PM Howard's Visit, Afghan Deployment -&- Gun Registry

PM Howard's Visit and Speech

CBC is so obvious. Yesterday, there were two events of import:

* The father of Captain Goddard delivered an eloquent and moving public statement on his daughter's life and death, and

* The Prime Minister of Australia addressed the Canadian Parliament after being introduced by PM Harper.

Both, considering their interest to Canadians, could have been taped and played one after the other. Instead, CBC interrupted the live coverage of an historic visit and speech in the House of Commons during PM Harper's introduction of PM Howard. CBC presented, instead, the full speech by Mr. Goddard. They probably hoped it would be an anti-war speech. It was not, nor were the words of Captain Goddard's husband, heard later. Why could both not have been presented consecutively? That is what recordings/tapes are for.

CBC expected that interested Canadians would not notice? They are fools, their biases evident for all to see. CPAC to the rescue ....... Naturally, CBC's subsequent news coverage (that I caught) did not present the full speech. Democracy? Trustworthy?

This is the CBC, which manages to black out some key speeches, lines, reports, et cetera ..... accidents, of course, at key times ... enough that I have noted it.



Jennifer Ditchburn: Harper looks up to his 'mate' down under

[....] Around Ottawa, Conservatives spoke reverently of Howard's masterful grasp of what voters want to hear.

In the last Aussie election, that meant a direct pitch to "mainstream" Australians with middle-class tax cuts, a tough stance on illegal immigration, and a determination to bar same-sex marriage.

"He's provided stable government, low taxes, an unapologetic sense of where Australia is in the world," said Tory MP Scott Reid, who once lived in Australia as a visiting scholar. [....]

Search: commentator Michelle Grattan , media access to the leader , Australian parliamentary model , Senators , press gallery dinners , proportional representation




Note: Paul Martin skipped the vote on extending the troops' mission to Afghanistan.

He had been in the House earlier. Note also the photo accompanying this article: Frank McKenna, the guy who snowed NB with his 60-70 "communications" aides whose real job was to make Premier Frank look good during his tenure of talking a good line , while accomplishing little economically. [Was he busy courting the "right people" for the Liberal leadership run later? -- I remember reading that he had been vetted by a powerful Quebecker ... but you'll have to check further.]

Joan Bryden: Harper may have used vote to ensare Ignatieff in Afghan trap

And Bob Rae? Just read what he had to say ... a perfect NDP turned Liberal.

OTTAWA (CP) - After narrowly winning the vote to prolong the risky Afghanistan mission, a triumphant Stephen Harper crossed the floor of the Commons and threaded his way to the back of the Liberal benches to shake hands with Michael Ignatieff.

The prime minister's gesture may well turn out to be the political equivalent of the kiss of death for Ignatieff's bid to lead the Liberal party.

Ostensibly, Harper was simply thanking the rookie Toronto MP and acclaimed scholar for being one of only 24 Liberals to support the Conservative government's motion to extend the Afghanistan military deployment for two years. [....]

Scott Brison stood on principle and voted with the Conservatives. Good show, Scott.

Search how the rest of the Liberal "leadership" team voted, bearing in mind that it was the Liberals who sent our soldiers to Afghanistan in the first place ... so as not to have to join the Americans in Iraq. (ex-PM) Jean Chretien did not go to Parliament for permission, I don't believe; it was his decision ... see below.




Political wizardry by the man from Oz (sour grapes from Canada's CBC on John Howard of Aus's visit) -- CBC News Indepth: Reality Check, May 18, 2006, Robert Sheppard, Posted on 05/18/2006 10:26:33 PM EDT by NZerFromHK

As addresses by visiting dignitaries go, this one didn't have quite the same historical heft as namesake Winston Churchill's in 1941, and his famous British defiance in the teeth of the Nazi onslaught: "Some chicken. Some neck."

But for Australian Prime Minister John Winston Howard (the middle name a direct homage to the British war leader), his speech to a joint session of Canada's Parliament was by turns elegant, charming and delightfully mischievous.

[.... re: anti-military / anti-war involvement] But in our case, we have a long and almost institutionally entrenched strain of that to contend with, something that is part of the Quebec fact and has been with us from the Boer War right through the Conscription Crisis. And it has shaped our politics and our national conscience accordingly. [....]

Comment: "Robert Sheppard began his career at the Montreal Star (may it rest in peace), spent 22 years at the Globe and Mail and was recently senior editor at Maclean's magazine. He has co-authored a book on the Canadian Constitution and writes on a variety of subjects."

Now do you have a fairly good idea of his politics? Perhaps a stint at the CBC .... maybe then he could become the next GG. He would be a MSM darling.



Ties between Canada and Australia 'great': Howard



Memory Lane

House of Commons Hansard: Tuesday Oct 2, 2001

Terrorism

Ms. Alexa McDonough (Halifax, NDP): Mr. Speaker, my question is for the Prime Minister. The United States is parceling out to selective allies its evidence linking Osama bin Laden to the September 11 terrorist attacks. This reinforces the perception that while the coalition against terrorism is truly international the march toward military action is not.

Will the Prime Minister call upon the United Nations today to establish an international tribunal and call upon our American allies to place their evidence before an international body like the United Nations?

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, I had occasion to talk with the president not long ago. The evidence that is available to the leaders of nations is evidence that cannot be shared in public at the same time.

It is very confidential information that we need in order to make sure that bin Laden and his terrorists are punished for the terrible acts they have done. It is not the time to debate that type of information publicly. It is the time to do the job and get them to face justice.

Ms. Alexa McDonough (Halifax, NDP): Mr. Speaker, we are not asking that the Prime Minister telegraph the evidence into every Canadian household. We are asking that the evidence be brought before an international body.

The Prime Minister says that he is satisfied the evidence links Osama bin Laden to the terrorist attacks, but the evidence he is willing to accept has not been brought before Canada's cabinet, much less before the United Nations.

In view of that, how could the Prime Minister even consider asking Canadian families to sacrifice their sons or daughters?

Right Hon. Jean Chrétien (Prime Minister, Lib.): Mr. Speaker, it is not the time to make the type of speech the member is making. It is the time for all the people who want to fight terrorism to be united and defeat it . That is what we have to do now.

2001: Troops sent to Afghanistan in forest-green uniforms. -- a small problem with underfunding the military and overfunding Adscam?


Military History: Afghanistan involvement MapleLeafWeb.com

How Are Canadian Forces Working With American Forces in Afghanistan?

In its contribution to the war against terrorism in Afghanistan, Canada established an organization called Canadian Joint Task Force South West Asia. This organization encompasses all Canadian military assets and activities in the Afghan region. Its headquarters is located in Tampa, Florida, alongside the US Central Command. The Commander of Canadian Joint Task Force South West Asia works closely with American military leadership at US Central Command.

Canadian troops in Afghanistan are operating under a joint command structure headed by US General Tommy Franks. [Subsequently, a Canadian led this group, I believe. Check further.] This is not unlike arrangements in previous theatres of war and peacekeeping. However, military officials in Ottawa retain the right to turn down assignments. As National Defence spokesman Clarence Roussel stated, “Whatever orders they [Canadian troops] receive would have been cleared through the [Canadian] chief of defense staff.” “If, for any reason, the order would place Canadian troops at an unreasonable risk . . . then there would be an intervention.” [....]

The following is a partial list of coalition countries and their contributions to the war against terrorism in Afghanistan (as of February 26, 2002). [....]

Note: October 07, 2001 -- Prime Minister Jean Chretien announces that Canada will provide military contributions to operations in Afghanistan -- Does anyone remember Jean Chretien putting any of this to a vote in the House of Commons? ...... But of course, for the mainstream media whinging about keeping the military in Afghanistan to do what is necessary ...... that was a LIBERAL Prime Minister. Therein lies the difference in the media coverage .......




Dear Mr. Prime Minister, a letter from Lawyers Against War

1) Stated Legal Basis for Our Use of Force:

We note that on Jan 17, 2001 Our Minister of Defense stated:

“As you know, the multinational military response to the terrorist acts of September 11 began in mid-October. Canada is responding militarily on the basis of article 51 of the UN charter, and there have in fact been three resolutions of the Security Council in support of the use of that article in this case. That article of the UN charter allows states to exercise the right of individual and collective self-defense.”

Art Eggleton evidence before House of Commons Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs – (Jan 17, 2002 10:10 AM)

We note that he continued;

“This campaign was initially launched in the wake also of NATO's invoking Article 5 of the Washington treaty, which collectively implements the UN charter's right to self-defense when a NATO member state has been attacked.”

Art Eggleton evidence before House of Commons Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs - Jan 17, 2002 10:10 AM

[....] 5) Stated Purpose of Mission:

We note that on Jan 17, 2002 our Defense Minister stated that our actions were not in keeping with Canada’s traditional role of peacekeeping:

“Now to the nature of the mission in Kandahar. This is not a peacekeeping mission. The military campaign in Afghanistan is not over yet. Our troops will be carrying out a variety of tasks, some of which may involve combat operations.”

Art Eggleton evidence before House of Commons Standing Committee on National Defence and Veterans Affairs - Jan 17, 2002 10:10 AM

We note that this mission was under the auspices of neither NATO, nor under the UN body ISAF;

Remember, the above is from Lawyers Against War but there are points worth considering.




Gun Registry

Gun registry successfully kept guns out of the United States posted by Daralundy -- Angry in the Great White North May 18, 2006, Steve Janke

Gun registry successfully kept guns out of the United States The people for and against the long-gun registry have been tossing allegations back and forth about how effective the registry has been in fighting crime. Often this takes the form of statistics. For: An average of 5,000 queries a day are made by law enforcement agencies. Against: Virtually all the queries are automatically generated by local police computers whenever any kind of information is accessed, including outstanding parking fines. The problem is that it is hard to really understand how useful the registry is when you look at broad collections...

Gun Registry "This is from the freedom of information act, about how many times the data base is being used." posted by wagccan, May 18, 06

I like this part

"For example, one Saskatoon City Police officer told us he checked one name in the system and it took more than 6 hours and it came back negative. On January 22, 2003, CBC Radio in Saskatchewan reported: "Police in Regina say they haven't yet had a lot of use for the new gun registry. The Canadian Police Association claims the controversial database provides useful information in less than one second. However, Regina officials cannot confirm that figure. Sgt. Rick Bourassa says officers in his city do not use the data-base very often.” On December 4, 2002, CFRA talk show host Michael Harris reported that officials from the Police Association of Ontario told him that they fail to get the information requested from the registration system 95% of the time."

www.garrybreitkreuz.com/publications/Article120.htm

On April 1, 2003, the Canadian Firearms Centre website stated: “2,328,360 CFRO [Canadian Firearms Registration On-Line] queries have been made by police and other law enforcement officials since December 1, 1998.” Please provide records and reports showing: (1) the number of requests by police, (2) the number of requests by law enforcement officials, (3) the number of requests by Canadian Firearms Centre staff, (4) the number of requests by Chief Firearms Offices and Firearms Officers, (5) the number of requests by NWEST personnel, (6) the number of requests from each province and territory, (7) the number of requests by type of information requested, and (8) the number of requests that resulted in the requestor actually receiving the information requested.

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT RESPONSE DATED MAY 6, 2003 - FILE: A-2003-0001

“I am pleased to enclose all the relevant documents (one page) to your request and it is released in its entirety. This record reflects information/statistical reports that are responsive to your queries 6 and 7 noted-above. In regard to your queries 1 to 5 and 8, no relevant documentation was identified and no reports were ever prepared to reflect the information/statistics you are seeking.”

JUSTICE FILE: A-2003-0001 – MAY 15, 2003 [....]

GARRY BREITKREUZ, MP – FOLLOW-UP ACCESS REQUEST DATED MAY 17, 2003 [....]

JUSTICE DEPARTMENT RESPONSE DATED JUNE 9, 2003 – FILE: A-2003-0056

I must advise you that a search for records under the control of the Department of Justice did not find any that would be responsive to your request.

BREITKREUZ'S COMPLAINT TO THE INFORMATION COMMISSIONER

JUSTICE FILE: A-2003-0056 – June 13, 2003 [....]

RESULTS OF INFORMATION COMMISSIONER’S INVESTIGATION

JUSTICE FILE: A-2003-0056 – February 25, 2004
[.... DO NOT MISS THE LAST THREE PARAGRAPHS ... UNBELIEVABLE ... Read about CPIC, the Canadian Police Information Centre (CPIC). CPIC is the national automated law enforcement system. ... the lead up to this incredible ending "... not substantiated."]

If it were not so serious, considering the former (Liberal) government's "misrepresentations", it would be a hoot -- a sort of a Key Stone Cops Registry brought in by a Key Stone Cops Liberal Government.