Commentary on the Harper Government banning British MP George Galloway from entering Canada.
Perhaps Harper is afraid the Galloway will come into Canada and start passing our humanitarian aid to members of the Oppositions Parties. After all, he did try to have financial assistance by the government banned and they haven’t even been declared terrorist organizations – but lets wait and see.
Lloyd MacIlquham
23 March, 2009
- let the trial being - Using ‘Gay Rights’ as an example of the evils that will befall our society and covert Xenophobia won’t make it.
Comment on "First decriminalization, then plural marriages", Tom Flanagan, 23 mar.'09, G&M
“http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090320.wcopoly23/BNStory/specialComment/home
What Tom Flanagan seems to be criticizing is the Canadian Courts’, especially the Supreme Court of Canada, clarification of our basic human rights as enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights. In other words it is really our Charter of Rights and its application by our Courts in protecting our basic human rights, and religious freedom is a basic, fundamental human right, and our Supreme Court of Canada, that he is attacking.
This has been one of the big concerns about Harper and the Con’s and their extreme right wing ideology, and probably we are quite fortunate that they do not have a majority. Given Tom has been so closely connected to Harper and the Con’s in the past, at least, this attack on our Charter of Rights is very predictable and perhaps being done to “test the waters” so to speak.
Section 15(1) of the Charter states, in part: “Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on … religion…”. Sounds good to me.
Generally the Canadian Courts enforce, as far as I can see, our laws against bigamy, and polygamy is just an example. From what I have read and heard in the media, this case certainly raises the issues of the right to practice one’s religion and religious beliefs.
If the application of our laws against bigamy, in the case at hand, infringes s.15(1) of the Charter, then by a proper interpretation of Section 2 of the Charter it is up to the Government of Canada to prove that this infringement, in the particular case at hand, is “demonstrably justified”. So, let the trial begin. To me using ‘Gay Rights’ as an example of the evils that will befall our society and covert Xenophobia won’t make it.
Lloyd MacIlquham
“http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090320.wcopoly23/BNStory/specialComment/home
What Tom Flanagan seems to be criticizing is the Canadian Courts’, especially the Supreme Court of Canada, clarification of our basic human rights as enshrined in the Canadian Charter of Rights. In other words it is really our Charter of Rights and its application by our Courts in protecting our basic human rights, and religious freedom is a basic, fundamental human right, and our Supreme Court of Canada, that he is attacking.
This has been one of the big concerns about Harper and the Con’s and their extreme right wing ideology, and probably we are quite fortunate that they do not have a majority. Given Tom has been so closely connected to Harper and the Con’s in the past, at least, this attack on our Charter of Rights is very predictable and perhaps being done to “test the waters” so to speak.
Section 15(1) of the Charter states, in part: “Every individual is equal before and under the law and has the right to the equal protection and equal benefit of the law without discrimination and, in particular, without discrimination based on … religion…”. Sounds good to me.
Generally the Canadian Courts enforce, as far as I can see, our laws against bigamy, and polygamy is just an example. From what I have read and heard in the media, this case certainly raises the issues of the right to practice one’s religion and religious beliefs.
If the application of our laws against bigamy, in the case at hand, infringes s.15(1) of the Charter, then by a proper interpretation of Section 2 of the Charter it is up to the Government of Canada to prove that this infringement, in the particular case at hand, is “demonstrably justified”. So, let the trial begin. To me using ‘Gay Rights’ as an example of the evils that will befall our society and covert Xenophobia won’t make it.
Lloyd MacIlquham
21 March, 2009
- Harper and the Con’s To Be Made Accountable – That’s a Good Thing
Comment on T. Star, “Public at tipping point on bailouts”, http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/606056#Comments
Just think, the people of Canada demanding that Harper act in an open, fair and transparent fashion, helping those that need help and protecting those that need protection. Sounds good to me.
It also sounds exactly like what Ignatieff has been demanding and the whole purpose of the periodic reviews that the Liberals forced Harper and the Con’s to adopt. As Ignatieff puts it Harper is ‘on probation’ and that's a good thing.
Lloyd MacIlquham
Just think, the people of Canada demanding that Harper act in an open, fair and transparent fashion, helping those that need help and protecting those that need protection. Sounds good to me.
It also sounds exactly like what Ignatieff has been demanding and the whole purpose of the periodic reviews that the Liberals forced Harper and the Con’s to adopt. As Ignatieff puts it Harper is ‘on probation’ and that's a good thing.
Lloyd MacIlquham
17 March, 2009
- Mister Science Minister, Do the Right Thing and Resign:
Comment on the G&M article: Minister won't confirm belief in evolution
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090317.wgoodyear16/BNStory/National/home
It is in the highest scientific tradition to state that you do not accept a theory as “scientific fact” and to debate it – just ask Albert Einstein. But to refuse to even discuss it on religious grounds drags us back to the dark ages where they prosecuted Galileo as a heretic for suggesting that the Sun not the Earth was the center of the Universe.
The separation of religion and the state is vital to our society, its development and our basic freedoms. For Harper to put in place a Science Minister that refuses to even comment on, on a scientific level that is, any generally established scientific theory based on religious beliefs is not only indicative of an extreme right wing ideology but outright dangerous.
There is nothing wrong with having strong religious beliefs, of course, but when they pose the real possibility of interfering with the proper execution of his job, and in the case at hand I think the indications are that there is, then he should do the right thing and resign.
Lloyd MacIlquham
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090317.wgoodyear16/BNStory/National/home
It is in the highest scientific tradition to state that you do not accept a theory as “scientific fact” and to debate it – just ask Albert Einstein. But to refuse to even discuss it on religious grounds drags us back to the dark ages where they prosecuted Galileo as a heretic for suggesting that the Sun not the Earth was the center of the Universe.
The separation of religion and the state is vital to our society, its development and our basic freedoms. For Harper to put in place a Science Minister that refuses to even comment on, on a scientific level that is, any generally established scientific theory based on religious beliefs is not only indicative of an extreme right wing ideology but outright dangerous.
There is nothing wrong with having strong religious beliefs, of course, but when they pose the real possibility of interfering with the proper execution of his job, and in the case at hand I think the indications are that there is, then he should do the right thing and resign.
Lloyd MacIlquham
15 March, 2009
- When You’re Right – You’re Right!
Comment on:
“Carney hedges economic rebound prediction”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090314.wg20wrestle0314/BNStory/Business/home
Reading this article one might think that Flaherty is the main driving force in the global economic recovery. Flaherty’s statements are little more than a ‘cheap shot’ for the purpose of grandstanding. There is nothing constructive or informative about it.
Listening to Flaherty, and Harper, one gets the impression that the Canadian Banks being in such good shape is all their doing. Harper and Flaherty, of course, had nothing to do with it. They inherited it from the good management of previous governments, like they did the very healthy Federal Fiscal status. In fact, the laissez-faire, hands off, ‘steady-as-she-goes’ reduction in government interference with the economy, approach, so much a part of Harper’s right wing agenda, overt or covert, is generally accepted as at the foundation of the finacial crises and is one of the main thrusts of the Ecomonic G-20 meeting. Where’s Flaherty’s statement on increasing international regulation of financial institutions.
One need only read the G&M article “Canada's place is on the B list”, 13 Mar.’09, to get a real idea of how Flaherty, Harper and the Con’s are viewed on the Int’l Financial stage as far as them being “movers and shakers”. The British PM doesn’t even consider Flaherty and Harper as important enough for Canada to ‘merit “intensive diplomatic lobbying and engagement” ahead of the [London summit” on April 2]’. The British PM put Flaherty, Harper and the Con government in the same sphere of influence as such international economic policy leaders as: Turkey, Indonesia, Mexico and Argentina. To Gordon Brown: when you’re right – you’re right!
Lloyd MacIlquham
“Carney hedges economic rebound prediction”
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090314.wg20wrestle0314/BNStory/Business/home
Reading this article one might think that Flaherty is the main driving force in the global economic recovery. Flaherty’s statements are little more than a ‘cheap shot’ for the purpose of grandstanding. There is nothing constructive or informative about it.
Listening to Flaherty, and Harper, one gets the impression that the Canadian Banks being in such good shape is all their doing. Harper and Flaherty, of course, had nothing to do with it. They inherited it from the good management of previous governments, like they did the very healthy Federal Fiscal status. In fact, the laissez-faire, hands off, ‘steady-as-she-goes’ reduction in government interference with the economy, approach, so much a part of Harper’s right wing agenda, overt or covert, is generally accepted as at the foundation of the finacial crises and is one of the main thrusts of the Ecomonic G-20 meeting. Where’s Flaherty’s statement on increasing international regulation of financial institutions.
One need only read the G&M article “Canada's place is on the B list”, 13 Mar.’09, to get a real idea of how Flaherty, Harper and the Con’s are viewed on the Int’l Financial stage as far as them being “movers and shakers”. The British PM doesn’t even consider Flaherty and Harper as important enough for Canada to ‘merit “intensive diplomatic lobbying and engagement” ahead of the [London summit” on April 2]’. The British PM put Flaherty, Harper and the Con government in the same sphere of influence as such international economic policy leaders as: Turkey, Indonesia, Mexico and Argentina. To Gordon Brown: when you’re right – you’re right!
Lloyd MacIlquham
05 March, 2009
- Access to Information is Vital to an Open, Free and Tolerant Society
submitted to:
TS, 5 Mar.'09, "Watchdog seeking to lift veil on cabinet", Bruce Campion-Smith
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/596832#Comments
Liberal and comprehensive rights to access information, available to all, unobstructed and vigilantly exercised, is a cornerstone of modern, open and free, democracy, protecting all from a closed, secretive government intent on using the powers entrusted to them for their self interest and interests contrary to the will of the people.
Access to information affords the stuff whereby the individual may forge both sword and shield to uphold human rights, without which no amount legislation can guaranty these rights and so, should therefore stand on the same footing.
TS, 5 Mar.'09, "Watchdog seeking to lift veil on cabinet", Bruce Campion-Smith
http://www.thestar.com/News/Canada/article/596832#Comments
Liberal and comprehensive rights to access information, available to all, unobstructed and vigilantly exercised, is a cornerstone of modern, open and free, democracy, protecting all from a closed, secretive government intent on using the powers entrusted to them for their self interest and interests contrary to the will of the people.
Access to information affords the stuff whereby the individual may forge both sword and shield to uphold human rights, without which no amount legislation can guaranty these rights and so, should therefore stand on the same footing.
04 March, 2009
- Get Ready for More of the Harper attack ads the likes of which have not been seen in Western democracies in Recent Years
Comment post to:
Liberals preparing for a fight if Tories run anti-Ignatieff attack ads
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090304.wignatieff04/BNStory/politics/home
As far as comparing someone’s current opinions with what they have expressed in the past might I quote that modern day philosopher-king Mohammad Ali:
“A man who views the world the same at fifty as he did at twenty has wasted thirty years of his life.”
That Harper and the Con’s would be monitoring what Michael Ignatieff says now and comparing it what he has said throughout his illustrious career in order to fabricate attack adds is beyond belief. Well, not really beyond belief when you consider that Harper and the Con’s have subjected the Canadian people to propaganda campaigns the likes of which has not been seen in Western democracies in recent times. Hopefully all Canadians will let Harper know in no uncertain terms that we don’t go for his type of rules and government.
Lloyd MacIlquham
Liberals preparing for a fight if Tories run anti-Ignatieff attack ads
http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20090304.wignatieff04/BNStory/politics/home
As far as comparing someone’s current opinions with what they have expressed in the past might I quote that modern day philosopher-king Mohammad Ali:
“A man who views the world the same at fifty as he did at twenty has wasted thirty years of his life.”
That Harper and the Con’s would be monitoring what Michael Ignatieff says now and comparing it what he has said throughout his illustrious career in order to fabricate attack adds is beyond belief. Well, not really beyond belief when you consider that Harper and the Con’s have subjected the Canadian people to propaganda campaigns the likes of which has not been seen in Western democracies in recent times. Hopefully all Canadians will let Harper know in no uncertain terms that we don’t go for his type of rules and government.
Lloyd MacIlquham
01 March, 2009
- Harper Filling the Conservative Leadership Vacuum in North America
I submitted the following Comment to:
WSJ, ‘Stephen Harper A Resolute Ally in the War on Terror’, 28 Feb.’09
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123578347494598289.html
Being Canadian, the most important part of your article is your statement ” There is a vacuum in conservative leadership in North America and on the world stage, and Mr. Harper is stepping into it”.
I have no doubt that Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party’s overall objectives are just that. However, for many Canadians, and I suggest a majority of at least 63% (those that voted against him being Prime Minister in the last election), this is not a good thing. Harper was obviously a puppet to President G.W. Bush while he was in office and is a George wanna-be now. One need only consider Harper’s statements just prior to the Obama visit to Canada regarding the Harper and Conservative government’s position on Global Warming (and I will let your readers do the research) – essentially it was a Mea Culpa blaming G.W. Bush, in effect saying (although for clarity not actually saying) “the devil made me do it”.
Also, I take exception and I have no doubt there are many Canadians that are of similar view, to your statement “…this prime minister and his Conservative Party have restored Canada's international prestige by increasing military funding and tenaciously supporting Canada's dangerous NATO mission in the Afghan province of Kandahar”. Canada has had for many years and especially since Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson considerable international prestige as peacekeepers and international mediators (and again, I will let your readers do the research). We have been very proud of this. Increasing military spending may be the American way but not the Canadian way and hopefuly it never will be.
Lloyd MacIlquham, Nanaimo, BC
WSJ, ‘Stephen Harper A Resolute Ally in the War on Terror’, 28 Feb.’09
http://online.wsj.com/article/SB123578347494598289.html
Being Canadian, the most important part of your article is your statement ” There is a vacuum in conservative leadership in North America and on the world stage, and Mr. Harper is stepping into it”.
I have no doubt that Stephen Harper and the Conservative Party’s overall objectives are just that. However, for many Canadians, and I suggest a majority of at least 63% (those that voted against him being Prime Minister in the last election), this is not a good thing. Harper was obviously a puppet to President G.W. Bush while he was in office and is a George wanna-be now. One need only consider Harper’s statements just prior to the Obama visit to Canada regarding the Harper and Conservative government’s position on Global Warming (and I will let your readers do the research) – essentially it was a Mea Culpa blaming G.W. Bush, in effect saying (although for clarity not actually saying) “the devil made me do it”.
Also, I take exception and I have no doubt there are many Canadians that are of similar view, to your statement “…this prime minister and his Conservative Party have restored Canada's international prestige by increasing military funding and tenaciously supporting Canada's dangerous NATO mission in the Afghan province of Kandahar”. Canada has had for many years and especially since Prime Minister Lester B. Pearson considerable international prestige as peacekeepers and international mediators (and again, I will let your readers do the research). We have been very proud of this. Increasing military spending may be the American way but not the Canadian way and hopefuly it never will be.
Lloyd MacIlquham, Nanaimo, BC
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)