used "a private citizen's wireless internet service to post his offensive comments". Rather, he merely identified the Bell customer who had control of the IP 70.48.181.203 on Dec. 8. He said nothing about that person's wireless, nor about any posts made by anyone anywhere. That is all the supposition, speculation, and conspiratorial fantasy accumulated at extremist blogs and discussion sites in the weeks following that hearing.

Nor, in fact, did Steacy post any comments at all on Dec. 8, as you say, much less offensive ones. Steacy's pseudonym, jadewarr, has only ever made one comment at Stormfront, on Sept. 15, 2006. (It's not offensive, by the way.) Steacey posted nothing on Dec. 8; he merely logged in on that date.

This gets to the central problem with the allegation. The software used for the Stormfront bulletin board records IPs for posts, but not log-ins. A Stormfront moderator, however, has publicly attributed the IP 70.48.181.203 to jadewarr for a different date.

So you can see, although you are correct to say that the "expert evidence" of the Bell technician is uncontradicted, the allegation of wifi-hacking has been investigated by the privacy commissioner and dismissed as likely the result of "a mismatch on the part of a third party".

So in a single sentence above you have made at least three factual errors: the expert testimony said nothing about anyone's wireless; Steacy did not post any comments on the day in question; and the whole allegation has been contradicted by the privacy commissioner.

Everyone, of course, makes mistakes. You, however, are offering this error-filled sentence -- and these are not your only errors -- to rebut claims that you had been misinformed. Did you actually read any of this material?

All of this, however, raises an even more problematic aspect of your recent performance. You chair the Parliamentary Subcommittee for International Human Rights (SIHR), which is a subcommittee of the Standing Committee on Foreign Affairs and International Development (FAAE). As Chair you have held hearings on Canadian Human Rights Commission. Why is it that your committee is delving into the CHRC at all? To compare how Human Rights is handled in Canada as opposed to other states? Or was the point to provide a platform whereby defamatory allegations could be made in privileged circumstances?

Sincerely,

Buckets

cc: ReidS@parl.gc.ca, SilvaM@parl.gc.ca, ThilaE@parl.gc.ca, SweetD@parl.gc.ca, HiebeR@parl.gc.ca, MarstW@parl.gc.ca, CotleI@parl.gc.ca

Other posts relevant to this controversy:

Wednesday, July 08, 2009

Index to impolitical's istope posts

One of the best bloggers on the progressive side of the blogosphere is impolitical, whose posts are a model of careful collection of material, accurate reporting, and sound analysis. There is, also, a soupçon of policy wonkiness.

One issue that impolitical has been following carefully in recent months has been the collection of collection of mishaps associated with Chalk River, Lisa Raitt, and the production of medical isotopes.

It struck me that an index of all her posts would be worth having. So here it is. Enjoy!

Friday, July 03, 2009

Harper's protocol breach

As Impolitical and Galloping Beaver pointed out earlier today and others today, Harper decided that the troops should salute him before the Governor General at the Canada Day celebration. And, as Jason Kenney makes clear in the following clip, the decision to do so was Harpers, no one elses.

Update. More commentary on this at Impolitical.

Tuesday, June 30, 2009

Eyes right! (Happy Canada Day)

Gymnast put to sleep after breaking leg

Gymnast Shawn Johnson Put To Sleep After Breaking Leg

Thursday, June 25, 2009

An open letter to Senator Anne Cools about 90sAREover and the Richard Warman allegation

Dear Senator Cools,

There has been some buzz in recent days about the testimony of Professor Robert Martin of the University of Western Ontario regarding Human Rights Commissions, which (if you haven't heard it already) can be heard here (loading can be slow, so be patient).

Professor Martin, who spoke in his testimony of his high regard for you and noted that he regarded you as a dear friend, seems to have been especially exercised by allegations that Richard Warman was responsible for a nasty racist screed about you -- so nasty, that he wouldn't (quite rightly) repeat its words. (Nor will I.)

The problem with Martin's testimony is that Warman didn't write that post. He has denied the matter under oath and has sued for defamation those who have made the allegation in unprivileged circumstances. Moreover, the allegation was debunked over a year ago, largely on the internet (from where all these allegations began), including at my site.

One of the basic facts, as you may know, is that that the racist post in question was made by someone using the pseudonym "90sAREover". The allegation that this was Warman depends on the claim that "90sAREover" had the same IP as "lucy" (Warman's pseudonym) and a computer with the same set-up.

the IP in question, however, was a web-caching proxy shared by most Rogers customers, as I have shown in a post called "Why there is room for doubt that Richard Warman wrote the Cools post". To summarize a long and technical argument, 90sAREover could have been any Rogers customer, or anyone with access to the computer of any Rogers internet customer. This could have been millions of individuals.

It has also been claimed that Warman's computer was set-up identically to the one that made the racist post. This would not be especially helpful even if true: something over 10% of users had their computers set-up that way (see here), and 10% of millions is still hundreds of thousands. The set-up, however, was not identical. In a post called "why Richard Warman is innocent" , I demonstrate that the computer used to write the racist post was different in at least one key respect from Warman's computer, with the result that they must have been computers.

The technical argument of my posts may be unintelligible to you, and there is no reason that you should believe me -- an anonymous guy on the internet. If you forward this letter to someone knowledgeable in these matters they will confirm to you that there is no good evidence that Warman made the post in question. (That the IP was a proxy and therefore represents a potentially vast pool of users has been endorsed, for example, by the Conservative blog Catprint in the Mash.)^*

During his testimony, Prof. Martin said that you personally were greatly agitated at Warman for these remarks. You have every right to be agitated about this post. But not at Warman, who did not make it.

Obviously, if you have any questions that I can help with, I'd be happy to do so.

Best regards,

Buckets

cc:ReidS@parl.gc.ca, SilvaM@parl.gc.ca, ThilaE@parl.gc.ca, SweetD@parl.gc.ca, HiebeR@parl.gc.ca, MarstW@parl.gc.ca, CotleI@parl.gc.ca

Why there is doubt the Warman wrote the Cools post, Why Warman is probably innocent of the Cools post, Bernard Klatt

Edited to clarify catprint's analysis.^*

Monday, June 22, 2009

The end of rubber ducky

I'm sure that I'm not the only one to react to the following story with shock and dismay:Canada to pull plug on ‘rubber duck' chemicals:

Health Canada plans to ban the “rubber duck chemicals,” six compounds widely used in the manufacture of soft plastic children's toys, after similar restrictions in the United States and the European Union.

Scientists have raised alarms about the compounds, known as phthalates, because they may block the production of testosterone, a critical male hormone.

There is growing scientific evidence – disputed by makers of the chemical – that everyday exposures can cause a slight feminization of baby boys, particularly during fetal development.

Phthalates are among the most common chemicals added to plastic, making it more pliable and less brittle. They are also found in cosmetics and other personal care products, although the new Health Canada regulations would not cover that variety, known as DEP.

Health Canada also said it would propose a cut to the amount of lead allowed in consumer products, such as paints on toys and children's jewellery.

Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq said in a statement that the measures would “help ensure that products intended for children are safe.… This is part of our overall effort to ensure that families have confidence in the quality and safety of what they buy.”

And, so, in memory of the passing of our dear friend the rubber duck, I offer you this musical interlude:

National Aboriginal Day reminds us there's lots still to be done

Before it slips my mind, it's useful to note that yesterday was National Aboriginal Day across Canada. Ceremonies were held across the country. Some of this was celebratory, of course, but there are some sad things to remember, too, including Canada's sad legacy with regard to residential schools, as this story in the Globe reminds us.

While National Aboriginal Day was marked across the country yesterday with celebrations of culture and community gathering, in Saskatoon there was a sombre tone as survivors of Indian residential schools were honoured.

Speakers included Ted Quewezance, who was taken from his family at the age of five and shipped to a residential school, where he said he was sexually abused for five years.

"I remember the day I was taken away," said Mr. Quewezance, whose voice broke as he talked about the difficulty of reliving his childhoor horrors.

Survivors have already received apologies and compensation from the federal government, and earlier this year Pope Benedict expressed sorrow for what had happened at the schools, about 75 per cent of which were run by the Catholic Church.

And, of course, is the lingering challenges with reforming the Indian Act and making native self-government a reality.

For coverage of a lot of these issues, it is worth visiting, Meaghan Walker Williams blog as well as the official Meaghan Walker Williams article archive (for several years she reported for the MSM on aboriginal issues).

xxx xxxx xxx xxxxxx xxx xxxx xxx xxxx xxx xxxxxx xxx xxxx xxx xxxx xxx xxxxxx xxx xxxx xxx xxxx xxx xxxxxx xxx xxxx Other stories on Meaghan Walker Williams
Meaghan Walker Williams profile
Meaghan Walker Williams trade proposal
Meaghan Walker Williams libertarian
Meaghan Walker Williams blog profile
Meaghan Walker Williams candidate
Meaghan Walker Williams story
Meaghan Walker Williams activist
Meaghan Walker Williams free trade
Meaghan Walker Williams
Meaghan Walker Williams story archive

Friday, June 19, 2009

Stay classy, Vic!

The Lac Dubet Leader is reporting that Vic Toews has sent an anti-Ignatieff leaflet as his constituency mailing (link).

Provencher MP Vic Toews got in on the smear campaign action last week, sending out a mailing to his constituents painting Ignatieff as a Ukrainian-hater. Toews takes some Ignatieff quotes that could be interpreted as racial slurs toward Ukrainians and displays them completely out-of-context, giving the impression that Ignatieff has an ax to grind with anyone of Ukrainian ancestry.

The two quotes come from Ignatieff’s book Blood and Belonging, which explores Russian stereotypes of Ukrainians. At first the glance the quotes are provocative, but only because they’re being read completely apart from the book they’re taken from.

It is material that was fairly thoroughly discussed in 2006 when Ignatieff was running for leader the first time around.

I'm not surprised, of course, that Conservatives would want people of Ukrainian descent to see these quotes. It does surprise me, however, that a prominent minister would want his own name so closely associated with something that's a bit, well, sleazy.

Wednesday, June 17, 2009

Will you take a cheque?

Here's an interesting one. Italian police report that they found some U.S. government bonds found in the false bottom of a suitcase. The suitcase belonged to two Japanese travelers who were about to cross into Switzerland. (link):

The bonds, with a face value of more than $134 billion, are probably forgeries, Colonel Rodolfo Mecarelli of the Guardia di Finanza in Como, Italy, said today. If the notes are genuine, the pair would be the U.S. government’s fourth-biggest creditor, ahead of the U.K. with $128 billion of U.S. debt and just behind Russia, which is owed $138 billion.

That's a heck of a surprise on your credit card bill.

Saturday, June 13, 2009

Tapes show that Raitt cares most about pleasing Harper

Stephen Maher, the reporter who broke the Raitt tapes for the Chronicle Herald, adds some perspective today (here; archive link).

What I find most surprising about the recording of Natural Resources Minister Lisa Raitt is not what she says, but what she doesn’t say. …

At no point does she show any concern for the issues that Canadians pay her to look after.

When she discusses wind power and the medical isotope crisis, she only expresses concern for them in relation to her career hopes.

She doesn’t say: "I hope we make sure that wind producers are getting the support they need to develop their industry."

Instead, she is worried that Prime Minister Stephen Harper will blame her for a leak to CanWEA, the wind producers’ association. Someone in her department had let on to the group that they were going to get an expanded development fund to build wind farms in the budget.

The money wasn’t in the budget, though, and Ms. Raitt suspects Environment Minister Jim Prentice had taken it and steered it toward carbon sequestration in the oilsands, which is sure to put a glint in the eye of Calgary oil executives.

Ms. Raitt doesn’t care about that. She is afraid that Mr. Harper may blame her for the leak.

This, of course, is point similar to what I wrote here.

And for those wondering about the rest of the tapes, note this paragraph:

In the section of the recording that we have been able to decipher (we are now having the recording cleaned up electronically so we can hear more of the conversation), Ms. Raitt speaks to an aide about cabinet colleagues, her career ambitions and — over and over again — what might please or displease Prime Minister Stephen Harper.

So there might be a lot more to come.

Hmm ... who really left those notes at CTV

From today's Toronto Star:

But there was one sign she, too, perhaps suffers from the forgetfulness that cost MacDonnell her job.

Raitt was heading off the stage when she stopped, grimaced and walked back.

She'd left her speech on the podium.

Friday, June 12, 2009

The perils of having a big-screen tv

Spector on Oliphant

Norman Spector makes some interesting observations about the Oliphant inquiry into Karlheinz Schreiber's dealings with Mulroney and his government.

Under Jean Chrétien's Liberals, the project was put to death in less than two years; during the Conservative era, it proved impossible to kill. How can one explain the differing response to Mr. Schreiber's aggressive lobbying?

It was certainly not due to any change in his modus operandi: To counter the consistent opposition of the public service, Mr. Schreiber spent freely, engaging well-connected lobbyists of both political stripes. And their advice to Mr. Schreiber was consistent: Get the project out of the hands of the public service and raise it to the political level.

The rest makes an interesting contrast between the way Chretien's and Mulroney's governments handled similar pressures.

Paul Wells nails it: the real shame in the Raitt scandal

Yesterday I wrote and complained about Raitt's approach to policy. Paul Wells today makes a similar, though fuller and more subtle, point today (link):

There’s no point getting on too much of a high horse about all this. Everybody likes to get credit, and in politics when you enhance your reputation by doing good it puts you in a position to do more good. But that conversation was recorded in January. And since it is now five months since Raitt was so eager to be thanked, it would be cheering if she had done more in that time that deserved thanks. No such luck: Chalk River was shut down after she made these comments, it remains shut down, and there is no reason for optimism about its chances of starting back up any time soon.

Wells extends his analysis to make a sociological observation about the nature of minority government:

This is how it goes lately in Ottawa. We are now five years into a string of successive minority governments that began when Paul Martin nearly lost the 2004 election. There is no reason to expect the winner of the next election to have a majority either. It could be Stephen Harper, it could be Michael Ignatieff, but neither will command a majority in the House. So the distinguishing feature of post-Chrétien Canadian politics—its precariousness—will continue.

Which means just about every parliamentarian will continue to spend part of the day thinking the way Lisa Raitt did on that tape. Will your staff shield you on the issues? Or will you roll the dice and hope for all the credit? It’s all about jockeying for position, because in a state of constant combat readiness, position is all you have. In government you can’t plan, because in six months you might no longer be the minister. In opposition you can’t say what you would do differently, because even if you know, you need to keep it under wraps until the campaign that’s eternally around the corner.

This is, of course, correct. But just because there is this danger implicit in minority governments doesn't mean that it we can't hold someone responsible. Who?

Note that this eternal short-term memory syndrome isn’t the certain fate of any minority Parliament. Just this one. Stable minorities have often formed, in various provinces or in Ottawa’s past, when a governing party could reach out to one or two other parties. But Stephen Harper doesn’t trust anyone enough. He keeps power and authority too close to him to build stable relationships with any of his opponents. In fact, he keeps his own ministers out of the loop on any serious issue. Bureaucrats in the ministries talk about getting “the full Langevin,” when the Prime Minister’s staff in the Langevin Block, across the street from the House of Commons, take over a hot file and push a minister’s department out of the way.

We interrupt our regular program …

… for a musical interlude.

else