There is no power in this Union

Pathetic:

The European Union has refused to support Britain's call to freeze $28 billion in export trade with Iran until 15 British sailors are freed.

France urged avoiding inflaming the confrontation and the Dutch noted it was important that the dialogue with Iran continue, the Times of London said Saturday. EU ministers met in Germany Friday night to discuss the impasse about the detention of the British naval personnel for allegedly trespassing in Iranian waters.

Damian P.

Update: "This latest crisis," writes David Frum, "opens a chance to mobilize European opinion to action." Doesn't mean they'll take that chance, though.

I, the critic

I've been posting quite a few movie, TV and book reviews to Blogcritics.org lately. In partcular, I strongly recommend Color Me Kubrick, starring John Malkovich and recently released on DVD.

Damian P.

The Globe's inimitable Ibbitson gets his

Kate McMillan takes him severely to task, drawing on a piece by the Toronto Sun's Lorrie Goldstein. The guy from Gravenhurst (give it a ranking on the "cosmopolitan" scale) really is too supercilious.

Mark C.

"That's where I saw the leprechaun. He told me to burn things."

Part 2 here. They taste like burning!

Damian P.

Responding to Rosie

Popular Mechanics answers Rosie O'Donnell's "unanswered questions" about the collapse of World Trade Center 7.

I was going to send this link to "ask ro," but she's not accepting any new questions right now. But of course. (In any event, you can be sure she'd just respond with the blatant lie that Benjamin Chertoff, the "lead researcher" on PM's conspiracy-debunking story, is a close relative of Homeland Security Chief Michael Chertoff.)

Damian P.

If only Canadian opposition parties thought like Democrats

On the other hand, Charles Krauthammer's Martian is right in terms of argument, but can his conclusion be successfully implemented--politically or militarily?

...Bring in a completely neutral observer -- a Martian -- and point out to him that the United States is involved in two hot wars against radical Islamic insurgents. One is in Afghanistan, a geographically marginal backwater with no resources and no industrial or technological infrastructure. The other is in Iraq, one of the three principal Arab states, with untold oil wealth, an educated population, an advanced military and technological infrastructure that, though suffering decay in the later years of Saddam Hussein's rule, could easily be revived if it falls into the right (i.e., wrong) hands. Add to that the fact that its strategic location would give its rulers inordinate influence over the entire Persian Gulf region, including Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and the Gulf states. Then ask your Martian: Which is the more important battle? He would not even understand why you are asking the question...

[...]

The Democratic insistence on the primacy of Afghanistan makes no strategic sense. Instead, it reflects a sensibility. They would rather support the Afghan war because its origins are cleaner, the casus belli clearer, the moral texture of the enterprise more comfortable. Afghanistan is a war of righteous revenge and restitution, law enforcement on the grandest of scales. As senator and presidential candidate Joe Biden put it, "If there was a totally just war since World War II, it is the war in Afghanistan."..

As to implementation, several commenters on an earlier post, "US ground forces tapped out", objected that it was based on a news story in the Washington Post and hence was basically liberal pap. This article appears in the Post's evil conservative twin, the Washington Times: "Is the Army headed for collapse?". It is written by a retired major general, a former commander of the Army War College.

Mark C.

Afghanistan: Taliban not what they were/ANA improving

A round-up post at The Torch: "Less fight in Taliban".

Plus: "Romania one of the six doing combat" (can you name them all?).

And a post by Damian Brooks on the Canadian Forces' other, small operations around the world: " The forgotten missions".

Mark C.

Update: When the Poles arrive they'll be fighting too.

"The wonder drug of German politics"

Der Spiegel laments the results of a poll showing that more Germans feel threatened by the United States than by Iran:

Now they believe that the United States is a greater threat to world peace than Iran. This was the by-no-means-surprising result of a Forsa opinion poll commissioned by Stern magazine. Young Germans in particular -- 57 percent of 18-to-29-year-olds, to be precise -- said they considered the United States more dangerous than the religious regime in Iran.

The German political establishment, which will no doubt loudly lament the result of the poll, is largely responsible for this wave of anti-Americanism. [Might I suggest that the reliably anti-American Der Spiegel deserves its share of the blame? - DP] For years the country's foreign ministers fed the Germans the fairy tale of what they called a "critical dialogue" between Europe and Iran. It went something like this: If we are nice to the ayatollahs, cuddle up to them a bit and occasionally wag our fingers at them when they've been naughty, they'll stop condemning their women to death for "unchaste behavior" and they'll stop building the atom bomb.

[...]

For us Germans, the Americans are either too fat or too obsessed with exercise, too prudish or too pornographic, too religious or too nihilistic. In terms of history and foreign policy, the Americans have either been too isolationist or too imperialistic. They simply go ahead and invade foreign countries (something we Germans, of course, would never do) and then abandon them, the way they did in Vietnam and will soon do in Iraq.

Worst of all, the Americans won the war in 1945. (Well, with German help, of course -- from Einstein and his ilk.) There are some Germans who will never forgive the Americans for VE Day, when they defeated Hitler. After all, Nazism was just an accident, whereas Americans are inherently evil. Just look at President Bush, the man who, as some of SPIEGEL ONLINE's readers steadfastly believe, "is worse than Hitler." Now that gives us a chance to kill two birds with one stone. If Bush is the new Hitler, then we Germans have finally unloaded the Führer on to someone else. In fact, we won't even have to posthumously revoke his German citizenship, as politicians in Lower Saxony recently proposed. No one can hold a candle to our talent for symbolism!

That probably explains a lot of the comparisons between Israel and the Nazis, too.

Damian P.

What next for Zimbabwe?

Con Coughlin says Mugabe could be gone next month, but that his successor might be no better:

When officials at South Africa's foreign ministry start whispering to visiting American businessmen - as they did earlier this week - that a coup in Harare is on the cards for some time in mid-April, there is every reason to believe that the wind of change is about to blow the cantankerous old devil out of his presidential palace.

The sudden change in Pretoria's attitude to Mugabe is just one of the many factors that have raised expectations throughout Africa that the dictator's 27-year rule of fear is finally drawing to a close.

But if Mugabe goes, will Zimbabwe's salvation inevitably follow?

[...]

Joice Mujuru, generally regarded as holding pole position in the succession stakes, is hardly a figure to inspire confidence.

A veteran of the guerrilla war that eventually brought ZANU-PF to power, she owes her political prominence to her husband Solomon, who for many years commanded Zimbabwe's armed forces, and therefore bears responsibility for many of the atrocities committed against the country's civilian population.

Solomon Mujuru, who acquired vast personal wealth while the rest of Zimbabwe starved, is credited with being instrumental in Mugabe's appointment following independence in 1980; but the country's dire economic situation has prompted even him to ditch his loyalty to his erstwhile protégé, and he has been wooing support from British, American and French diplomats.

When South African officials talk of a potential coup in Zimbabwe, Solomon Mujuru's name is never far from their lips.

For those desperate to see the back of Mugabe, the replacement of a political dictator with a military one might have its attractions, but this would completely fail to serve Zimbabwe's long-term interests.

What Zimbabwe needs is not more of the autocratic Marxist dogma that has brought the country to its knees; it needs to start again, just as it did after the 1980 Lancaster House agreement ended years of bloody civil war.

Damian P.

Update: publicly, at least, Zimbabwe's neighbours are showing "solidarity" with Mugabe's government:

In a communique issued at the end of the meeting, the 14 countries of the Southern African Development Community called for an end to all economic sanctions against Zimbabwe and expressed their solidarity with the government of Mr Mugabe.

They also took up one of Mr Mugabe's long-standing causes, calling on the British government to compensate white farmers whose land his government has seized.

However, they also acknowledged that Zimbabwe's political landscape needed to change. They appointed South African president Thabo Mbeki to promote dialogue between opposition and government figures.

Speaking after the two-day closed meeting, Jakaya Kikwete, the president of Tanzania, said there had been no suggestion of asking Mr Mugabe not to run in presidential elections scheduled for next year.

And he accused opposition groups of using illegal means to further their cause.

Celebrity guest post

4 thousand Jews

stayed home on 9/11

google it

Rosie O.

Canadians bloviate while Darfur burns

Same old headline, and the Arab states (and probably their people) don't give a...

...in a speech earlier in the day [March 28] at the Arab summit [in Riyadh], al-Bashir underlined his objections to a 20,000-strong combined U.N.-AU peacekeeping force, saying the United Nations should only provide financial and technical help to African peacekeepers already on the ground.

Al-Bashir slammed U.N. resolutions calling for U.N. troop deployment in Darfur as "a violation for Sudan's sovereignty" and said they "provoke the conflict in Darfur, instead of finding a solution for it."..

But Gerald Caplan, one of Canada's great and good, asks the question the international community is longing to hear:

Why is Canada not speaking up to decry the shameful opportunism and cynicism of the UN's permanent five?

So the US and UK are just as bad as Russia and China. Phooey on leftist relativism. Read the analysis at the Army.ca link.

As for the French, they're busy protecting their national interests next door:

France, the former colonial power in Chad, has an air force contingent of 3,000 now in the country...

Even more, from greater and gooder Canadians Allan Rock and Lloyd Axworthy:

Canada is failing the test of leadership in Darfur. As the sponsor and principal advocate of "Responsibility to Protect" -- the doctrine that recognizes an international responsibility to protect populations from genocide and other mass atrocities --Canada should be leading a sustained diplomatic and political push to stop the fighting, protect the population and broker a peace pact in Darfur.

[...]

...So how can Canada help? Here are steps we can take immediately...We should bring together a "contact group" of countries that share our concern, drawing from different regions and political interests, including the League of Arab States [hah! see above]...

...it must also be made clear that Sudan's failure to accept a protective force will have consequences. The contact group must be ready to persuade the Security Council to impose and enforce meaningful measures to show that the world means business...

-Lloyd Axworthy served as minister of foreign affairs from 1995-2000. Allan Rock served as Canada's ambassador to the United Nations from 2004 to 2006. In this capacity, he acted as Canada's representative during the negotiation of the May 2006 Darfur Peace Agreement.

What pleasant planet do these people live on? Have they brains? Did they learn nothing about reality on the job? Their idea of policy, I would suggest (and it is far too common with Canadians), is that attitudes are action and proposals in themselves purposeful--especially since they make us feel oh so morally superior to those damned Yankees. Who, in the end, will have to do most of the heavy lifting most of the time. Thank goodness they no longer have power of any sort, other than with our self-satisfied chattering classes.

Latest: progress that means nothing effectual:

"Sudan has now agreed for the U.N. to provide logistical support to help African forces," Saudi Foreign Minister Saud al-Faisal said at a news conference.

Those logistics will sure solve things.

Mark C.

"Plan B" for Iraq

One cannot but wonder why Muslims (of whatever stripe) and anti-Americans everywhere do not simply scream blue murder--and maybe try to suggest something effectual--in an effort to stop the killing.

Scoring points seems all that many people wish to do, rather than consider human life. Saddam was evil. The US bungled, very badly, the occupation. Is being anti-Bush morally better than not condemning those actually doing the killing?

And are the frontiers of an artificial state worth preserving? The Muslim countries pay a huge amount of attention to the Palestine/Israel problem - where far, far, fewer Muslims are being killed.

Why this odd priority, if people are what one cares about rather than religion or attitude? Do Muslims have any suggestions for the future of Iraq, other than US withdrawal and concomitant slaughter? Quelle solution.

"Plan B"--blah, blah, blah:

On the other hand, an orderly withdrawal has its advantages. Taking sides would keep both U.S. troops and credibility mired in Iraq. It would make it more difficult to marshal significant forces and political capital to address other pressing challenges like Afghanistan and Iran. And if, in taking sides, the administration fully embraces the logic of the 80 percent solution, it risks U.S. complicity in a “final solution” for the 5 million Sunnis in Iraq. Beyond the obvious moral implications here, empowering the Shiite majority and its efforts to crush Iraqi Sunnis might cause the fragile coalition of Sunni Arab states Washington is currently stitching together to fly apart. Moreover, as the declassified 2006 NIE on terrorism recognized, the perception of the continued U.S. “occupation” of Iraq feeds the anti-Americanism that drives jihadi recruitment around the world. It might therefore be preferable to withdraw U.S. support from the Iraqi government altogether rather than risk being a party to genocidal violence and the spark for a regionwide sectarian war and greater terrorism worldwide.

Given the strategic and moral stakes, we should hope that President Bush’s new plan indeed spurs important Iraqi political changes—a new oil law, a rollback of de-Baathification, local elections that empower Sunnis, demobilization of militias, etc.—that produce genuine national reconciliation. But we should not count on it. Instead of fixating on the pros and cons of the surge (which, for all intents and purposes, is a done deal), the U.S. public and Congress should be thoroughly analyzing the options for Plan B while there is still time for reasonable debate. Discussion needs to start now, not six or nine months from now. If it doesn’t, the likely result will either be another fait accompli by the Bush administration that puts in place its preferred Plan B if the surge fails, or a rushed withdrawal driven more by domestic politics in the United States than its geopolitical interests and humanitarian obligations in Iraq.

I have no answers. I have one question, an honest one. Would it have been better to have allowed Saddam to remain in power?

Mark C.

Afghanistan: "We are Canadian"

Crikey, what a good film. Interesting to see navy-looking types in land-locked desert terrain. And how good to live in a country from which such volunteers choose to serve.

It was, near the end, I think important to see an Afghan National Army officer telling the Canadians what his troops were going to do with the clear implication that he was in charge of that aspect. It's their country; we are only there to do what we can in an effort to ensure that it does not threaten us in some way.

The Globe and Mail's not-John Doyle liked it too. How refreshing.

Mark C.

My question would be, "are you on meth?"

u have no idea how much idiocy can b featured on 1 site

more here

Damian P.

Update: my pounding headache is getting worse

Turley's second letter

The Iranians haven't released Faye Turney yet (nor any of her colleagues, needless to say), but they have produced another letter she voluntarily wrote in her own words, she really did:

Iran's Mehr news agency quoted military commander Alireza Afshar saying Britain must apologise for entering Iran's waters and promise it would not happen again.

"The release of a female British soldier has been suspended," he was quoted as saying. "The wrong behaviour of those who live in London caused the suspension."

In the letter, whose authenticity could not immediately be confirmed, Turney said her group was in Iranian waters.

"Unfortunately during the course of our mission we entered into Iranian waters," the letter said. "Even through our wrongdoing, they have still treated us well and humanely, (for) which I am and always will be eternally grateful."

[...]

The somewhat stilted language of the letter led some linguistic experts to suggest the text may have been written originally in Farsi and then translated into English.

Damian P.

Britain vs. Iran: The EU's role

Will EU hearts beat as one with Britain's? Don't bet on it, says Timothy Garton Ash.

Last week, while the European Union celebrated 50 years of peace, freedom and solidarity, 15 Europeans were kidnapped from Iraqi territorial waters by Iranian Revolutionary Guards. As I write, those 14 European men and one European woman have been held at an undisclosed location for nearly a week, interrogated, denied consular access but shown on Iranian television, with one of them making a staged "confession," clearly under duress. So if Europe is as it claims to be, what's it going to do about it? Where's the solidarity? Where's the action?

[...]

Many continental Europeans, if they have registered that there is a crisis at all, will probably think of it as yet another consequence of a foolish, illegitimate Anglo-American military action in Iraq. They will see it as a problem for "them" (Brits and Americans) rather than for "us" (right-thinking, peace-loving Europeans). Some may suspect the British sailors and marines did in fact stray into Iranian territorial waters, as the Iranians claim. A few may even privately mutter, "Well, you had it coming to you."

[...]

Here is something Europe should do: Flex its economic muscles. The EU is by far Iran's biggest trading partner. More than 40 per cent of its imports come from, and more than a quarter of its exports go to, the EU. Remarkably, this trade has grown strongly in the past years of looming crisis. Much of it is underpinned by export credit guarantees given by European governments, notably those of Germany, France and Italy.

[...]

So here's a challenge for the German presidency of the European Union: Will you put your money where your mouth is? Or are all your recent speeches about European solidarity in the cause of peace and freedom not even worth the paper they are written on?

Now Mr Garton Ash is a particularily prominent pro-Europe Brit. Yet he clearly is close to outrage at the EU's mealy-mouthed passivity. A lesson to him and others likeminded, perhaps? As to views in the "Union's" current presidency:

1) Who are the good guys?

Evil Americans, Poor Mullahs

By Claus Christian Malzahn

Forty-eight percent of Germans think the United States is more dangerous than Iran, a new survey shows, with only 31 percent believing the opposite. Germans' fundamental hypocrisy about the US suggests that it's high time for a new bout of re-education...

2) How to deal with Iran:

The German papers Thursday [March 28] praised the British response to the crisis, with some newspapers calling for international solidarity in dealing with Tehran...

That certainly is a stand-up attitude. Whilst at the scene of the latest action:

Britain is seeking a United Nations Security Council statement demanding the immediate release of 15 British sailors and marines seized last Friday by Iran, British officials said Thursday.

At the United Nations in New York, British officials were circulating a draft statement, which would also condemn Iran's actions in the case and support the British position that its troops were acting legally within Iraqi waters. The officials hoped it would be issued later Thursday, according to a spokesman for the British Foreign Office...

Any wagers on how much support Russia and China will give for any substantive action? By the way, in the latter case it is, as with Darfur, all about oil.

Mark C.

Update: Should you wish to face the enemy within (us) take a look at the comments on Mr Garton Ash's piece as published in The Guardian. First on the scene is "DaveCanuk". Oh dear. Can't spell much.

I also hope you and your emperial overlords get chased back to your home countries promptly.

Cry, the beloved country. Such cultural self-loathing. Diagnosis, please?

A premeditated heist

When fifteen British sailors were taken prisoner by Iran, geopolitical analyst Rosie O'Donnell compared it to the Gulf of Tonkin Incident. She may have a point: just as the Johnson Administration exaggerated, falsified and/or manipulated the Tonkin incident, it looks like the Iranians exaggerated, falsified and/or manipulated this one. (What do you mean, "that's not what she meant"?)

Dominic Kennedy, in The Times, suggests it was all planned well in advance:

The Ministry of Defence released the coordinates of the searched vessel yesterday to prove that the Iranian Revolutionary Guards made an unprovoked and improper attack in Iraqi waters.

The Iranians also blundered in diplomatic talks by giving the British their own compass reference for the place where they said the 14 men and one woman had been seized. When Britain plotted these on a map and pointed out that the spot was in Iraq’s maritime area, the Iranians came up with a new set of coordinates, putting the seizure in their own waters.

The speed and cunning shown by the Revolutionary Guards has raised suspicions that their action was premeditated. A senior military officer described it as “deliberate”.

It took only three minutes for the Iranians, moving at 40 knots, to move from their legitimate positions monitoring shipping in their waters to come alongside the British last Friday morning.

Why didn't the British fight back? Kennedy says they would have had every right to do so, in self-defence, but it would have been suicidal:

— The two Iranian patrol ships that seized the Britons were equipped with rocket-propelled grenades and heavy machine guns, enough for a small sea battle. By contrast, the Britons go lightly armed on vessels they search in the Gulf. Each man is issued with a rifle or a pistol

— The Iranians struck at a vulnerable moment when the Britons were climbing down a ladder to jump into their inflatables

— The Royal Navy does train its men in the techniques needed to fight at just such a dangerous stage. “They had all the rights available to act in self-defence under law,” a senior military officer said. But they were in an “almost impossible position”

— A similar decision to hold fire was taken by the six Royal Marines and two sailors captured by Iran in 2004 in similar circumstances. Scott Fallon, a former marine, said they did think about shooting their way free but knew it would be hopeless. He told BBC Radio 4: “They had antiaircraft guns. We would have stood no chance”

Meanwhile, the Iranians say they may not release Faye Tunney after all, as long as the British refuse to act like proper dhimmis:

British sailor Faye Turney may be set free by Iran on Thursday, but there is word her release could be delayed if Iran is faced with "fuss and wrong behaviour" from Britain.

[...]

Ali Larijani, the secretary of Iran's Supreme National Security Council, said on state television that Turney's release would depend on the British response.

"We even said that the grounds were ready for the release of a woman among the British sailors but if we are faced with a fuss and wrong behaviour then this would be suspended and it would not take place," Larijani said, according to Reuters news service.

In another interview on Iranian radio, Larijani said specifically that Turney's release could be delayed if Britain takes the issue to the UN Security Council or freezes relations, as it has threatened to do.

Damian P.

Meet the new Commission, same as the old Commission

The Foreign Policy blog describes how the "reformed" UN Human Rights Council is back to its old tricks - namely, letting brutal dictatorships off scot-free, and concentrating its attacks against the country with all the Jooooooos in it:

...By a decisive margin, the Council voted to end its examination of Iran and Uzbekistan despite worsening human rights records in both countries. Japan, South Korea, and Brazil were surprising votes in favor of the free passes; they had been supported more predictably by Zimbabwe, Bangladesh, and Azerbaijan.

The sad irony is, the Council was actually conceived as an alternative to the now-defunct Human Rights Committee, which had been widely condemned for doing exactly what the new Council is doing now. The United States had been a leading advocate for reform, but refused to sit on the Council at its inception, fearing that it would degenerate into a talking shop that would aid and abet the worst violators.

That position is looking pretty prescient now. The Council has condemned Israel 8 times, but refused to pass judgment on even a single other regime. Regional bloc cover for their own, while tyrants point to the shortcomings of democracies to hide the fact that they aren't even trying. All of which just goes to show the inherent weakness of a body that treats all of its members as formal equals in judging matters in which they manifestly are not. ...[emphasis added]

Via Publius Pundit.

Damian P.

At least he isn't teaching anymore

While Cathy Seipp was on her deathbed, a persistent, mentally unstable cyberstalker took the opportunity to take cheap shots at Seipp and her teenaged daughter:

Just hours before her death, “Cathy Seipp” suddenly seemed to undo decades of hard work with an oddly written letter posted on the Web site, www. cathyseipp.com. In what came off as more bizarre rant than heartfelt apology, her supposed “very last blog entry” called her years of journalism a “shoddy,” “despicable” and “irresponsible” career as a “fourth-rate hack.” Her political stance? All a mistake.

The fiery, unwavering supporter of George W. Bush supposedly said she'd done a complete 180 in the past year and was now an implied supporter of Sen. Hillary Clinton, D-N.Y. What was even more perplexing was that “Seipp” was taking mean-spirited potshots at her own daughter, Maia Lazar, whom she called an “obnoxious” and “arrogant” wanna-be “skank” who was “mentally ill.” Throughout the letter, the one person whom “Seipp” seemed most sorry for ever having offended was Maia's 10th-grade journalism teacher, who had frequently clashed with mother and daughter. Finally, “Seipp” said she was probably to blame for her own illness — the “venom” she'd spewed for years was responsible for her terminal cancer.

Friends were horrified. They quickly realized that the letter was the work of an infamous character known as “Troll Dolls” who'd positioned himself as the blogger's archenemy and bought the domain name www.cathyseipp.com years earlier (Seipp's real Web site is www.cathyseipp.net). Troll Dolls is really Eliot Stein, a 54-year-old former online talk-show host and stand-up comedian who hadd taught Maia in a journalism class for a brief period in 2004, and who blamed Maia and Seipp for his departure from the school after only five weeks. Seipp's friends marshaled their resources, creating an impromptu Internet chat room to make their plans, fingering Stein as the culprit, enlisting the help of a lawyer to serve him a cease-and-desist letter, and successfully lobbying Stein's Internet host to take the Web site down permanently.

[...]

...Stein said that he made several bona fide efforts to end the feud with Seipp, but that whenever he took his site down, Seipp would begin the conflict again with comments about him in her blog. Seipp's friends said that if anything, the reverse was true, and that Seipp was a deathly ill woman focusing on her cancer and her daughter, and never took Stein very seriously. In 2006, Seipp wrote a column in which she lightheartedly referred to Stein as a cyberstalker and compared him to the Star Wars figure Jabba the Hutt. That, Stein said, was the last straw. He later crafted his fake Seipp letter and posted it on his Web site, knowing full well that she was dying but still alive.

“They thought that because this is the Internet they could say whatever they want whenever they want, but they met someone with an expansive education, a pioneer of the Internet with an incredible sense of humor,” Stein said. “They picked the wrong person to mess with.”

When asked if he himself might be accused of abusing the freedoms and power of the Internet to attack someone, Stein said his actions were justified by Seipp's history of “character assassination.”

If the teaching thing doesn't work out, maybe he can get a place at the Huffington Post.

Damian P.

Captives on parade

Iranian television showed the captured British sailors today:

Iran today broadcast a film of the lone woman among 15 British Navy personnel seized in the Gulf last week, in which she says she "obviously trespassed" into Iranian territory.

As the seven sailors and eight Marines were paraded on Iranian state television, Leading Seaman Faye Turney was shown separately, wearing a headscarf and smoking a cigarette.

An apparent recording of the 26-year-old said: "I am Leading Seaman Faye Turney. I come from England. I serve on Foxtrot Nine Nine. I have been in the Navy nine years. I live in England."

“I was arrested on Friday March 23. Obviously we trespassed into their waters. They were very friendly and very hospitable, very thoughtful, good people. They explained to us why we had been arrested. There was no aggression, no hurt, no harm.They were very, very compassionate.”

The broadcast was accompanied by what was claimed to be a letter from Ms Turney to her parents, which was released by the Iranian Embassy in London.

In the letter, Ms Turney said they had "apparently" gone into Iranian waters and repeated her assurances that was being treated well by her captors.

[...]

Earlier the British Ministry of Defence published satellite coordinates which commanders said proved that the personnel were 1.7 nautical miles inside Iraqi waters when they were "ambushed" by the Iranian Revolutionary Guard.

British Foreign Secretary Margaret Beckett then told MPs that Britain was immediately freezing all bilateral ties with Iran - except for negotiations directly concerning the 15.

Turney's "confession" is the lead story in most British newspapers this morning. The video, if you can stand it, is here.

Damian P.

Why the European Economic Community went wrong

Too much "coordinated capitalism" (as in Quebec?):

Postwar European history falls neatly into two periods. From 1945 to 1973, the countries of Western Europe recovered rapidly from the almost unimaginable devastation caused by World War II and then took off, growing faster than the United States and more than twice as fast as their own historical trends. From 1973 to the present, however, their economies have struggled with low growth and high unemployment, lagging behind both international competitors and their own earlier success.

...In “The European Economy Since 1945,” Barry Eichengreen, a professor of economics and political science at the University of California, Berkeley, presents not only a comprehensive account of Europe’s postwar economic experience but also an important analysis of capitalist development more generally.

...In the years after 1945, Europe needed to recover from the war and catch up with the United States. This involved what economists call “extensive growth” — essentially, increasing the number of workers doing familiar kinds of jobs. Extensive growth requires adopting existing technology, using labor more efficiently and generating high levels of investment. After the war, Europe developed a variety of institutions well suited to these tasks.

...By the early 1970s, however, the potential for extensive growth had been largely exhausted. Europe’s businesses and infrastructure had been rebuilt, its labor force transferred from agriculture to manufacturing, the latest technology imported and adopted. At this point, Eichengreen says, “the continent had to find other ways of sustaining its growth. It had to switch from growth based on brute-force capital accumulation and the acquisition of known technologies to growth based on increases in efficiency and internally generated innovation” — that is, to “intensive growth.”

The problem, of course, was that Europe was now saddled with institutions ill suited to the creativity and flexibility that intensive growth demands. As Eichengreen puts it, “the continent’s very success at exploiting the opportunities for catch-up and convergence after World War II doomed it to difficulties thereafter.” The new situation called for flexible and mobile work relationships, technological novelty and the financing of risky ventures — none of which Europe’s postwar institutions were good at...

More on the broader malaise of what became the European Union is here.

Mark C.

Big Bang

Talk about MOPping up:

The Defense Threat Reduction Agency (DTRA) successfully conducted the first explosive test of the Massive Ordnance Penetrator (MOP) conventional weapon concept yesterday at White Sands Missile Range, N.M. The test consisted of a statically emplaced conventional weapon within a DTRA test tunnel. “This demonstration of the bomb’s capability to defeat tunnels was a significant step in the development of this innovative concept,” said Robert Hastie, Ph.D., MOP program manager.

The conventional 30,000-pound penetrating bomb is designed to defeat hard and deeply buried targets such as bunker and tunnel facilities. Designed to be carried in B-2 and B-52 bombers and employed at high altitudes, the MOP’s innovative design features include a Global Positioning System navigation system and over 5,300 pounds of explosives...

Picture here--topping the Tallboy, as well as the Daisycutter and MOAB.

Mark C.

Update: Omitted the Grand Slam.

Testing British resolve

Melanie Phillips says Iran's seizure of fifteen British sailors is a test to see how the UK and its allies will react. And so far, the British are failing that test miserably:

My goodness, the Iranian regime must be shivering in its shoes. With what contempt they must regard us — a country that stands impotently by while its people are kidnapped and then does no more than bleat that it is ‘disturbed’.

[...]

We just don’t seem able to grasp the true nature and scale of the Iranian threat. Indeed, there is a distinct air of irrationality about a Britain which tells opinion pollsters that it believes President Bush is a greater threat to world peace than Mahmoud Ahmadinejad. What terrible moral confusion.

We have consistently shown we are not prepared to defend ourselves. In 2004, the British servicemen who were kidnapped by Iran were spirited to Tehran and paraded blindfold on television, which broadcast their apprehensive apologies for a ‘big mistake’.

It was an act of war against us. We let them get away with it.

In 2005, the then Foreign Secretary Jack Straw said Iran was supplying the roadside bombs that were blowing up our troops in Iraq. Such a supply was an act of war against this country. We let them get away with it.

Our failure to respond adequately to Iranian aggression this time round will provide yet another signal, not just to Iran but to every corrupt despotism which fancies its chances against Western interests, that we are there for the taking.

Some Britons - the same ones who compared their public response to 7/7 with how the Americans reacted to an attack that killed sixty times as many people - would respond that the Brits' relatively muted response is itself a sign of maturity and courage, compared to these trigger-happy Yanks. But I fear many Britons believe their sailors somehow deserved it.

Damian P.

Update: Telegraph readers weigh in.

Separatism isn't dead

Yes, the PQ was relegated to third place in the Quebec election. And, yes, Mario Dumont opposes a new referendum on sovereignty. But the ADQ platform demands significant "autonomy" for the province:

Mr. Dumont drew a lot of attention during the campaign for his promise not to facilitate another referendum. Less attention was paid to his platform to assert Quebec's autonomy, elements of which might surprise Canadians.

Adopted by the party in 2004, the policy is a strongly nationalist document that calls for Quebec to adopt its own constitution, create its own citizenship and even disregard some federal laws when they are judged to be infringing on areas of provincial jurisdiction.

"Our first fidelity, our passion and our loyalty are toward Quebec," the platform says. It adds: "The development of Quebec as a distinct nation flows naturally from an increase in our autonomy." Canadians outside Quebec are considered "privileged partners," not countrymen. It proposes having the province's name officially changed to the "Autonomist State of Quebec."

The document is heavy on rhetoric about rejecting "submission to Canada" and affirming Quebec's "sovereign rights."

The Canada Health Act, which sets national standards for healthcare delivery and limits private sector involvement, is considered an unacceptable intrusion.

If federal environmental law were to block construction of Quebec hydroelectric dams, an ADQ government would reserve the right to ignore the federal government if it were satisfied the project met Quebec environmental standards.

[...]

Guy Laforest, a professor of political science at Universite Laval and former president of the ADQ, said the electionmarks the beginning of a new political phase in Canada.

"The idea of Canada as one nation, Dumont does not buy that dream. Dumont is not a one-nation Canada guy. Dumont is a Quebec nationalist," Mr. Laforest said. "The result of yesterday is not that Quebec is going out. Quebec is not going anywhere. Quebec is staying in but will act as a nation, will demand autonomy and will act autonomously."

Mr. Dumont has said he wants limits on federal spending power written into the Constitution, but Mr. Laforest said much of the ADQ program does not require anyone's approval.

"Quebec does not have to beg for permission to do this. It can do it alone," he said.

Mario Dumont obviously feels no emotional attachment to Canada, but is willing to remain part of Confederation as long as Quebec gets a lot of power and money out of it. ("Quebec would be under none of the constraints of federalism, but would enjoy all of its privileges," writes Andrew Coyne.) With about two-thirds of the vote going to the ADQ, the PQ and the far-left, separatist Quebec Solidaire, it's obvious that most Quebecois feel the same way - and that the R-word will come up again before too long.

The question is, ten or twenty years from now when Quebec inevitably holds another referendum, will the rest of Canada even care anymore?

Damian P.

Live from Kurdistan

Michael Totten continues his outstanding reporting from Iraqi Kurdistan, including an inspiring piece about how that relatively calm region of the country is being rebuilt, and an encounter with Iranian Communists.

Damian P.

CBC to air excellent documentary on troops in Afghanistan

Now that you've picked yourself up off the floor read the post, "The Crazy Eights", by Damian Brooks at The Torch. Damian has some perceptive points on the Canadian media's general attitude towards the Canadian Forces.

The Crazy Eights will air on Thursday, March 29, 2007 at 8:00 p.m. on CBC television, repeating Saturday, March 31, 2007 at 10:00 p.m. ET/PT on CBC Newsworld. Make some time to watch it.

Now read this piece by Mark Steyn: "Harmed Forces".

Mark C.

The Liberals were right!

Airman, with gun, on our ice. Canada's New Government sure is scary.

Mark C.

An electric Bricklin?

The Truth About Cars is skeptical about the heavily hyped Tesla roadster, a beautiful, electric (not hybrid) sports car that will reportedly go from 0-60 in four seconds:

...our man was not allowed behind the wheel. Indeed, all Tesla’s media coverage has been carefully supervised and controlled. While "you can't touch this" restrictions are not unknown in an industry that produces million dollar plus prototypes, there are plenty of electric car companies happy to let responsible journos do what responsible journos are supposed to do.

[...]

The enthusiastic staff at Tesla Motors describes the Roadster’s selling proposition as “performance without guilt.” But if you set aside the media’s PC fawning over an eco-friendly sports car, there are serious questions about the Roadster’s ability to deliver on its manufacturer's promises.

For example, Tesla says its engineers have placed the Roadster’s LiIon batteries away from each other in steel and aluminum containers. Even so, if one of its batteries ignites, it could cause a virtually unstoppable series of fires and/or explosions. Roadster deliveries are now scheduled for fall; federal approval for the vehicle has not yet been granted.

Safety, range, reliability, recharge time, battery life, build quality, manufacturing costs– Tesla has yet to prove that they’ve overcome any of these obstacles for their lightweight Roadster (never mind their planned family car). Until they do, until they allow the press to thoroughly evaluate the car’s real world capabilities, their Roadster should be viewed as nothing more than another well-meaning concept car. Or, if you prefer, a fabulous toy.

I hope the Tesla lives up to expectations, but how many times have we been burned by upstart manufacturers promising to revolutionize the auto industry?

Damian P.

The making of an environmental myth

If you thought recent talk about China having stricter vehicle-emissions standards than the U.S. was too good to be true, you were right. (Ironically, China is one of the few places on earth where big American cars - especially Buicks - are a hit.)

Damian P.

Hicks heading home

The "Australian Taliban" has plead guilty before a U.S. military tribunal, and will serve his sentence Down Under:

Chief prosecutor Colonel Morris Davis said today that David Hicks's guilty plea meant the Australian terror suspect could be winging his way home in a matter of months.

Hicks would be sentenced by the end of the week, under a deal in which Hicks can serve out any more time to be served in an Australian jail, Colonel Davis said.

[...]

Hicks’s US military lawyer, Major Michael Mori, entered the plea to the charge of material support for terrorism which was broken into two counts or specifications.

Major Mori rose and said Hicks pled guilty on specification one, and not guilty on specification two.

Specification one of the charge detailed at length Hicks's links to terrorist organisations and his activities in Afghanistan where he met Osama bin Laden and completed al-Qa'ida training courses.

Specification two simply alleged that Hicks entered Afghanistan from about December 2000 to December 2001 to provide support for terrorism and that he did so in “in the context of and was associated with an armed conflict namely al-Qa'ida or its associated forces against the United States or its coalition partners”.

Tim Blair, one of the few Aussies who never drank the Hicks Kool-Aid, has much more. (Turns out our Aussie friend, who had been repeatedly described in the Australian media as being on the verge of starvation, packed on quite a few pounds in Chimpy McLikudBurton's gulag.)

Damian P.

Charest cut down; Boisclair bombs

Jean Charest and the Liberals barely hang on to power in Quebec, but the big story is the upstart ADQ surging ahead of the venerable Parti Quebecois to become the official opposition:

When the dust settled, the Liberals had 48 seats, the ADQ 41, and the PQ 36 in the 125-seat National Assembly. The last time Quebec had a minority government was in 1878.

While it is not entirely clear how the three parties will align themselves, the Liberals almost certainly will continue to govern, even though Mr. Charest may be turfed as leader. Four of his cabinet ministers were defeated. Mr. Boisclair won his seat, but could also lose his job.

[...]

With the ADQ gnawing away at both the traditional parties, the federalist-sovereigntist dichotomy that dominated Quebec's political landscape for three decades dissipated.

While Mr. Dumont's "autonomist" position remains vague, his fence-straddling allowed him to move beyond the age-old debate about Quebec's place within Canada and focus on other issues.

He wooed voters, particularly outside of urban Montreal, with his small-c conservatism and focus on families.

Is this the end of Quebec separatism? Don't bet on it. You can be sure the endless debate will lurch back to life before too long, and then we'll see where Dumont and his ADQ really stand on the issue.

Damian P.

The greening of war games

Different types of wars demand a different sort of game--and player.

Strategic war games used to be simple. Soldiers, defense consultants and others divvied up into Blue (allied) and Red (enemy) teams and then faced off in a series of moves roughly resembling chess. The point wasn't to predict the outcomes of future battles — though that sometimes happened — but to sort out how policies, tactics and weapons might perform in combat. A roll of the dice set a team's odds. Complicated mathematical formulas determined the outcome. And that worked pretty well up through the Cold War.

Today, dice seldom get rolled. In the wake of 9/11, Afghanistan and Iraq, war games have had to evolve to remain relevant. Instead of a monolithic enemy, there are often several Red teams, fighting against each other as well as the Blue team. This complicates things for Red team players like me, but frankly, it's a fascinating way to make a living.

It's not just the Red teams that are changing; so is the definition of victory.

The outcome of many games is determined by a new addition, the Green team. Green represents the civilian population, the media and the international community — once bystanders, now the ultimate arbitrators. If Red or Blue kills civilians in a manner considered unnecessary in the process of winning a battle, for instance, it may lose Green team support, thus losing the war or at least the campaign.

Mark C.

The Truth Hurts

Hillel Neuer, head of UN Watch, appeared before the UN Human Rights Commission last week - and spoke truth to powerlessness.

Damian P.

Quote of the Day

KSK reader "big jim slade" on Joe Theismann getting dumped from Monday Night Football:

"The only thing that would have made this sweeter is if they had Lawrence Taylor break the news to him."

Damian P.

It worked so well in Ukraine

Hugo Chavez wants to collective agriculture:

President Hugo Chavez announced Sunday that his government's sweeping reforms toward socialism will include the creation of "collective property."

Vowing to undermine capitalism's continued influence in Venezuela during his television and radio program "Hello President," Chavez said state-financed cooperatives would operate under a new concept in which workers would share profits.

"It's property that belongs to everyone and it's going to benefit everyone," said Chavez, a close ally of Cuban leader Fidel Castro whom opponents accuse of leading Venezuela toward Cuba-style communism.

Chavez — a leftist former paratrooper popularly known as "El Comandante" — said his government fully respects private property, but pledged to replace capitalist ideals with socialist principles on cooperatives such as cattle ranches and farms.

"It cannot be production to generate profits for one person or a small group of people that become rich exploiting peons who end up becoming slaves, living in poverty and misery their entire lives," he said.

[...]

Since the reform began five years ago, officials have redistributed over 1.9 million hectares (4.6 million acres) of land that had been classified as unproductive or lacked property documents dating back to 1847, according to a recent government census.

Critics say reform has failed to revive Venezuela's agriculture industry, which does not produce enough food to satisfy domestic demand. The government has been forced to import food amid shortages of staples such as meats, milk and sugar.

Damian P.

Iranian provocation

The Iranian government says the captured British sailors have "confessed" to entering Iranian territorial waters:

The Iranian Foreign Minister accused a group of captured British servicemen last night of having committed an act of “aggression”, only hours after Tony Blair appealed for their release.

“The charge against them is their illegal entrance into Iranian territorial waters,” Manouchehr Mottaki, the Foreign Minister, told a press conference in New York.

In a telephone conversation with Mr Mottaki last night Margaret Beckett, the Foreign Secretary, “made extremely clear our view that our personnel were operating in Iraqi waters, called for their immediate return, and asked for immediate consular access to them”, a spokesman said.

But Mr Mottaki told the conference that Iran had already provided British officials with details, including GPS coordinates, of the servicemen’s arrest. The British Ambassador to Tehran was summoned to the Foreign Ministry to explain why 15 service personnel in two inflatable boats had strayed into Iranian territorial waters.

[...]

So far the Iranians have refused to give any details about their fate, other than to say that they are being well treated. General Ali Reza Afshar, Iran’s armed forces spokesman, said that they had been taken to Tehran for questioning and that they had “confessed” to an “aggression into the Islamic Republic of Iran’s waters”.

Diplomats involved in the case believe that the British servicemen were ambushed by a naval unit of Iran’s Revolutionary Guards with the intention of putting pressure on Britain ahead of the key UN Security Council vote to impose sanctions on Tehran for its nuclear programme. If that was the motive, it failed. On Saturday, the day after the abduction, the council voted unanimously to impose sanctions on Iran, banning the export of weapons and freezing the assets of 28 individuals and companies involved in the country’s nuclear and ballistic missile programmes.

It's certainly possible that the British sailors had strayed into Iranian waters, but the Iranian response definitely looks like a test of how Britain and its allies will react. Not unlike 1979.

Damian P.

Love among the classmates(.com)

Some stunning news about the best-known (formerly) married couple on the internet. (Via Kathy Shaidle)

Damian P.

How long must this go on?

A consensus amongst some Sun Media columnists this Sunday (via Norman's Spectator):

"Quebec sucks Canada dry"

"Stop bribing Quebec"

"Keeping Quebec comes at steep cost"

Mark C.

Afghanistan: What you won't see in the Canadian media...

...except, oddly enough, on the CBC website: the UN Security Council has passed unanimously a resolution that, amongst other things, endorses the work of NATO ISAF and the Operation Enduring Freedom coalition (almost no coverage in US or UK press either):

“The Security Council,

[...]

“Noting, in the context of a comprehensive approach, the synergies in the objectives of UNAMA [United Nations Assistance Mission in Afghanistan] and of the International Security Assistance Force (ISAF), and stressing the need for continued cooperation and coordination, taking due account of their respective designated responsibilities,

[...]

“25. Calls upon the Afghan Government, with the assistance of the international community, including the International Security Assistance Force and Operation Enduring Freedom coalition, in accordance with their respective designated responsibilities as they evolve, to continue to address the threat to the security and stability of Afghanistan posed by the Taliban, Al-Qaida, other extremist groups and criminal activities, welcomes the completion of ISAF’s expansion throughout Afghanistan and calls upon all parties to uphold international humanitarian and human rights law and to ensure the protection of civilian life...

I wonder what the Liberals, NDP and BQ, those great believers in the UN, think of all this.

This is what you do see from some Canadians. And here's what you can see in a video by a US Army sergeant.

Mark C.

Update: Other news you are most unlikely to see in the Canadian, quagmire-memed, media:

"Australian special forces likely to head to Afghanistan"

"First group of Polish troops leaves for mission in Afghanistan"

But then, I guess, Diggers and Polacks (irony alert) are just infra dig. Bush babies you know, just decent members of the UN.

Tres close

The latest numbers from Quebec: PQ 31, Liberals 30, ADQ 28. Unbelievable.

I'm not sure what to think about the ADQ. Quebec's political system desperately needs a good shaking, and I find many of Dumont's policies intriguing - but even if he now opposes a new referendum, I can't forget where he stood 12 years ago.

Damian P.

Afghanistan: More ministerial and bureaucratic economy with the truth

This sort of thing is ridiculous and must stop. (I guess CIDA can contradict "Ottawa" since its HQ is in Gatineau.)

Canada has not funded the Afghan Independent Human Rights Commission for years, despite the government's insistence that it plays a vital role in safeguarding captives transferred by Canada to Afghanistan's notorious prisons...

Government House Leader Peter Van Loan said Monday, that "the government of Canada has funded the Independent Human Rights Commission to the amount of $1-million."

Mr. Van Loan did not mention that the $1-million was given five years ago by the previous Liberal government...

Now doubts have emerged over another of Mr. O'Connor's assurances in light of a letter from senior Defence and Foreign Affairs officials.

Two assistant deputy ministers told MPs in December that Canada had been notifying the AIHRC of the names of transferred detainees for months. But in a March 15 letter revising their statement, they wrote that Canadian Forces didn't pass along any of the names of transferred detainees.

"No notifications, in fact, took place," until last month, the two assistant deputy ministers wrote.

Mark C.

The brutal truth about "one tier" health care

Excerpted from a post by the president of the Richmond Hill Federal Liberal Riding Association and Director of York Region Area for the Ontario Liberal Party (via Kate McMillan):

...I support public health care because it is a manner of rationing [emphasis added] scarce medical resources in a way that the market could never do.

Mark C.

Dirty work at the wicket

"Blogs and chat rooms abuzz over Woolmer murder".

More mega-coverage, from the Daily Telegraph:

Bob Woolmer, the Pakistan coach, was poisoned and then strangled as he was about to go public with allegations of corruption in international cricket, it was claimed yesterday. Police believe food or alcohol delivered to Mr Woolmer's hotel room in Jamaica after Pakistan's shock World Cup exit might have been poisoned to incapacitate him before he was killed.

Speculation that he was murdered to silence him before he blew the whistle on match-fixing in the game intensified yesterday.

The Daily Telegraph can disclose that Mr Woolmer was planning to write a book about cricket which would include a chapter on the issue.

In an email, seen by The Daily Telegraph, Mr Woolmer wrote: "I am going to write a book on my tenure as Pakistan coach. I shall only start after the World Cup... I believe, regardless of the money, the story is worth telling, has to be told and in the correct way. I am not a name and shame guy, just the honest facts. Let the punter make up his mind etc."..

I have no idea how valid any of the insinuations may be. But, if Mr Woolmer's death really is connected to corruption, then we are facing one of the biggest professional sports scandals ever. Not cricket, as one used to say.

Mark C.

Paint him Black

Mark Steyn writes about the first week of the trial of the Lord of Crossharbour. Pretty straight reportage, rather than the usual Steyn fireworks--but interesting.

Peter Worthington, for his part, describes the thinness of the US government's case so far--and makes a clear distinction between ethics and illegality.

Even the egregious Eric Margolis, to whom I cannot bear to link, is on Lord Black's side.

Mark C.

EU's 50th anniversary blues

Two leading public intellectuals analyze what has gone wrong and how to right things. Neither writer's suggestions sound compelling or very practical to me:

1) Timothy Garton Ash: "The EU's midlife crisis--Europeans need to start finding each other in a common public sphere.."

2) Bernard-Henri Lévy: "Europe Has Lost Confidence".

A contrary view:

The elites' most sacred doctrine is what they call the acquis communautaire. This is like the Muslim notion of sacred space - the belief that land, once occupied for the part, belongs to it forever. It says that what has become common European property can never be given up...

Mark C.

British sailors seized

This could be a misunderstanding (the British mistakenly being in Iranian waters, or the Iranians thinking the British were in Iranian waters), or it could be something much bigger:

Iranian naval vessels seized 15 British sailors and marines Friday in Iraqi waters, the Ministry of Defense said.

The British personnel from the frigate HMS Cornwall were "engaged in routine boarding operations of merchant shipping in Iraqi territorial waters," and had completed their inspection of a merchant ship when they were accosted by Iranian vessels, the ministry said in a statement.

"We are urgently pursuing this matter with the Iranian authorities at the highest level and ... the Iranian ambassador has been summoned to the Foreign Office," the ministry said.

"The British government is demanding the immediate and safe return of our people and equipment."

A fisherman who said he was with a group of Iraqis from Basra in the northern area of the Gulf said he witnessed the event. The fisherman declined to be identified because of security concerns.

"Two boats, each with a crew of six to eight multinational forces, were searching Iraqi and Iranian boats Friday morning in Ras al-Beesha area in the northern entrance of the Arab Gulf, but big Iranian boats came and took the two boats with their crews to the Iranian waters," said the fisherman.

The British Broadcasting Corp. said the British forces were inspecting a ship suspected of smuggling cars. It did not cite a source for the report.

A similar incident occurred in 2004:

In June 2004, six British marines and two sailors were seized by Iran in the Shatt al-Arab between Iran and Iraq. They were presented blindfolded on Iranian television and admitted entering Iranian waters illegally.

They were released unharmed after three days.

No explanation from the Iranians yet. PJM has a blog roundup.

Damian P.

Dishonesty of the day

Lawrence Martin of the Globe and Mail tells a real porky:

...[Conrad Black's] purchase of Southam and creation of the Post (both of which he sold later to owners more ardently right wing than himself) did wonders to change the tenor of the debate...

Larry, really: CanWest Global, owned by the Asper family, bought the Post.

Mr. Asper's influence spread to the political world, where he was involved with the Liberal party, serving as an MLA and as its provincial leader...

And this:

...The Aspers were close political allies of Chrétien...

But maybe this is how Larry defines "ardently right wing":

...CanWest is "unabashedly" pro-Israel, company executive Murdoch Davis once famously announced...

Mark C.

"Canadian values"

Ideological idiocy impedes improving health care in Ontario:

Ontario Health Minister George Smitherman said the government will not consider contracting out knee-replacement operations to a private Toronto hospital.

The Globe and Mail revealed yesterday [March 15] that the province was reviewing a proposal from Don Mills Surgical Unit Ltd., a private Toronto hospital, to perform 1,500 knee-replacement operations.

[...]

"This Ministry of Health gives you and all Ontarians the complete assurance, I will never support the outsourcing of those knee surgeries to any private, for-profit-motivated organization," Mr. Smitherman said. "Our government fundamentally believes that the public health-care system, the not-for-profit public health-care system is the best expression of Canadian values [emphasis added]."..

Despite the fact that there would be a substantial cost saving, and that the province already funds some procedures at this hospital:

The Ontario government has rejected a proposal to have 1,500 knee replacements done at a private Toronto hospital, even though it would have helped reduce waiting times and cost $1,000 less per knee than in the public system.

[...]

Don Mills Surgical is one of three surgical hospitals that operate under the province's Private Hospitals Act...[and amongst other things does] provincially financed cataract and orthopedic services such as knee arthroscopy and cataract surgery...

As the Globe editorialized [full text not online]:

Canadians should not have to wait in terrible pain for surgery because political leaders won't talk honestly about private health care. But that is the situation in Ontario. People wait nearly twice as long as the Ontario government's official targets say they should. Yet Health Minister George Smitherman turned his nose up last week at a chance to pay a private clinic in Toronto to help cut waiting times for knee-replacement surgery...

Madness.

Mark C.

Toyota hits the jackpot

As if they need the help. How's this for government policy distorting the market:

Unhappy auto companies that sell subcompact cars are revising marketing plans and sales forecasts now that Ottawa has provided a competitive advantage to Toyota Canada Inc. with environmental provisions in the new federal budget.

The provisions will affect virtually every auto maker in the country, but the most significant impact will come in the subcompact segment of the market, where Toyota's Yaris gets a fraction better fuel economy than cars offered by competitors.

Under the government's plan, Yaris buyers will receive a $1,000 rebate from Ottawa, while people who drive off dealers' lots in competing cars such as the Chevrolet Aveo, Honda Fit, Hyundai Accent, Nissan Versa and Suzuki Swift are out of luck...

[...]

...Yaris was the fourth best-selling passenger car [emphasis added] in Canada last year with 34,202 sales.

None of the other vehicles eligible for the rebate came close to that level of sales.

And the Corolla five-speed qualifies for the $1,000 rebate too (list of rebates here). Honda and Nissan must be feeling sick.

Mark C.

And you thought soccer fans were passionate

The coach of Pakistan's national cricket squad, who died shortly after his team's shocking World Cup loss to Ireland, may have been murdered:

Top British detectives will investigate the death of Bob Woolmer as speculation intensifies that the former Pakistan coach was strangled in his bath.

Two Scotland Yard officers are due in Jamaica to help to solve the mystery behind the death of Woolmer, who held a British passport.

A Jamaican television station reported yesterday that the former England batsman had been strangled within 24 hours of Pakistan's shock Cricket World Cup loss to Ireland on Sunday, and other sources were backing that assertion last night.

[...]

Suspicions surfaced on Tuesday that his death was linked to match-fixing, and that he was about to tell all in a book that would have implicated several Pakistan players.

But co-author and sports scientist Professor Tim Noakes dismissed that theory.

Poor Mr. Woolmer may have met a fate similar to Colombian footballer Andres Escobar, who was shot dead after scoring an own-goal in the 1994 World Cup. Good thing we don't take our sports this seriously in North America, or Rex Grossman would be under 24-hour police protection. (Well, I guess that's a good thing.)

Damian P.

Cathy Seipp, R.I.P.

She succumbed to cancer yesterday, at age 49. The Los Angeles Times, one of Seipp's favorite targets, has an obituary.

Cathy had a lot of friends and fans in the blogosphere, and their tributes are being collected here. At least she got to see her daughter, Maia, off to college. My condolences to Maia and the rest of her family.

Damian P.

Rosie's new friends

Now that Rosie O'Donnell has thrown her intellectual weight behind the 9/11 conspiracy movement, the View studios have become a shrine for her fellow blackshirts. (The official uniform is available in sizes up to XXL. I'm just sayin'.)

Damian P.

African solidarity

Good news: another African country is sending security forces into Zimbabwe. Bad news: they're being sent in to help Robert Mugabe:

About 2,500 Angolan paramilitary police, feared in their own country for their brutality, are to be deployed in Zimbabwe, raising concerns of an escalation in violence against those opposed to President Mugabe.

[...]

Police sources who asked not to be named said previous training exchange programmes with southern African countries had involved only small numbers of officers at a time. “This is the first time that there has been such a large group,” said one. “Our capacity for training is badly run down, and we could never deal with so many. I doubt if any of them speak English. They can only be here for riot control and to back up our own riot police.”

Dubbed “Ninjas” for their all-black uniform of combat trousers and tunics, boots and balaclavas, the paramilitaries form part of the presidential guard of Jose Eduardo dos Santos, who has been in power since 1979. They patrol in pickup trucks, with mounted heavy machine-guns, and are notorious for their violence. “Angolans are terrified of them,” an Angolan resident said.

They will significantly reinforce Zimbabwe’s police force, which used to have 25,000 officers but has been severely depleted in recent months by mass resignations due to discontent with low pay and poor conditions.

Damian P.

Russia and Iran: It's all about money (maybe)

The NY Times wonders about the Bear's motives and gives (reluctant) credit to the Bush administration. It even cheers capitalism:

Let’s hear it for the profit motive. Russia has apparently decided that it can do even better financially if it starts pressuring its longtime client Iran to curtail its nuclear appetites.

Elaine Sciolino reported in The Times yesterday that Moscow told Tehran privately that it will not deliver nuclear fuel for Iran’s Russian-built Bushehr power plant unless Iran stops enriching uranium. There were also reports that Moscow was pulling experts from the nearly finished reactor site. The pressure is welcome and long overdue, considering that the Security Council ordered Iran to suspend enrichment by the end of last August.

As for why Moscow — which has been working since before August to deflect any serious sanctions against Iran — may be doing the right thing, that is something of a puzzle. Russia’s leaders may have finally figured out that a nuclear-armed Iran poses a genuine danger. But we suspect profits may have brought that threat into sharper focus.

Russia has accused Iran of falling behind on payments for the Bushehr project, which Tehran hotly denies. Meanwhile, Russia is very eager to become a leader in the global business of nuclear fuel production and spent fuel storage. Being the chief protector and enabler of Iran’s nuclear efforts is not the best advertising for such an enterprise. Moscow will have another chance to put its mouth where its money is in coming days when the Security Council votes on another series of sanctions against Iran.

The Bush administration also deserves credit if it helped Moscow to see where its larger interests lie...

Mark C.

Airport security blasted

And the Liberal government was just as culpable:

A Senate committee is recommending the federal Transport Department be relieved of its responsibility for airport security after finding that improvements in lax security at Canadian airports are "few and far between" more than five years after the terrorist strikes of Sept. 11, 2001.

"The Committee recommends that Transport Canada be relieved of its responsibility for security at airports and that this responsibility be transferred to the Department of Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada," says the all-party security and defence committee in one of 16 recommendations contained in its update on airport security.

[...]

It says the federal government should boost the size of the RCMP by between 600 and 800 full-time equivalents so the national police force can expand its "security, investigative and analytical capabilities at airports [the RCMP got out of providing airports security in 1997]."

Departmental responses to the committee's three-year-old recommendations aimed at overcoming "serious gaps" in airport security were typified by "vagueness, obfuscation, non-response and seemingly endless procrastination," it says, adding the federal bureaucracy is bogged down in "more talking; more consulting (and) more thinking

I quite agree about the pathetic nature of departmental responses.

Giving the RCMP overall operational control would seem to make sense, with policy direction from Public Safety and Emergency Preparedness Canada--an organization with operational responsibilities only for coordinating the federal response to emergencies. And I have serious doubts about its capabilities in that regard. In fact, the department has quietly dropped "emergency preparedness" from its name on its website.

Damian P.

Comuzzi cut out

Veteran Liberal MP Joe Comuzzi has been expelled from Stephane Dion's caucus for supporting the budget:

He was expelled because he has decided to vote against his leader and for the minority Conservative government budget, which contains money for a research facility in Thunder Bay.

[...]

As the minister for Northern Ontario in Paul Martin's cabinet, Mr. Comuzzi, who had eschewed the trappings of a minister by refusing a car and driver and bigger office, had worked to get funding for the centre. It means 400 good jobs for the area and all the accompanying spin-offs.

But Mr. Comuzzi also liked how Finance Minister Jim Flaherty spoke optimistically about Canada and its accomplishments. He said he spoke with "enthusiasm" that he hasn't heard for a long time.

"I have a feeling about Flaherty," said Mr. Comuzzi. "He's got the map of Ireland on his face. He can't lie."

Comuzzi says he won't be joining the Conservatives, but who knows?

Damian P.

Auto buzz

I don't think the name of the General's new model will be a winner (though on a hot new Vauxhall, who knows?):

GM mosquito bred to destroy malaria

Mark C.

Budget blindness: No accountability, no rational electorate

William Robson outlines the fundamental perniciousness of transferring large amounts of federal revenues to provinces as "transfers" (rather than the distinct equalization payments):

To start, they kill accountability. Suppose Manitobans are unhappy with the quality of their hospitals, British Columbians want change in their universities, or Nova Scotians need leaky sewers fixed. To whom do they complain? Their provincial governments are constitutionally responsible for health care, education and cities. But if the latest infusion of cash, and all the conditions that came with it, are federal, who is really in charge? Provincial [and increasingly municipal] politicians can simply point to their federal counterparts, thousands of kilometres away.

[...]

The key lesson Ottawa and the province both need to learn is that one more infusion of federal money, no matter what label it bears, will not solve the fiscal imbalance. Quite the contrary: the more Ottawa gives -- and the more taxes it levies, not for its own programs, but to transfer funds to the provinces -- the worse the imbalance gets. What Canada's provinces need -- and what Canadians as taxpayers, voters and citizens need -- is federal tax relief that will leave more money in their pockets. Then they can debate how much, and how, they should pay for the health, education and infrastructure they want from their provincial governments.

Democratic government simply cannot function properly when voters do not know who is responsible for government program funding. So the endless fed-prov blame dance will waltz on.

Meanwhile, John Ibbitson of the Globe and Mail sums up the political effectiveness (all conservative principles aside) of the budget:

Vast swaths of the suburban middle class may start to wonder whether maybe this Harper fellow isn't as scary as his critics make him out to be and, besides, that baby bonus sure has come in handy.

The Liberals and the NDP, meanwhile, fight over the downtown Toronto lesbian vote...

Mark C.

It's Super Buick!

GM is bringing back an old name:

General Motors Corp. said yesterday it is bringing back its "Super" line of Buicks, about five decades after the premium models last were sold, as it makes broader efforts to reinvigorate the 104-year-old brand in the U.S. and grow in China.

Buick general manager Steve Shannon said the auto maker soon will unveil the line, last used in 1958. For now, he said, it will include versions of the LaCrosse and Lucerne sedans.

[...]

After bringing out a fresh face for Cadillac and Saturn, GM is turning more attention to Buick, which traditionally is known for its appeal to older drivers.

Longer-term, Shannon said there will be a focus on rolling out fewer – but better – Buick models to keep the brand profitable for GM.

Nearly all of Buick's new vehicle sales are in the U.S. and China. Buick's worldwide sales rose about 3 per cent last year to more than 567,000 as sales in China jumped 25 per cent to about 304,000.

If GM is going to keep selling Buicks in North America, they might as well go all the way and make Buicks - big, rear-wheel-drive, V8-powered, porthole-emblazoned, heavily chromed, plush, intimidating Roadmasters. That's what the brand is all about. (The Lucerne is a very nice car - the best Buick in years, according to many critics - but GM chickened out and made it front-wheel-drive.)

Damian P.

The premiers are revolting

We all know why Danny Williams and Lorne Calvert are upset, but despite plenty of new money for Ontario, it ain't enough for Dalton McGuinty:

In Toronto, Premier Dalton McGuinty said he feels short-changed despite improved federal funding for Ontario.

McGuinty vowed to continue his fight to eliminate the fiscal imbalance because federal funding for health care in Ontario won't be made on a per capita basis – as it is now with other provinces – until 2014, costing Ontario about $700 million a year.

"That's a seven-year wait," he told reporters at Queen's Park. "Justice delayed is justice denied and we'll continue our fight in that regard."

The extra funding for health in the budget is not enough to buy Ontario's silence because "we're going to continue to be the subject of discrimination," McGuinty added.

"While we're getting more money for health care, we're not getting as much as we should. So more is better than none, but what's best is that we're treated the same as all Canadians."

Yeah, about that "fiscal imbalance"...

Damian P.

China's Olympic Crackdown

Beijing prepares to welcome the world in 2008.

As noted in the story, the South Korean military dictatorship fell as the 1988 Seoul Olympics approached. And the Nazis and Communists didn't last much longer after the 1936 and 1980 games. Coincidence? Maybe, but it's a promising precedent. (Maybe we should give Tehran or Harare the games in 2016.)

Damian P.

The least effective embargo ever

In 2006, financial support for the Palestinians went up considerably, despite a "painful aid cutoff" to the Hamas-led government:

Despite the international embargo on aid to the Palestinian Authority since Hamas came to power a year ago, significantly more aid was delivered to the Palestinians in 2006 than in 2005, according to official figures from the United Nations, United States, European Union, and International Monetary Fund.

Instead of going to the Palestinian Authority, most of the money was given directly to individuals or through independent agencies like the World Food Program.

The IMF and the UN say that the Palestinians received $1.2 billion in aid and budgetary support in 2006, about $300 per capita, compared with $1 billion in 2005.

While the United States and the EU have led the boycott, they too provided more aid to the Palestinians in 2006 than 2005. Washington increased its aid to the UN refugee agency for Palestinians to $468 million in 2006, from $400 million in 2005.

The EU and its member states alone are subsidizing 1 million people in the West Bank and Gaza, a quarter of the population, as part of their effort to avoid creating a catastrophe from the embargo.

One side effect of the redirected aid, some officials said, is that while starvation has been avoided, institutions are withering and a culture of dependence is expanding.

Damian P.

You should know your argument's in trouble...

...when you have to quote Hitler in support of Stalin's greatness:

'Compared with Churchill, Stalin is a giant figure,' confided Hitler to Goebbels on the eve of the battle of Stalingrad. 'Churchill has nothing to show for his life's work except a few books and clever speeches in parliament. Stalin on the other hand has without doubt--leaving aside the question of what principle he was serving--reorganised a state of 170 million people and prepared it for a massive armed conflict. If Stalin ever fell into my hands, I would probably spare him and perhaps exile him to some spa; Churchill and Roosevelt would be hanged.'

Some principle. Some reorganisation. That certainly puts things in perspective. Stalin, according to the book from which I took that quote (p.373), was a very good leader if one just ignores the millions of people who died as a result of his intention or his incompetence. When will we ever learn about evil? And, by the way, the Cold War was basically the West's fault.

As for Churchill and the overarching importance of what he achieved in 1940, I suggest you read this book.

Mark C.

Hearn stands firm

Loyola Hearn will support the federal budget:

Federal Fisheries Minister Loyola Hearn is on the defensive..in the wake of the federal budget. Hearn says Ottawa was ready and willing to remove 100 per cent of non-renewable natural resources from the equalization formula, but the premiers couldn't agree. Hearn says the province is losing nothing now. Hearn says we have until 2012 with the Atlantic Accord benefits uncapped, so there is time to ensure Newfoundland and Labrador's benefits continue.

[...]

There are calls for Loyola Hearn's resignation in the wake of the federal budget. Bonavista- Gander -Grand Falls-Windsor MP Scott Simms says Hearn has a choice to make.Liberal MP Gerry Byrne says it isn't a good day for the province. Liberal MP Bill Matthews says the federal government has nullified the Atlantic Accord. Matthews says any gains in the budget will be overshadowed by the loss.

On Bill Rowe's VOCM show this afternoon, Fabian Manning also implied that he'll vote in favor of the budget. (Newfoundland's third Conservative MP, Norm Doyle, is retiring from politics.) If the talk-radio shows are any indication, Newfoundlanders are furious about the equalization changes - but I suspect most Canadians would echo these sentiments:

Michael Dymond, Toronto: Hello, regarding equalization and Newfoundland, do you think it is as laughable as I do that Danny Williams thinks that there should be no cap on equalization so that hypothetically, Ontario or Alberta could be paying Newfoundland money that makes them better off than the people in Ontario and Alberta?

I mean, his performance yesterday reminded me of a 3-year-old crying in a toy story. Give it a rest, Danny.

Equalization should make you equal. Ontario and the "have" provinces shouldn't have to pay you money past the point that your province is on an equal footing with the rest.

So much for the end of provincial/federal bickering over money. It lasted about 20 minutes I think.

Jeffrey Simpson: Michael, Paul Martin went over the top in his deal with the offshore provinces.

What he should have done was agree that Newfoundland would get a better deal on resources up to the point at which the province reached the national level, at which point, like Ireland, they would pay into the system.

Instead, Martin's deal was so sweet that it had Ontario residents paying into equalization even if Newfoundlanders per-capita were getting more income. The fiscal cap stops that.

As for Mr. Williams, he has declared war on Ottawa, Quebec, the offshore oil companies, foreign fishermen, playing very skillfully on the sense there that everyone is against Newfoundland and that the provinces is being held back by "others."

He bullied Paul Martin, but he can't do that to Stephen Harper who twice has gone to St. John's and refused to be pushed around by the premier.

In this province, the NDP may benefit from an anti-Conservative protest vote come election time, but I suspect most Newfoundlanders and Labradorians will reflexively turn back to the Liberals - even though Stephane Dion never supported Williams's position in the first place.

Damian P.

Spendthrift conservatives

Andrew Coyne notes that the government of Stephen Harper, former head of the National Citizens Coalition, is the biggest-spending government in Canadian history. (Is that adjusted for inflation or percentage of GDP, Andrew?)

...The $200-billion Mr. Flaherty proposes to spend this year works out to about $5,800 for every citizen. Even after you adjust for increases in prices and population, that's more than the Martin government spent at its frenetic worst, when it was almost shovelling the stuff out the door. It is more than the Mulroney government spent in its last days, when it was past caring. It is more than the Trudeau government spent in the depths of the early 1980s recession. All of these past benchmarks of over-the-top, out-of-control spending must now be retired. Jim Flaherty has outdone them all.

In two years of this "conservative" government, spending has climbed a historic $25-billion. Bear in mind: that's on top of the wild rise in spending during the Liberals' last term. The Tories have taken all of that fat, all of that waste, and all of those hundreds of priorities --and added to them.

[...]

...The $200-billion Mr. Flaherty proposes to spend this year is nearly $4-billion more than he projected in his last budget, just 10 months ago. The $207-billion he projects for next year, we may assume, will be similarly revised. The budget boasts of instituting "a new Expenditure Management System." And why not: That's a whole lot of