Will someone help this poor widow?

I can just see some leftist retard falling for this.

Dear Friend,

I am Mrs. Suha Arafat, the wife of Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian leader who died recently in Paris. Since his death and even prior to the announcement, I have been thrown into a state of antagonism, confusion, humiliation, frustration and hopelessness by the present leadership of the Palestinian Liberation Organization and the new Prime Minister. I have even been subjected to physical and psychological torture. As a widow that is so traumatized, I have lost confidence with everybody in the country at the moment.

You must have heard over the media reports and the Internet on the discovery of some fund in my husband secret bank account and companies and the allegations of some huge sums of money deposited by my husband in my name of which I have refuses to disclose or give up to the corrupt Palestine Government.

In fact the total sum allegedly discovered by the Government so far is in the tune of about $6.5 Billion Dollars. And they are not relenting on their effort to make me poor for life. As you know, the Moslem community has no regards for woman, more importantly when the woman is from a Christian background, hence my desire for a foreign assistance.

I have deposited the sum of 21 million dollars with a Security financial firm in whose name is withheld for now until we open communication. I shall be grateful if you could receive this fund into your bank account for safe keeping and Investment opportunity. This arrangement will be known to you and I alone and all our correspondence should be strictly on email alone because our government has tapped all my lines and are monitoring all my moves.

In view of the above, if you are willing to assist for our mutual benefits, we will have to negotiate on your Percentage share of the $21,000,000 that will be kept in your position for a while and invested in your name for my trust pending when my Daughter, Zahwa, will come off age and take full responsibility of her Family Estate/inheritance. Please, if you are honest, I am going to entrust more funds in your care as this is one of the legacy we keep for our children. In case you don't accept please do not let me out to the security and international media as I am giving you this information in total trust and confidence I will greatly appreciate if you accept my proposal in good faith and send to me your complete personal contact information.

May God bless you and your household.

Yours sincerely,

Suha Arafat
Reply to suha43@steam.to

A leftist will see the name of thankfully deceased camel humper Yasser Arafat and immediately think. "Wow. She is contacting me personally. I better sign up, as I assume there will be some opportunity to assist in the killing of more Jooooos!"

I got to admit though, it is pretty accurate account of things. The corrupt Palestinian government, the total disregard for women, the daughter Zahwa, and not least Arafat's stolen multi-billion dollar fortune, and the critical need for secrecy (overlooking the fact this has been emailed all over the web) all entirely accurate and plausible.

Why if I didn't have half a brain (i.e if I were a leftist) I too would probably believe that this is Arafat's widow wanting to pay me a share of $21 million for help and proceed to hand over all my bank account details, at which point I find my account emptied and then go and cry like a little bitch to the media about how the government should ban the internet, or at the very least, monitor and have to approve every single email that ever gets written to stop ones like this coming into the country, so idiots like me are protected from my own idiocy. Have I got that right, leftists?

Of course I have.

I certainly would not assume it was some variation of a Nigerian 419 scam and that perhaps it wasn't really Arafat's widow emailing me, nor that this person would empty bank account as soon as I handed over all the details to it. No, of course not. Nobody would think that.

Still, there are obviously enough morons getting sucked in to these to warrant the number of emails I get each week (over the course of one weekend my net worth went up by over $100,000,000 as a result of all the money I was promised for assisting with transfers like this one and the total of my European lottery winnings that I don't seem to remember buying a ticket for, yet appear to have won first prize in anyway)

To paraphrase one of my favourite movies of all time

"I've been trying to figure something in my head, and maybe you can help me out, yeah? When a person is stupid, as you clearly are, do you know that you're stupid? Maybe you're just sitting around, reading "Green Left Weekly", masticating on your own fingers, do you just stop and go, "Wow! It is amazing how fucking stupid I really am!"? Do you guys do that?"

The next time a moonbat talks about Cuba

Show them this.

"The increase will raise the minimum salary from 100 pesos to 225 pesos," the Cuban leader said.

Castro said this would raise the average monthly wage in Cuba to 312 pesos ($14.20) from 282 pesos ($12.80) at a cost to the government of $48.4 million.

Cubans welcomed the raises, but said it was still too little to live on. Rent and public services are heavily subsidized in Cuba, but essential consumer goods are more expensive than in the United States.

This means you could out-earn what the average Cuban earns in a month by working very little:

United States: 2 hours, 46 minutes.
Australia: 1 hour, 29 minutes.

And I could go on, but you get the picture. The majority of Cubans live on less than US$14.20, or AU$18.20 a month - a figure that could be doubled (or quadrupled depending on your definition) and still be classified as extreme poverty. The average Victorian earns more than 240 times more than the average Cuban.

But at least those Cubans can enjoy free healthcare. Not to mention their freedoms, especially on the internet. Exactly what is it that radical leftists love so much about Cuba?

(Cross-posted to The House Of Wheels.)

Satanic dress

A Muslim sheik told followers at a public meeting in Bankstown that women who were raped had incited men's lust by dressing immodestly and only had themselves to blame.

Sydney-born Sheik Faiz Mohamad, 34, a former boxer who teaches at the Global Islamic Youth Centre in Liverpool, made the comments during a lecture for more than 1000 people at Bankstown Town Hall. The Sun-Herald has a recording of the March 18 speech in which Sheik Faiz said: "A victim of rape every minute somewhere in the world. Why? No one to blame but herself. She displayed her beauty to the entire world.

Take note you women, look good and you deserve to be raped!!! Is this guy for real, I thought we had moved on from all this... wait, we did, just not this primate.

"Strapless, backless, sleeveless, nothing but satanic skirts, slit skirts, translucent blouses, miniskirts, tight jeans: all this to tease man and appeal to his carnal nature."

At the local mall, I, being an example of 'man', am subjected to many a species of the opposite sex, dressed in these satanic robes (or lack thereof). Wait till they find out my carnal nature is dying to unleash. I think I'll just wait in the car while the wife does the shopping.

He compared a woman dressed in such a way to a sheep. "Would you put this sheep that you adore in the middle of hungry wolves? No . . . It would be devoured. It's the same situation here. You're putting this precious girl in front of lustful, satanic eyes of hungry wolves. What is the consequence? Catastrophic devastation, sexual harassment, perversion, promiscuity."

Thanks a lot sheik, now I, like all other men out there are deemed lustful, with satanic eyes and with wolf like profiles, although I do prefer to be described as wolflike in stature rather than slightly over weight and a bit clumsy.
But coming back to this comparison, in the recent gang rape cases in Sydney, the women were kidnapped or taken under false pretences, they were not placed with the rapists or something, maybe the good sheik should go on a fact finding mission before opening the trap.

The invitation to the $15-a-head lecture stipulated modest dress and "strict male and female segregation". It was promoted as a lecture about "death" in flyers and on the website of the ICRA Youth Centre in Lidcombe, an Islamic community group which sponsored the evening.

I guess all the men were standing on the other side, eyeing the females with lustful and satanic eyes and also appearing wolfish.

The ICRA and Faiz's Global Islamic Youth Centre have broken away from the Lakemba Mosque, the main place of worship for Sydney's Lebanese Muslims, because, a former associate says, Sheik Taj Aldin Alhilali, 64, is too moderate.

Good riddance.

Sheik Faiz declined to be interviewed.

Maybe he was afraid to be deemed a dangerous fool, too late for that.

The good sheik really needs to wake up to himself, he just painted all men (not just us infidels) as evil raping bastards who just want to rape any woman that looks pretty. We have no control of ourselves, so no woman is safe in front of us, the wind blows the long skirt a bit, an ankle is revealed, there go the carnal urges, sorry dear, your fault.. this guy is a real piece of work.

Last week I heard a caller to the openline to the local radio station 2GB, a middle aged white woman driving around somewhere in Bankstown or Lakemba, when she had a flat tyre or two, anyway she had to stop and happened to pull over into the parking lot of a Mosque.

They had just finished their prayers and this poor woman was confronted by sight of God knows how many men exiting the mosque. You can just imagine the apprehension, but it all amounted to nothing more than fear, apparently a group of them came over and helped her change the tyres and fix up the car and she didn't have to lift a finger, friendly, polite and happy to help. Off she went safe and sound.

I hope the Muslim community wake up to this deranged fellow and collectively fund his one way ticket to the middle east or whatever crazy planet he has come from.

Sleeping on the job

The NSW Judicial Commission has dismissed a complaint against a Sydney judge who reportedly fell asleep and snored through the evidence of an alleged rape victim. The Daily Telegraph newspaper on Tuesday said Judge Ian Dodd had admitted to being asleep while a woman gave evidence about alleged sex attacks which began when she was six.

I don't hold a job that decides which course a person's life is going to take, I don't drive a 10 ton truck, or drive a train or fly a plane, yet my employer will not be happy if I fall asleep on the job.

Documents obtained by the paper showed Judge Dodd snored as he slept for 15 minutes at a time. The victim felt "destroyed and humiliated" and was concerned the judge's response may have influenced the jury's decision to rule the defendant not guilty. The accused was later convicted and jailed for 12 years for a sexual assault on another person in a hearing before a different judge.

Yet this judge fell asleep while hearing the evidence of the victim, the accused was released and then later commited another rape and was found guilty of that. Maybe if he had bothered to hear the victims testimony and found this fellow guilty then the second person would not have been raped. The judicial commission doesn't give a stuff, it wasn't one of them who got raped so who cares.

The Judicial Commission did not uphold the woman's complaint, stating in a letter that there was no evidence of the judge's "unresponsiveness". "There was no evidence that the judge's condition had affected his understanding of what was going on during the trial or his rulings and directions," the commission stated.

I guess pilots, train drivers and motor vehicle drivers are allowed to fall asleep at the wheel and cannot be punished unless there is evidence beyond a reasonable doubt that they don't know what they are doing when asleep at the wheel.

Judge Dodd acknowledged he had fallen asleep, a problem apparently linked to the disorder known as sleep apnoea. He apologised to the complainant in a letter to the commission, saying he had not been diagnosed of his condition at the time of the 2003 trial. "(The complainant) feels that I did not treat her humanely and with courtesy and respect and that I was gruff and arrogant," Judge Dodd wrote.

"I apologise for any behaviour on my part which has caused her to feel that way." The Telegraph reported that this was one of several cases in which the judge had been accused of falling asleep.

Yes we must trust the system.

The complainant, now aged 30, has lobbied Premier Bob Carr to force the judge to face "serious disciplinary action". "I want him removed from the bench," she said. She also wrote to Attorney-General Bob Debus who stated in his reply that he intended to pursue "a number of unresolved issues with the commission".

Source

Pajama Revolution

Bloggers got a lift from The Economist in an article last week discussing the rise of the blogosphere as a medium complementary to traditional media.

Blogs, moreover, are but one item on a growing list of new media tools that the internet makes available. Wikis are collaborative web pages that allow readers to edit and contribute. This, to digital immigrants, may sound like a recipe for anarchic chaos, until they visit, for instance, wikipedia.org, an online encyclopaedia that is growing dramatically richer by the day through exactly this spontaneous (and surprisingly orderly) collaboration among strangers. Photoblogs are becoming common; videoblogs are just starting. Podcasting (a conjunction of iPod, Apple's iconic audio player, and broadcasting) lets both professionals and amateurs produce audio files that people can download and listen to.

It is tempting, but wrong, for the traditional mainstream media (which includes The Economist) to belittle this sort of thing. It is true, for instance, that the vast majority of blogs are not worth reading and, in fact, are not read (although the same is true of much in traditional newspapers). On the other hand, bloggers play an increasingly prominent part in the wider media drama—witness their role in America's presidential election last year. The most popular bloggers now get as much traffic individually as the opinion pages of most newspapers. Many bloggers are windbags, but some are world experts in their field. Matthew Hindman, a political scientist at Arizona State University, found that the top bloggers are more likely than top newspaper columnists to have gone to a top university, and far more likely to have an advanced degree, such as a doctorate.

The Revolution in this case has nothing to do with overthrowing the old order, but with making it more accountable. Come to think of it, the original American War of Indepence started with cries of no taxation without representation!, so the pajamahedin may be Minute Men after all. On second thought, that might give people the wrong idea ...

[Cross-posted at Between Worlds]

UN Commission Against Human Rights

The United Nations once again showed the extent to which its ideals have been evaporated by its present situation. On 5 April 2005, Bob Fu, the head of China Aid Association, which advocates for persecuted, unregistered Christians in China, spoke at the General Assembly of the so-called United Nations Commission on Human Rights. He was a guest of A Woman's Voice International, and his topic was the use of torture devices against Christians in China. When he displayed the torture device, the delegate from China demanded Reverend Fu be banned from the commission, and to be criminally prosecuted. In UN parlance, however, Reverend Fu "brandished" the device, and the matter was simply one of "accreditation". Here is the UN's own report:

Brandishing an electrical shocker, the delegate of A Woman's Voice International said, "This is what passes for justice in the People's Republic of China." He then turned it on and a silence fell upon the room as the device audibly brought forth electric shocks.

At the beginning of the afternoon session on Tuesday, China took the floor, saying, "A Woman's Voice breached security by bringing in an electrical device in violation of Resolution 9631, concerning participation of NGOs at UN meetings". The delegate himself was "an alleged criminal," in China.

The Chinese delegate then made a number of requests to the Secretariat. Among them: security should investigate the incident fully, including the background of the speaker and the organization. The investigation should also include how the man passed through security. The results of the investigation should be made public to the Commission. Furthermore, any NGOs under the umbrella of A Woman's Voice should lose participation rights. For its part, China will report the incident to the Committee of NGOs in New York City, and the organization should regulate its actions in the future.

The Secretariat said that security escorted the speaker from A Woman's Voice out of the building, taking his UN card and banning him from the remainder of the Commission. Accreditation of delegates is the responsibility of the organization concerned and a full investigation would be launched into the matter.

China said that the host country of Switzerland should consider criminal sanctions and background checks should be made into the members of the organization. China said that if A Woman's Voice International could provide a written assurance that it would obey the rules for the remainder of the Commission, "perhaps we can be flexible".

Cuba was also concerned with accreditation of individuals by governments, saying that several delegates accredited by the government of the Czech Republic insulted the Cuban delegation at a parallel event. The Secretariat replied that an investigation into that matter would also be launched.

China Aid Association disputed the bias in that report, and produced their own report (link in Word format):

During his speech on April 5, 2005, with previous agreement from both the Commission secretary office and the UN security guards, Rev. Bob Fu displays and demonstrates an electric-shock baton smuggled out of China recently. It was made in China used by the Chinese police and interrogators to torture victims of religious victims. However, the Chinese delegate immediately registers a complaint to UNCHR that the electric baton made them "feel threatened". Then Both Rev. Bob Fu’s UN badge and the electric baton were taken away by the UN security officials without giving any explanation. Rev. Fu was ordered to leave the UN complex immediately. At the same time, according to those who were present there, for about an hour, China uses the plenary floor attacking A Woman’s Voice International and threatening to shut up all the NGOs. China demands apology from AWVI and Bob Fu.

Notice that Cuba was very quick to jump on the bandwagon. Their goal: To be able to control what non-governmental organizations (NGOs) are allowed to speak, and what speakers they're allowed to present, at the UNCHR, and probably elsewhere throughout the entire United Nations system as well.

So here's China trying to make it seem as if it were the equivalent of Jeffrey Dahmer challenging the US. Perhaps the People's Republic would care to explain exactly why the reverend is considered a criminal. If anything, his crime is the political crime of calling a spade a spade. Perhaps the delegate felt threatened because if it ever came to light what devices China uses to silence religious folk, he may lose his job. It is the supreme symptom of insecurity to attempt to silence a critic before the critic has had a chance to speak.

The incident is not going to die in Geneva, however. US Representative Chris Smith (R) of New Jersey's Fourth District has now called for a hearing:

The Africa, Global Human Rights and International Operations subcommittee will probe the question of whether the UN Commission on Human Rights (UNCHR) continues to promote and serve the purpose it was created to advance: respect for internationally recognized human rights and freedoms.

Featured at the hearing will be Bob Fu, a former Chinese prisoner of conscience who was recently removed from the 61st session of the UN Human Rights Commission earlier this month, after he made a presentation showing how China tortures religious prisoners with specially designed electro-shock devices. The Chinese delegation complained that the equipment 'made them feel threatened', and insisted that Mr. Fu be removed from the conference, his credentials seized, and his Chinese torture device confiscated. Mr. Fu’s credentials were issued by a non-governmental organization (NGO), A Woman’s Voice International (AWVI).

Many in Congress and around the world have questioned and criticized the membership of the UNCHR for including a number of countries whose records on human rights are almost universally recognized as deplorable. Many of these regimes (such as the People’s Republic of China, Cuba, Saudi Arabia, and Sudan) seek membership on the UNCHR in order to deflect criticism from their own poor human rights records, and mutually support each other to prevent the Commission from appointing special rapporteurs to examine particular human rights abuses or situations.

If you care about the freedom of religion, please support Congressman Smith's efforts to get the word out about the appalling treatment of Reverend Fu.

In the meantime, the United Nations is turning into the exact opposite of what it was meant to be. I've said it before and I'll say it now: The United Nations is a farce. It has been going down the path of the League of Nations for some time now, and now we know that it wasn't US non-participation in the League of Nations that condemned that body to obsolescence.

The world has changed since 1945, and the United Nations no longer serves the interests of a free world. Whereas some arms of the United Nations arguably are worthy organizations, the farce, the circus that has become the political arm of the United Nations exacts a toll that is not warranted by what little good the WHO and UNICEF do.

Let's leave the United Nations, and let it relocate to Paris.

(Hat-tip: Chrenkoff)

[Cross-posted at Between Worlds and Naruwan Formosa]

New US census figures

These new figures are quite interesting.

Three states — Florida, California and Texas — would account for nearly one-half (46 percent) of total U.S. population growth between 2000 and 2030, according to Census Bureau state population projections released today. Consequently, Florida, now the fourth most populous state, would edge past New York into third place in total population by 2011; California and Texas would continue to rank first and second, respectively, in 2030.

These three states would each gain more than 12 million people between 2000 and 2030. Arizona, projected to add 5.6 million people, and North Carolina, with 4.2 million, would round out the top five numerical gainers. As a result, Arizona and North Carolina would move into the top 10 in total population by 2030 — Arizona rising from 20th place in 2000 to 10th place in 2030 and North Carolina from 11th place to seventh place. Michigan and New Jersey are projected to drop out of the top 10.

The projections indicate that the top five fastest-growing states between 2000 and 2030 would be Nevada (114 percent), Arizona (109 percent), Florida (80 percent), Texas (60 percent) and Utah (56 percent).

USA Today's table has the important results, and from here we can work out some interesting things:

The population of traditional Red states (states that have gone Republican at least four of the last five Presidential elections) will be projected at 150.3 million, out of a projected 363.6 million.
This is horribly bad news for the Democrats, because theoretically it means that safe Republican states add up to enough percentage of the population to win 222 electoral votes - and not among these safe Republican states are places like West Virginia, Lousiana, Kentucky, Missouri, Arkansas and Tennessee that Bush won by more than 8% after winning in 2000 - add those and all of a sudden you've got 175.9 million people - enough to give the Republicans mathematically 260 electoral votes in the bag as long as they continue to hold their stronghold states.
That's just one small-medium state, or 10 votes from victory.

New England stands to lose about 20 percent of its congressional seats over the next quarter-century as political power follows population booms in the South and West: AP
Again, horribly bad news for the Democrats. They've shown themselves virtually incapable of winning states in the South, and their main electoral vote base is going to lose 20 percent of its Congressional states, meaning they'll lose a very similar amount of electoral college votes. But how are they going to get the extra votes they'll need when those votes will be almost all in the South - where the Democrats seemingly don't even try anymore? Howard Dean can talk all he likes about trying to win in 40+ states, but with quotes like "I still want to be the candidate for guys with Confederate flags in their pickup trucks.", you're not likely to get anywhere.

So where to for the Democrats? For starters, electing a North-Eastern liberal as your party chief isn't a good move if you want to win votes in the South. Even worse is electing a high-brow North-Eastern liberal as your Presidential candidate. They haven't won the White House in 44 years. The classic quote "That Northeast liberal thing hasn’t panned out for us lately" could not be more accurate. Considering it comes from a DNC fundraiser, the party could do a lot dumber things than listen to him.

In fact, they've consistently done a lot dumber things over the past 5 years.

(Cross-posted to The House Of Wheels.)

The Question

Watching the ANZAC day news tonight, my seven-year old asked me a question:

“Did anyone in our family die in the war?”
“Yes, my sweet,” I replied, “they did”.

I explained.

My little ones great, great grandfather. He was a naval man (Royal Navy), as all our male family members were to that point, following the family’s naval tradition (a custom my great grandmother made my grandfather promise to break, given it was an institution that had killed them all).

It was World War I. The year was 1914. The ship was Good Hope, Admiral Craddock’s West Indies Squadron flagship. The battle was Coronel.

A gunnery officer, his ship, Good Hope, was struck by volley after volley from the German armoured cruiser Scharnhorst, in concert with Gneisenau and a further three German light cruisers, all modern, efficient ships. Once the battle was done, the last it was seen it was steaming to the horizon, listing badly, issuing smoke. It was never seen again. All but five of her nine hundred hands died.

When I was done, my little girl wept for her great, great grandfather, a man she never knew.
And for the first time in my life, quietly, so she couldn’t see. . .
. . .so did I.

What does this day mean for me? It means the sacrifice of a young man named George. And it means a life, celebrated by a little girl George never knew, nearly a century away.

Lest We Forget

Once again we honour the memory of those who served, those who died, and those who serve us still.

Lest we forget.

Spain - the Land of Regret

Seems the Spanish 'love' affair with the Socialists may well be over:

Since prime minister Rodriguez Zapatero's administration took over power 12 months ago in April 2004, the people's trust in him has declined by 16 percentage points. 44.4% of Spaniards say they have little or no trust in Zapatero, according to the most recent survey carried out by government pollster CIS (Center of Sociological Investigation).

Didn't take them long, did it. Quite obviously, the pundits were right. An outburst of emotion over the bombing saw the previous government blamed and summarily dispatched.

The cold light of day (and a burgeoning raft of loony-left policies) seems to be giving the Spaniards a little pause for thought, though. One can only hope Zapatero doesn't do too much damage before the Spaniards get to correct their mistake.

Some small insight from el-socialismo himself: "I thought this business of governing would be complicated," Mr Zapatero was overheard telling a friend, "but really, I've got it licked."

The man is a fool.

A sad state of affairs

How ironic that on the very day that Pope Benedict gave a reminder to journalists worldwide regarding the importance of ethics in their profession, a story breaks about the BBC planting hecklers at a campaign meeting for the Tory party of Great Britain.

The Tories have made an official protest after the hecklers, who were given the microphones by producers, were caught at a party event in the North West last week. Guy Black, the party's head of communications, wrote in a letter to Helen Boaden, the BBC's director of news, that the hecklers began shouting slogans that were "distracting and clearly hostile to the Conservative Party".

These included "Michael Howard is a liar", "You can't trust the Tories" and "You can only trust Tony Blair".

Mr Black's strongly-worded letter accused the BBC of staging the event "to generate a false news story and dramatise coverage. . . intended to embarrass or ridicule the leader of the Conservative Party". The letter said that BBC staff were guilty of "serious misconduct". At least one of the hecklers was seen again at a Tory event in the North East, Mr Black added.

Pretty pathetic behavior, but hardly surprising.

Last night, the BBC claimed that the exercise was part of a "completely legitimate programme about the history and art of political heckling" and said that other parties' meetings were being "observed". However, The Telegraph has established that none of Tony Blair's meetings was infiltrated or disrupted in similar fashion.

This is such a contrast from the words of Pope Benedict today:

He stressed the "ethical responsibility of those who work in the media, especially regarding the sincere search for truth and the defense of the centrality and dignity of the human person."

Displaying his linguistic skills by speaking in Italian, English, French and his native German, he said each journalist had to contribute to the common good.

They should also understand the effect the media's recent breathless development can have "on people's consciences and their spiritual outlook and in forming public opinion."

Not to mention the effect that the media can and often do have on election outcomes.

crossposted on bittersweet

And the Survey Says...!

I was looking at some numbers this evening and decided to create a couple of charts. The first one illustrates the results of Canada's last General Election on 28 June 2004. Of the 308 Seats in the House you can see the Liberals hold 135 while the Conservatives have 99 seats.

In the next illustration we see the projected seat totals, based on the latest data, if an election were to be held today.

As we can see the Conservatives have surged past the Liberals and continue to climb. The most recent polling data actually indicates the Tories could be within reach of a majority government! Wouldn't that be nice.

To see a breakdown of the data click here for the report. (It's in PDF format) Thanks to NealeNews.

Special thanks to Jonathan of The Potent Pew


Technorati tags: Adscam, News, Politics, News and Politics, Canada, Gomery, corruption

The best post in Indymedia's history

The award goes to Michael Dargaville for this laughable tripe. A few excerpts:

But that was 25 years ago and since 1989 when the company was destroyed and a new Fairfax was founded, a Fairfax that is absolutely nothing like the old Fairfax, a completely dangerous Fairfax that lies all the time, distorts the truth, misinforms on a grand scale, revises history, promotes war criminals and are now active human rights abusers.

Not one single serious example of any of this is provided by Dargaville, but some accusations are backed up with other even more outrageous claims, most laughably like this:

The Fairfax Press are not only liars and cheats but launch campaigns of media ommision. For example, I have mentioned many times that ASIO, Australia's security intelligence organisation, has used psychotronic weapons on people in Australia. Psychotronic weapons are mind control weapons and use electro-magnetic frequences to change brain wave patterns. Neurophones are one machine which can do this. I have had major contacts confirm to me this is used widely but not one story from Fairfax. These pigs in Fairfax promote the human rights abuses of spies. Allegations that Martin Bryant, the convicted mass murder in Tasmania, was also given this technology before the shooting was again ignored by Fairfax. These allegations have the right to be heard and taken seriously before the public but not at Fairfax.

There's a good reason why Fairfax won't take them seriously, but the mere fact that you're writing this means you wouldn't understand it. Next, we find out just why he's so bitter against Fairfax:

The Fairfax media company these days launches campaigns against anyone who dares to challenge the tight media control of Australia.

In the 1990s I had published four novels, two of which I stupidly gave to Fairfax to review. These novels were cutting edge novels with lots of expletives and intellectual dialogue in the vain of William Burroughs, Kathy Acker, Richard Brauitigan and Irvine Welsh.

Not only did Fairfax not review any of them, but refused to issue any publicity. This sort of campaign of deciet and banning has now turned into standard practice for this evil and terrible media organisation.

They didn't review your books, so you're bitter. Wow, that's original.

You can tell Michael how much you lived his diatribe at newidealism@yahoo.com.au.

Oh, and Michael? The tin foil is in aisle 4.

UPDATE: His other articles are just as good:

In Australia our rock music tradition has a long history of being channelled by Lucifer. Look at Johnny Farnham's Whispering Jack which is totally evil. You can tell people channelled by Lucifer. Prime Minister John Howard, Johnny Farnham, Peter Garrett, the singers from Crowded House and some Tripple Jay announcers all have that WoWoWoWoWoWoWoWoWoW accent. Those humans are being smothered in super energy by Lucifer's angels. It is a sad but true occult fact.

Yet if you look at Australia's punk music tradition you will see the positive Archangels of Gabriel ringing through in super energy.

Somebody give this guy a comedy award.

(Cross-posted to The House Of Wheels.)

ANZAC Day

What does ANZAC Day mean to me? More than anything, I think of the reasons young soldiers, sailors and airmen have served Australia with distinction since before Federation. It is claimed that Australia lost her innocence on the shores of Gallipoli. I would counter that rather than losing anything, Australia gained a reputation.

Just 170 men out of the Australian 4th Brigade that landed ashore on the 24/25 April 1915 made it off 8 months later. Out of over 4000 men, 170left. The brigade was essentially a different unit from the one that stormed ashore and then was stalled by the forbidding terrain and incessant sniping and shell-fire. And yet, the character of the men remained the same. This was a wag's idea of how to run the AIF's campaign after they landed in Egypt.

To visit Leicester Lounge
Climb the pyramids
Drink beer
Shoot the Kaiser
Drink more beer
Capture Constantinople
Raid the Sultan’s harem
Drink more beer
Shave our moustaches (some of us)
Drink more beer
Flirt with French girls
Return home covered with medals
Drink more beer.

Typically Australian humour. Optimistic, irreverent. The same character traits that the general Australian public like to call their own. Ockers. Larrikins. The Diggers forged a reputation of no-nonsense approach to soldiering. Rarely trusted to be up-front around the barracks, once on the field of battle, the colonials were regarded as tough and worthy opponents by all they faced. Whether in the foxholes of the Gallipoli Peninsula, or the mud of the Western Front, the Australians faced up to the challenges set before them and forged a legend.

Today, school-children write about what ANZAC Day means to them as part of the curriculum. Editors around the country drag out interviews and pictures. Anti-war campaigners complain about the glorification of war. The media go into nationalistic hyperbolic over-drive, with commentary about every possible military related topic. The armchair generals re-debate the follies of following the Empire into wars against countries that offered no threat to Australia. Online commentary is written. Opinions espoused. And then on April 26, life goes on.

Remember what our fallen tried to protect. Our way of life. Australia as a nation was partially moulded by these heroic figures 90 years ago. Don't let their deeds be forgotten. It sounds trite if people just mouth the words around the Cenotaphs and Memorials. Remember.

Lest we forget.

Crossposted at Bastards Inc.

The UN almost does something right

The UN's laughable Human Rights Commission passed a resolution "condemning" Cuba (E/CN.4/2005/33). It almost sounds good. But here are the facts:

- It carries no penalties, and Cuba has refused to co-operate with any of the recommendations.
- Only 21 of the 53 nations on the HRC (less than 40%) were willing to vote against Cuba. By comparison, 39, 29 and 32 voted against Israel in three seperate resolutions.
- The HRC has censured Cuba every year since 1998 bar one - it has achieved absolutely nothing.
- Cuba called the decision both a farce and a moral victory.
- The report was submitted by Christine Chanet, who has never been to Cuba. In fact, not one member of the UN's HRC has ever been to Cuba.

And for the record, countries voted this way:

FOR (21): Armenia, Australia, Canada, Costa Rica, Finland, France, Germany, Guatemala, Honduras, Hungary, Ireland, Italy, Japan, Mexico, the Netherlands, Romania, Saudi Arabia, South Korea, Ukraine, United Kingdom, United States.

AGAINST (17): China, Congo, Cuba, Egypt, Ethiopia, Eritrea, Guinea, India, Indonesia, Kenya, Malaysia, Nigeria, Qatar, Russia, South Africa, Sudan, Zimbabwe.

ABSTENTIONS (15): Argentina, Brazil, Burkina Faso, Bhutan, Ecuador, Gabon, Mauritania, Nepal, Pakistan, Peru, the Dominican Republic, Sri Lanka, Swaziland, Togo, Paraguay.

It's time for a table:

                 For    Against   Abstained
Free          16 (76%)   2 (12%)    4 (27%)
Partly Free    4 (19%)   5 (29%)    5 (33%)
Not Free       1 (5%)   10 (59%)    6 (40%)

From this we can establish some basic facts: free countries will censure Cuba, not-free countries will not.

(Cross-posted to The House Of Wheels.)

Conservative Piece in NY Times

For those not familiar with David Frum, he is a writer for a conservative newspaper in Canada called The National Post. Recently, an op-ed of his appeared in The NY Times of all places. It's amazing they would print anything from a conservative. It's a good read.

Technorati tags: Adscam, News, Politics, News and Politics, Canada, Gomery, corruption

The Speech; The Analysis

After listening to Paul Martin's speech over and over as well as rereading the text, I've come to a couple of conclusions. 1) This speech was obviously directed at a wide audience and not necessarily those folk who closely follow politics and 2) These are the desperate words of a desperate man. Why do I say that? Where was our Prime Minister during the tainted-blood scandal? Where was our Prime Minister when he and his trained seals decided to redefine marriage? Where was our Prime Minister went the HRDC lost $1 billion? What about the federal gun registry? Canada's decision to participate in the war on terror by sending troops to Afghanistan? How about the event that triggered the war on terror - the cowardly act of mass murder that occurred on Sept 11 in which citizens of this nation lost their lives? Our flip-flop on the ballistic missile defence system? I could go on and on suffice it to say the Liberals weren't in a popularity free-fall like they are now hence no emergency, no need to speak to the masses. Don't kid yourselves, the fact that Liberal support is shrinking faster than the speed of light was the main motivation for the address.

So what did he actually say? He starts off by patting himself on the back by telling us that he's actually doing something about AdScam.

I want to talk to you directly tonight - about the problems in the sponsorship program; about how I’ve responded to them as your prime minister; and about the timing of the next general election.

Next, he accepts responsibility by pleading incompetence and in the process avoids any notions of complicity or guilt.

Let me speak plainly: what happened with the sponsorship file occurred on the watch of a Liberal government. Those who were in power are to be held responsible. And that includes me.

Make a note of that one sentence "And that includes me" as we'll come back to it shortly. Next, he admits incompetence again and reminds us that he apologized a year ago - a desperate attempt to tug at our heartstrings. He also pats himself on the back again by reinforcing the claim he's done something.

But taking responsibility is about more than words. I want to tell you what I’ve done as Prime Minister to deal with the sponsorship scandal - to make sure it does not happen again, to make sure that those who violated the public trust will be identified and will pay the consequences.

So what did he actually do?

On December 12, 2003, I cancelled the sponsorship program. It was my very first act on my very first day in office.

Why would he cancel the sponsorship program a full 2 months before Auditor-General Sheila Fraser released her report? At that point in time allegations of wrongdoing were just that, allegations and hearsay. At that point in time he was busy claiming ignorance of any and all things related to the program. Was it simply a preemptive strike? (the implication being of course he knew something) What else has he done aside from calling for an inquiry?

In addition, I fired Alfonso Gagliano, the minister responsible for the sponsorship program, from his appointment as Ambassador to Denmark.

Whoa! He fired Gagliano. This is an extremely important point as it ties into something he said earlier. Remember the statement "And that includes me"? He canned Gagliano simply because Gagliano headed the program. There was no and I repeat no evidence directly linking him to the scandal. The move was simply one of aesthetics - he wanted to be seen as doing something. The hell with due process and all that other fine stuff. So if Martin is so quick to satisfy the blood thirsty masses by presenting them with Gagliano's head despite the lack of any real evidence why doesn't he present us with his own head? Why hold everyone else up to such high standards? He's very quick to fire everyone else but he himself refuses to do the honourable thing by stepping down. Instead, he begs us for more time. I know I screwed up but hey I canned that Alfonso guy. Please please please don't fire me. I promise I'll make everything better - you'll see.

He continues by saying,

I put in strict new controls on spending within every single government department.

Huh? What strict new controls? He then refers to the whistleblower legislation he brought in.

My government brought forward whistleblower legislation to ensure that when public servants and others come forward with evidence of wrongdoing, they are protected, not punished.

That sounds nice in theory but if he is so concerned about exposing corruption why did shut down the public accounts committee last year when it was trying to get to the bottom of this mess? Why did he call for an election before any of the sordid details began to become public? Next he promises to act on Gomery's recommendations.

I committed to acting on the recommendations of Judge Gomery when he brings forth his final report. And I myself testified before his commission, answering any and all questions.

Notice his choice of words. He said that he is "...committed to acting on the recommendations." He didn't say that he will implement any or all of the recommendations - there is a big difference. Then he tries to reassure us by informing us that he called in the bean counters.

Finally, I ordered that the Liberal party bring in auditors to conduct a forensic examination of its books - and call in the RCMP to investigate what took place during that period.

Once again his choice of words is curious. He said forensic examination. That's not true, it's not a forensic examination. It is an ordinary review. In bean-counter-speak this is an important distinction. In a normal review, the accountants merely confirm the validity of receipts - it's called book keeping. In the case of AdScam a book keeping review is ridiculous. He then continues,

Let me emphasize that point: if so much as a dollar is found to have made its way into the Liberal party from ill-gotten gains, it will be repaid to the people of Canada. I want no part of that money.

Again, this makes for a nice soundbite on the six o'clock news but that's all. How in the world will he ever prove how much money went where when he hasn't called for a forensic audit? He then once again talks about the mess and once again promises us all that he's on the ball.

As Prime Minister, I will never hesitate to describe what happened on the sponsorship file for what is was: an unjustifiable mess. It’s up to me to clean it up. That’s my job. I am cleaning it up. And I am willing to be judged on my record of action.

Sorry Mr.Martin but you don't atone for your errors from your address on Sussex Dr. In the real world people like you are fired, axed, canned. Plain and simple. Drunk drivers don't avoid punishment by agreeing to drive senior citizens to medical appointments for free. Again I refer to Alfonso Gagliano. Then he goes so far as to deflect blame on the Opposition.

In recent weeks, fallout from the sponsorship inquiry has led to speculation about an election - which in turn is consuming virtually all political discussion, at least here on Parliament Hill. Initiatives to improve health care, strengthen our economy and ensure for Canada a role of pride and influence in the world are being obscured by partisan jousting.

In short, the Parliament you sent to Ottawa less than a year ago is preoccupied with election talk and with political strategy – not with the job you sent us here to do.

The PM claims that all other issues are being ignored in the House. To anyone who watches Question Period as I do they know this is an outright lie. Of course AdScam should dominate the debate as nothing of its magnitude has ever been seen in this country before but to suggest that other areas of concern are being ignored is bullshit. Besides, he wants to talk about partisan jousting? Why did he refuse to answer a simple question in the House put forth to him by Conservative leader Stephen Harper? Remember when he asked Martin if he ever discussed the directions of contracts over lunch with Claude Boulay? After numerous attempts to illicit an answer from Martin the PM turned the tables by accusing the Conservatives of having a hidden agenda when it comes to health care?! What? What the hell does that have to do with the question that was put forth? And he has the gall to talk about partisan jousting?!

He goes on to discuss due process again.

We’ve all heard that the opposition may defeat the government and take the country to the polls for the second time in a year.

I am prepared to face Canadians and have them judge my response to this serious test of leadership. I will be politically accountable. But I believe that before there is an election, you are entitled to answers - to the answers that Judge Gomery is working toward. I believe that Canadians deserve a full and frank accounting of all the facts. Fairness and due process require nothing less.

Again, I charge he has the audacity to talk about lofty ideals like due process when he threw Gagliano to the wolves? Whether or not Gagliano was guilty is not the point - the fact he was robbed of due process is. I guess the only one entitled to due process is Martin himself.

Then he indulges in a little fancy stick handling.

For that reason, I commit to you tonight that I will call a general election within 30 days of the publication of the commission’s final report and recommendations. Let Judge Gomery do his work. Let the facts come out. And then the people of Canada will have their say.

This is a very important point. He said that he would "...call a general election within 30 days of the publication of the commission’s final report." The conclusion date of the inquiry and the release date of its report are 2 entirely different things - hell the report may not be out for another year or so! Very slick move Martin. This is simply a stall tactic in light of the fact the Opposition has threatened to defeat the government in a confidence vote over the budget. The last thing Martin wants right now is an election! How many people will even remember AdScam a year from now? Voters are notorious for having short memories. Further backing up his claim why an election call at this point in time is not a good thing he says,

If the Opposition forces an election before then, that is their choice. But I believe we can do better. I believe we can - and we should - use the coming months to pursue the public’s business. To act on the issues that matter most to you and make a difference in your life.

If we are to have an election, one that will be at least in part about the work of Judge Gomery, surely that election should occur only when we have the work of Judge Gomery.

Why do we have to wait for Gomery's final report? Didn't Martin claim earlier in his speech that he is willing to be judged on his record? Why do we need Gomery to influence our decision? The testimony we've heard so far is incredibly damaging. I'm quite confident that Canadians are capable of rendering judgement instead of waiting for some judge's interpretation of the events. The next part is priceless,

But I trust your judgment. And I will not dishonour this office by trying to conceal or diminish such offensive wrongdoing. I have too much respect for this place.

My pledge to you tonight is that I will live up to that ideal. I went into public life because I believe in the good that government can do. And I will do my all as Prime Minister to make sure that your government is worthy of your respect.

Ah yes. There's those lofty ideals again - honesty and decency and morals blah blah blah. Why was the Somalia Inquiry cancelled just when it was getting to the juicy parts? What about his position on Free Trade or same-sex marriage or the GST? We've all seen what a Liberal commitment really means.

He then once again tries to tug at our heart strings by mentioning his late father.

When I was young, I practically lived here in the Parliament Buildings. My father was a cabinet minister in four Liberal governments. He taught me that those who serve in public office have a duty to protect the integrity of government.

To summarize, as I said at the start, this speech was aimed at a broad audience and not at people who closely follow politics in general or AdScam in particular. This speech was too self-congratulatory for me. He told us over and over that he's on the ball and that he's cleaning up the mess. He avoided admitting guilt but used the incompetence defence all the while begging for more time. The fox got caught in the henhouse but that's okay - we'll give the fox another year or so in its role as henhouse security guard. He is prepared to call an election but only at his convenience. Sorry Mr.Prime Minister. You were correct when you said Canadians will judge you on your record. We will do just that - and it won't be on your terms.

Technorati tags: Adscam, News, Politics, News and Politics, Canada, Gomery, corruption

Moussaoui Cops a Plea

Zacarias Moussaoui, the only terrorist to have been charged directly in the 9/11 attacks, has pled guilty to all six charges leveled against him. Four of the charges carry a potential death penalty.

Death Penalty Charges	Lesser Charges
- conspiracy to commit acts of terrorism - conspiracy to commit aircraft piracy - conspiracy to destroy aircraft - conspiracy to use weapons of mass destruction	- conspiracy to destroy property - conspiracy to murder government employees

More coverage is available from CNN and the BBC.

The matter is pretty much just pro forma at this point. Americans no longer need Moussaoui's conviction to move on, and the successes in Afghanistan and Iraq are more worth looking forward to. But, of course, you won't hear it from the traditional media, who will pile on to the Moussaoui sentencing as a chance to snatch victory from the jaws of defeat by raising the entire death sentence issue.

[Cross-posted at Between Worlds]

Frog Legs

Well, by now, it's everywhere on the blogosphere. I had to wait to post something about this because I was so upset. Deutsche Welle reports that France is backing China on Taiwan. French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin is basically saying that France supports China's sabre-rattling at Taiwan, and, oh, by the way, China is buying a large number of items from France:

At the outset of a three-day visit to China, French Prime Minister Jean-Pierre Raffarin said he supported Beijing's "anti-secession" law on Taiwan, and vowed to keep pushing for an end to an EU arms embargo that could open the door for Paris to sell weapons to the Asian giant.

Raffarin also signed or finalized major business deals with Beijing valued at around $3.2 billion (2.4 billion euros).

Appearing to put his government at odds with the European Union, Raffarin said at the outset of the three day visit that Paris had no objections to the anti-secession law.

Monsieur Raffarin calls the embargo "anachronistic" and "discriminatory". So he's telling us that refusal to sell weapons to a state that killed thousands of its best and brightest yet never acknowledged or showed regret or remorse for it is "anachronistic"? Ah morals, such an "anachronistic" concept! As for "discriminatory", what did he think embargoes are supposed to be?

Meanwhile, Philippe Delmas, vice president of Airbus, tagged along, and reported signing a contract with China worth $500-600 million. Put together with some 20 other deals that were finalized on this trip, the price tag cashes in at over $3 billion. That's $3,000,000,000.00, dear readers. I know the US dollar hasn't been strong for the past couple of years, but that is still a whole lot of zeroes!

With no offense to Airbus technology, but the only way it was able to build anything was because of the socialist nature of the consortium. And in this day and age, superjumbo jets aren't likely to be moneymakers. Given the range of the superjumbo jet, the most likely route it will cover is probably direct flights between Southeast Asia and California. As things stand, a typical Boeing 747 can make the flight between Los Angeles and Hong Kong on one full tank, so anything larger would help to decrease the importance of Hong Kong as a regional hub (perhaps China's punishment for its defiance?), and at any rate, seats would be too expensive for China's domestic market. Moreover, a Boeing 757 can already handle an American cross-continental flight; since China's main air traffic would be between the coasts and perhaps Sichuan in the interior, a superjumbo plane would be overkill. (Correct me, though, if I've somehow missed a sudden surge in demand for the Shanghai-Urumqi route.)

Thus, the purchase is just window dressing. Let's face it: France is corrupt and broke, and her top politicos are willing to sacrifice liberal ideals in order to sustain the pipeline into their own pockets. Their cynicism is unbounded, and their deal with China may yet be a Faustian one. And all because they still want to play the Great Game that they lost repeatedly, at Waterloo in 1815, at Paris in 1871, and again at Paris in 1940. They should remember that they're not the only ones that eat frog legs.

France must be made to pay. The question is, how?

[Cross-posted at Between Worlds and Naruwan Formosa]

Suspect Device Handling 1.01

You're a plainclothes law enforcement officer in a Middle Eastern country rife with terrorism, first on the scene where a crowd has gathered around an apparently abandoned piece of luggage:-

What do you do?

1/. Move the crowd back to a safe distance, and call for assistance then wait for the bomb squad.

2/. Exclaim "fuck this for a game of soldiers" in Arabic, cack your pants and flee the scene in terror.

3/. Stroll over nonchalantly, lean over the potential IED and open it while surrounded by gawping yokels.

Apparently to the Levantine mind,option 3 is the answer. (Warning: fairly graphic content, don't complain we didn't warn you.)

UN Has Success

Well it's been successful in slagging off free Western democracies for putting terrorist suspects in the bag, pandering to the demands of noisy Marxist pressure groups and appointing another dingbat to the gravy train:-

In a joint statement last week, groups including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch and the International Commission of Jurists had called for the new post.
'The special rapporteur would monitor counterterrorism laws and practices for their compatibility with human rights, act to prevent human rights violations arising from counterterrorism measures and provide technical assistance to states,' they said.

No mention of the supression of the right to continue breathing carried out daily by El Que'da adherents in Iraq and Palestinian nutjobs in the West Bank, however; being mildly unpleasant to Islamofascist detainees is much more important.

The forum, which winds up its annual six-week session on Friday, last year appointed an independent expert to draw up a report on counterterrorism.
The expert, Robert Goldman, reported that a 'broad range of human rights have come under increasing pressure or are being violated by states in the context of counterterrorism initiatives'.
His concerns included: the prolonged or indefinite incommunicado detention of terrorist suspects without access to courts; inhumane treatment during interrogation; military tribunals to try civilians; transfer or 'rendition' of suspects to third states which 'routinely practise torture.'
Some countries have also resorted to 'profiling' people to identify terrorist suspects or prevent them from entering their territory, according to Goldman, an American lawyer.

Horrible- truly horrible; murderous thugs and fundamentalist xenophobes are asked questions, held in remote locations so substantial populations are kept safe from random attack, occasionaly turned away at entry points and sometimes returned to their country of birth where nasty things happen to them. How can we look at ourselves in the mirror when such outrages are purpetrated in the name of our security.

How selfish of us- deranged Dervishes should be free to roam at will- after all, a few televised beheadings and explosions in crowded public spaces are a small price to pay for tolerance and respect for human rights.

No doubt this matter will be taken seriously by the nations in question, who will expend buckets of money on reviews of procedures and probes into unfounded allegations by questionable individuals of ill-treatment.

They have also come down like a ton of bricks on the minor rights violations in Sudan's Dafur region:-

The U.N. Human Rights Commission has adopted a resolution condemning human rights abuses in Sudan's troubled Darfur region.
The resolution, passed by consensus Thursday without a formal vote, blames both pro-government Arab militia and rebels in Darfur for the violations.
The Associated Press reports the measure specifically condemns the violence against civilians, sexual violence against women and girls, and the destruction of villages.
It was approved after the European Union withdrew a more strongly worded document that would have condemned the Sudanese government for its role in the violence.

That'll have them quaking in their curly-toed shoes in Khatoum.

This show of force will probably have a similar effect on the recalcitrant Sudanese regime as a similar resolution has had on the now docile North Koreans*.

*What is the Korean phrase for fuck off, limpdick imperialist running dogs?

UPDATE No doubt the UN will be as resolute about the Iranian government's proven indirect involvement in recruitment of mobile claymores- surely state sponsored terrorism is a major human rights issue.

UPDATE 2 JF Beck has more on the UN's valiant efforts in Dafur. It also appears The Koffster may still be in more shit that a dung beetle over oil for food.

World government indeed- I reckon this crew would do a much better job.

(Cross-posted at the Daily Diatribe).

I Have the Speech For Those Who Missed It

For anyone who missed the PM's address to the nation tonite I made a recording in MP3 format so that it's compatible with any media player such as WMP or Winamp etc. The original audio file is rather large weighing in at over 6MB. I split the original file into 6 smaller segments approx 1MB each and lasting about a minute each. This should drastically increase the download speed. If anyone wants the original file I created in its entirety drop me a line. To get the goods, go to a temporary site I set up here.

As I've been playing with my audio editing software all evening I'm rather tired right now. I'll provide my thoughts and analysis of the speech tomorrow. Enjoy!

PS - Here is a transcript of the speech

Good evening.

I want to talk to you directly tonight about the problems in the sponsorship program; about how I've responded to them as your prime minister; and about the timing of the next general election.

Let me speak plainly: what happened with the sponsorship file occurred on the watch of a Liberal government. Those who were in power are to be held responsible. And that includes me.

I was the Minister of Finance. Knowing what I've learned this past year, I am sorry that we weren't more vigilant - that I wasn't more vigilant. Public money was misdirected and misused. That's unacceptable. And that is why I apologized to the Canadian people a year ago.

But taking responsibility is about more than words. I want to tell you what I've done as Prime Minister to deal with the sponsorship scandal - to make sure it does not happen again, to make sure that those who violated the public trust will be identified and will pay the consequences.

On December 12, 2003, I cancelled the sponsorship program. It was my very first act on my very first day in office.

When the Auditor-General's report was publicly tabled, I acted immediately by ordering a fully independent commission of inquiry, under Mr. Justice John Gomery. Its mandate is to get to the bottom of what happened, and to do it in full view of Canadians. It will report before the end of the year.

And I think you'll agree - Judge Gomery is leaving no stone unturned.

In addition, I fired Alfonso Gagliano, the minister responsible for the sponsorship program, from his appointment as Ambassador to Denmark.

I put in strict new controls on spending within every single government department.

My government brought forward whistleblower legislation to ensure that when public servants and others come forward with evidence of wrongdoing, they are protected, not punished.

To recover taxpayers - money - money that went to those who did not earn it -- I ordered my government to sue 19 people and companies for more than $40-million.

I committed to acting on the recommendations of Judge Gomery when he brings forth his final report. And I myself testified before his commission, answering any and all questions.

Finally, I ordered that the Liberal party bring in auditors to conduct a forensic examination of its books - and call in the RCMP to investigate what took place during that period.

Let me emphasize that point: if so much as a dollar is found to have made its way into the Liberal party from ill-gotten gains, it will be repaid to the people of Canada. I want no part of that money.

As Prime Minister, I will never hesitate to describe what happened on the sponsorship file for what is was: an unjustifiable mess. It's up to me to clean it up. That's my job. I am cleaning it up. And I am willing to be judged on my record of action.

In recent weeks, fallout from the sponsorship inquiry has led to speculation about an election - which in turn is consuming virtually all political discussion, at least here on Parliament Hill. Initiatives to improve health care, strengthen our economy and ensure for Canada a role of pride and influence in the world are being obscured by partisan jousting.

In short, the Parliament you sent to Ottawa less than a year ago is preoccupied with election talk and with political strategy - not with the job you sent us here to do.

As people focus their attention on the commission's hearings, let's remember that the inquiry is being held in front of a judge for good reason.

There is conflicting testimony; only the judge is in a position to determine the truth. Only he can cut through the partisan politics. Only he can tell us what happened and who was responsible.

We've all heard that the opposition may defeat the government and take the country to the polls for the second time in a year.

I am prepared to face Canadians and have them judge my response to this serious test of leadership. I will be politically accountable. But I believe that before there is an election, you are entitled to answers - to the answers that Judge Gomery is working toward. I believe that Canadians deserve a full and frank accounting of all the facts. Fairness and due process require nothing less.

For that reason, I commit to you tonight that I will call a general election within 30 days of the publication of the commission's final report and recommendations. Let Judge Gomery do his work. Let the facts come out. And then the people of Canada will have their say.

If the Opposition forces an election before then, that is their choice. But I believe we can do better. I believe we can - and we should - use the coming months to pursue the public's business. To act on the issues that matter most to you and make a difference in your life.

If we are to have an election, one that will be at least in part about the work of Judge Gomery, surely that election should occur only when we have the work of Judge Gomery.

In closing, let me say this: there are people who think I was wrong to call this inquiry, wrong to expose my government to the political cost of the scrutiny that has ensued. They warn we will pay a price in the next election. And perhaps we will.

But I trust your judgment. And I will not dishonour this office by trying to conceal or diminish such offensive wrongdoing. I have too much respect for this place.

When I was young, I practically lived here in the Parliament Buildings. My father was a cabinet minister in four Liberal governments. He taught me that those who serve in public office have a duty to protect the integrity of government.

My pledge to you tonight is that I will live up to that ideal. I went into public life because I believe in the good that government can do. And I will do my all as Prime Minister to make sure that your government is worthy of your respect.

The final judgment on whether I have done that will be yours.

Thank you. And good night.

Technorati tags: Adscam, News, Politics, News and Politics, Canada, Gomery, corruption

Empire

Taking a slightly longer lunch break, I've finally finished reading Niall Ferguson's Empire: The Rise and Demise of the British World Order and the Lessons for Global Power. The book is an insightful look into the history of the little things that added up to the British Empire. Many of the events recounted are no longer remembered, least of all in the American public education system. Nonetheless, they are recounted as part of a dynamic sweep across history. The denouement comes in the finaly chapter, "Empire for Sale", and takes into account history from 1916 to 1956, with a brief focus on the two world wars, and more study of the Easter Rebellion, the Amritsar Massacre, and the Suez Canal Criss, and the role these events played in the dissolution of the Empire.

Niall notes, however, that although America has in effect assumed the role once played by Britain, the attitudes of Americans toward empire are different, not only because "imperialism" is not acceptable to the politically correct crowd, but because of the American founding myth, which continues to drive Americans to prefer influence over domination. Niall cites an example:

Yet from its earliest days, the so-called 'special relationship' between Britain and the United States had its own special ambiguity, at the heart of which lay the Americans' very different conception of empire. To the Americans ... formal rule over subject peoples was unpalatable. ... Sooner or later, everyone must learn to be, like the Americans, self-governing and democratic -- at gunpoint if necessary. In 1913 there had been a military coup in Mexico, to the grave displeasure of Woodrow Wilson, who resolved 'to teach the South American Republics to elect good men'. Walter Page, then Washington's man in London, reported a conversation with the British Foreign Secretary Sir Edward Grey, who asked:

'Suppose you have to intervene, what then?'
'Make 'em vote and live by their decisions.'
'But suppose they will not so live?'
'We'll go in and make 'em vote again.'
'And keep this up 200 years?' asked he.
'Yes', said I. 'The United States will be here for two hundred years and it can continue to shoot men for that little space till they learn to vote and to rule themselves.'

Anything, in other words, but take over Mexico, which would have been the British solution.

The point of the book, that America is now at the head of a new sort of imperium (perhaps the "new world order" that President George Herbert Walker Bush had mentioned after the fall of the Soviet Union, but which his son, President George Walker Bush, did the most to realize). This empire is patently not the same type as the British, and less still as the old, short-lived, but very brutal Empire of the Sun. It is quite something else altogether.

As such, it would be useless to heed the words of critics who, when they hear "empire", reflexively hearken back to only he worst excesses of the Age of Imperialism. Rather, this is a chance for liberals of all different stripes to deliver their messages to the world in different ways. Currently the most prominent voices are those that are calling for the spread of democracy and liberty -- the so-called "neoconservatives". They have made clear their intention of building an empire based on liberty, an empire that exists, again, more by influence than by domination.

Unfortunately, so far, the other voices talking about the new age of imperialism are the orphans of Marxism: Those that would seek to impose a statist socialist superstate (probably governed from Brussels); those that would seek to deconstruct the world into smallish socialist states with protective barriers against capitalist states; those that wish to return to the state of affairs as they were six hundred years ago, when China was arguably at its zenith, and the only white people in North America were the Vikings at Newfoundland; and those that would prefer that no authority be allowed to govern at all, including that of the United States over its citizens.

I know which side I'm on.

[Cross-posted at Between Worlds]

NCC Says Liberals Scary

In my email today yet another excellent press release from The National Citizens Coalition.

NCC Says Corbeil Allegations Point to Liberal Hypocrisy on Gag law

(Toronto, April 21, 2005) The National Citizens Coalition says recent allegations suggest the federal Liberals are supreme hypocrites when it comes to election gag laws.

"The Liberal government enacted an election gag law supposedly to ensure a fair vote" says NCC vice president Gerry Nicholls. "Yet according to allegations from Benoit Corbeil, the former director of the Quebec wing of the Liberal party, the same Liberal government secretly violated Quebec?s gag law during the 1995 referendum."

Corbeil told Radio-Canada yesterday that "secret" Liberal funds were spent to aid the federalist forces in the referendum and that such spending clearly violated, if not smashed, Quebec electoral laws.

"Apparently, the Liberals think its OK for them to spend money to influence voters, even if it means breaking the law, but independent groups and private citizens must keep quiet during federal elections or go to jail," says Nicholls. "The Liberal mindset on this is not only hypocritical, it?s scary."

Nicholls points out that the Liberal government dragged the NCC into court, accusing it of breaking the gag law during the 2000 federal election.

"It seems the same Liberals who allegedly broke the Quebec gag law, were persecuting us for supposedly breaking the federal gag law," says Nicholls. "It shows that the Liberal justification for this law ? the need to create a level playing field ? was a sham. They don?t care about level playing fields, they only care about stifling dissent."

The federal Liberal gag law imposes severe restrictions on what private citizens or groups can spend to express opinions during federal elections.

The NCC battled this law in the courts arguing it infringed on freedom of expression but last year, the Supreme Court of Canada ruled it was constitutional.

Technorati tags: Adscam, News, Politics, News and Politics, Canada

Corbeil Confirms Brault Testimony

It's no longer speculation. The explosive testimony of Groupaction's president Jean Brault has been confirmed.

Montreal — A high-ranking Liberal organizer says he received tens of thousands of dollars in sponsorship cash in 2000 from the president of Groupaction Marketing and funnelled the funds into the hands of “fake volunteers” working on the Liberal campaign.

Benoit Corbeil, the former director-general of the Liberal Party's office in Montreal, said in an interview that he received approval from some of his superiors for the cash transactions that were part of a regular flouting of electoral law.

If you recall earlier, Brault stated that he gave funds to Benoit Corbeil (former director-general of the Liberal Party's office in Montreal) for the Liberal Party. Mr.Corbeil said,

“I took the bills [from Mr. Brault] and with that, I paid people, without declaring it [to Elections Canada],” Mr. Corbeil said, refusing to state exactly how much money he received that day.

“I have to admit it, that's the way it happened,” he said.

He added,

Mr. Corbeil said most of the recipients of cash payments were Liberal supporters who took unpaid leaves from their positions in ministerial offices to work on the general election.

“I liked to call them fake volunteers,” he said.

Corbeil went on to explain that after he requested funds from an as-of-yet unnamed official, Groupaction handed over cheques via Commando Marketing, a company owned by one of its employees, to 5 Liberal volunteers totalling nearly $100,000. He also stated he had the approval of his superiors. Corbeil currently refuses to name any of the people involved but said that he will reveal all when he appears in front of the Gomery Inquiry in early May.

He did state that some wanted to get their money right away while others were willing to wait. Some of the beneficiaries, according to Corbeil, included lawyers, engineers and accountants from major firms hoping to land contracts after the election.

“They don't want to get paid right away, they want to get paid later,” he said, noting that many of the lawyers have since been named to the bench.

If that's not shocking enough, Corbeil charged that the main purpose of the sponsorship program was to benefit the Liberals.

Mr. Corbeil said the problems originated in the 1995 referendum on Quebec sovereignty, in which the federalist camp exceeded the spending limit through a major demonstration in Montreal dubbed the “love-in.”

Mr. Corbeil said the viewpoint at the time was that this was a “war” against Quebec separatists, and that all means should be employed to ensure victory.

He said that after the referendum, two goals were approved by the highest authorities in the Liberal Party: Annihilate the Conservative Party in Quebec to unite all of the federalists in Quebec under the Liberal banner, and ensure that the Liberal Party became synonymous with Canada in the province of Quebec.

That, he said, led to the creation of the sponsorship program under which flags and banners were placed at events all over Quebec, and the establishment of ministerial tours under which federal ministers regularly travelled across the province.

I can hardly wait for him to appear before the inquiry. His testimony is going to be dynamite.

Meanwhile, Prime Minister Martin plans to address the nation on TV tonight. The context of his address is not known but it will only be 5 or 6 minutes long. That means the English portion of the speech will be a mere 2 or 3 minutes. I can't possibly imagine what he'll say in that amount of time although there is much speculation.

"He'll address the sponsorship issue and the current parliamentary context," Amy Butcher, a spokeswoman for the Prime Minister's Office, told globeandmail.com.

She indicated the gravity of the address.

Beyond that she refuses to go in to detail. She did say, "He [Martin] will not prorogue the House, nor dissolve Parliament."

As I said, I can't possibly imagine how he will address this on TV tonite in the span of a few minutes but I'll be watching.

Technorati tags: Adscam, News, Politics, News and Politics, Canada

(cross-posted to Rite Turn Only)

Volcker, yet again

The latest in the stumbling sham commonly referred to as the Volcker report:

Two senior investigators with the committee probing corruption in the U.N. oil-for-food program have resigned in protest, saying they believe a report that cleared Kofi Annan of meddling in the $64 billion operation was too soft on the secretary-general, a panel member confirmed Wednesday.

The investigators felt the Independent Inquiry Committee, led by former U.S. Federal Reserve chairman Paul Volcker, played down findings critical of Annan when it released an interim report in late March related to his son, said Mark Pieth, one of three leaders of the committee.

"You follow a trail and you want to see people pick it up," Pieth told The Associated Press, referring to the two top investigators who left. The committee "told the story" that the investigators presented, "but we made different conclusions than they would have."

The investigators were identified as Robert Parton and Miranda Duncan.

Roger L. Simon previously noted that two of those names had done "most of the heavy lifting" in regards to interviewing of witnesses - and back then, at the beginning of April, Roger scooped the mainstream media with the news they weren't happy with the inability of the Volcker Committee's lack of interest in following up leads.

Previously:
- A graph that ties in Canada's leaders, Saddamites, Oil companies, Volcker and the UN.
- Paul Volcker's ties to the companies and people he's meant to be investigating, and why his appointment by Kofi Annan violates UN regulations.

(Via Roger L. Simon. Cross-posted to The House Of Wheels.)

Iraq 'hostages dumped in river'

The bodies of more than 50 men, women and children have been recovered from the River Tigris in the town of Suwayra, south of Baghdad. Many had been badly mutilated, Iraqi authorities said.

President Jalal Talabani said the bodies were those of people who had been taken hostage and then killed in the nearby town of Madain. We discovered bags with the slaughtered children inside them - there were two girls, one was a student and the other was very young.

Mr Talabani confirmed the discovery. "More than 50 bodies have been brought out from the Tigris, and we have the full names of those who were killed and those criminals who committed these crimes," he said. "We will give you details in the coming days...".

The town of Madain had been reported to be in the hands of militant Sunni insurgents earlier this month. When government forces moved in and took control on Monday, they encountered no resistance, nor could they find any trace of hostages.

And in the town of Haditha, north-west of Baghdad, at least 19 men were found dead at a football stadium. They had apparently been lined up against a wall and shot. The interior ministry said they were Iraqi soldiers who had been abducted by insurgents while travelling to Haditha.

Story from BBC News

MathewK -

This is the kind of evil that the Iraqis and Americans have to face everyday.

John Pilger described the resistance in Iraq as incredibly important to stop the US. During the liberation of Iraq, there was a scene when an American soldier hoisted the American flag atop some building, it was quickly taken down and replaced with the Iraqi flag, there was much squealing like stuck pigs from the critics though. Then came Abu Gharib, the Arab world was shocked and appalled, mis treatment of prisoners, the world was appalled, Geneva conventions, rights for the prisoners, the Arab world blind to their own mis treatment of prisoners, shrieked for Bush to say sorry, Rumsfeld must resign, the squealing continued.

Occasionally the odd reporter was shot under suspicious circumstances in Iraq, more squealing and condemnation, then came Najaf and Fallujah, oh the insurgents, their rights, send them food, rules of engagement for the marines, too many, it'll all fail, we must run, the Geneva conventions, cameras focused on every American marine, watching their every move, I wouldn't be surprised if the marines weren't sure who the enemy really was.

Then the elections came, professor of foreign this from that university, expert on middle east history from that organisation, local leftist safe and sound in the free west, all carping on about how it lacked legitimacy because the Sunni's weren't involved, too few votes, puppet government and the insurgents were not in the process, all predicted chaos, bloodshed, death and burning. Free Iraqis gave them the one fingered salute. Every time the Iraqi Army or police mount an operation, the Americans have all the power, the Iraqis are deserting, can't learn fast enough, no weapons, ineffective, the Insurgents are winning and they have control. Mass graves are still being found in Iraq from the Saddam era, yet wherever the American marine turns, all they get is criticism or some opportunistic bastard looking for a mistake.

So where are all the critics now, why isn't anyone explaining the Geneva conventions to these parasites called insurgents, why is the professor from somewhere not fighting for the rights of the beheaded child or the policeman shot like a dog in a football field. Maybe the "Stop the war coalition" could stop the murdering by Insurgents for a change. We should get all the critics and fly them all over to Iraq, here you go, you fix the problem using your ingenious methods and theories, and don't come running back if you get shot in the ass.

Sometimes when I read about what's going on in Iraq, I think we who are free in the West should fall to our hands and knees and thank whoever we believe in for the life we have. Also the soldiers that have paid with their blood so we can live safely.

Some Islamic Love for Happy George

Of course, treasonous George deserves a bit of egging, and not least of all for his open, fawning support of Saddam Insane, and all things violently Islamic. So I guess what happened last night probably came as a bit of a surprise to the poor chap.

That said, even he should be getting the message by now. . .

Hate mob attacks Galloway

Anti-war campaigner Mr Galloway was forced to take refuge from Islamic militants who denounced him as a "false prophet".

The former Labour MP said "the police saved my life" after supporters of radical group Hizb-Ut-Tahrir clashed with members of his Respect party last night.

Mr Galloway was electioneering on the Osier council estate in Bethnal Green last night when a gang of 30 Muslim fundamentalists, who claim voting is un-Islamic, surrounded him and his supporters.

The men said they were angry at Mr Galloway's attempt to woo Muslim voters. They said they were "setting up the gallows" for him and warned any Muslim who voted for his anti-war Respect party that they faced a "sentence of death".

"I was meeting people who live in the flats. Hizb-ut-Tahrir suddenly filled the room and blocked the door. I tried speaking calmly. They then said I was parading as a false prophet and served a sentence of death on me. They were claiming I was representing myself as a false deity and for this apostasy I would be sentenced to the gallows," he said.

"Thank God my daughter was not with me. She was in the car outside. Otherwise there would have been nobody to call the police. The police saved my life."

Last night's incident came hours after another group of Muslim men disrupted a general election media meeting of the Muslim Council of Britain. A group thought to be followers of cleric Omar Bakri Mohammed attacked the Council, claiming no one should vote in the election.

Seems to be a bit of a pattern forming here, wouldn’t you say?

This is not the expression of a religion. And we've seen violence like this at work before. Then, however, they tended to wear brown shirts and speak German. Unfortunately, it seems it’s going to take an awful lot for people to start working this out. I just hope not too many more have to die before the penny finally drops.