My colour laser printer won't start. I need a Dell technician. Apparently the local printer doctors can't get Dell parts.
First, I try a number in the phonebook and get a phonebot that demands a 7-digit extension (!) and which hangs up when I go for the "hit zero repeatedly" trick, or enter seven digits randomly, hoping for a score.
Then I spend literally hours talking with several clueless Dell call-centre folks about the problem.
The first keeps running away for five minutes or so, then returning to thank me for my patience. It appears I am out-of-warranty. I'll have to pay for the servicing. No problem.
She wants to "troubleshoot." I say, "That's easy. Won't start."
"Did you try another outlet?" (Good grief.) "Yup."
All I want is the name and telephone number of a Dell technician in Ottawa. Sorry, that's confidential. But one will be telephoning within 24 hours.
Uh-huh. I find that a little iffy, so I try another Dell Canada number that I'd stored. I repeat my request: name and number of an Ottawa technician. After being confused for five minutes or so, the call-centre person gives me a number to call. It's the one by which I have just reached her.
I hang up. A few minutes later, one of them calls back, wanting to give me a "dispatch number." What for? I ask. Silence, and more confusion. She wants to give me a part number too, and I ask how the heck she could possibly know what part was needed. She gives me yet another Dell Canada number to call.
I call it--the "out-of-warranty service department"--and repeat my question. The person is utterly helpless in the face of my request for a local technician's coordinates. He passes me on to someone else, who suggests that I telephone the "out-of-warranty service department."
He then connects me back--with a person who tells me that this information is not available.
Then this new gentleman informs me that he is with the ink-jet service department, not the laser service department. This is nearly at the two-hour point.
I give it one last try. I am disconnected, try again, and somehow get connected to a laptop person, who--after considerable back-and-forth about sending my printer to Newmarket, Ontario, and like that--says he'll connect me to an on-line technician. Hey, the morning's shot anyway, so why not?
I spend a happy few minutes listening to various useless recorded messages from Dell, and then a fellow comes on who says he can send me out a technician, if I'm still within warranty. I say that I thought I was calling the out-of-warranty service department.
"Oh, I see. May I have your service tag please?" He wants to give me yet another number to call, but then he says he can send out a technician all by himself. One will be contacting me within 24 hours. (See above.) He asks a lot of questions, and then we are disconnected.
We're now at the 2.25 hour mark. Easy as Dell.
Will the phone ring? Your guess is as good as mine.
We shall be returning to regular programming shortly. Just let me calm down a little.
Manuel Zelaya, the elected President of Honduras recently toppled in a coup, has returned to the capital of his country.
From the vantage-point of the Brazilian Embassy in Tegucigalpa, he's calling for dialogue. The Organization of American States and the United Nations are sending representatives.
Thousands of jubilant supporters are dancing outside the Embassy at this very moment, ignoring a curfew and shouting "Yes we could!" Heh.
Politics in Latin America is never dull. Stay tuned.
Ahoy, mates! That scurvy swab Jay Currie reminds us, like, that this day be Talk Like A Pirate Day. And I be robbin' him of his links, and if he don't like it, I'll cut him to bits and feed his liver and lights to the gulls, so I will.
Yer slaverin's must conform to the spirit o' the Jolly Roger or they'll be ripped out like the still-quiverin' heart of a star-crossed landlubber, like we did for this poxy knave.(Aye, even now it's roastin' on a stick while he burns in the greasy flames of Hell, along with that bilge-sucking Newton blaggard.)
Time for a healthy dose of Realpolitik--the same fodder that the Afghanisnam hawks have been shoveling down our throats since our "mission" began.
I won't apologize for the scare-quotes, either. It's been sold like those old-time missions, all righteousness and hallelujah and pie in the sky. The missionary zeal at The Torch, and at Terry Glavin's School for Cheerleaders, has been something to behold.
Our troops were told to ignore it, as reported more than a year ago. I blogged about this back then, and noted that Rick Hillier, in charge at the time, had stated that Canadian troops were not to stand idly by and let these atrocities happen.
A military Board of Inquiry was convened--it's still under way--to examine a single incident reported in the media. A tortuous article appeared at a Canadian milblogger site, explaining that this is an Afghan thing that re-emerged after the Taliban put a stop to it, and that charges of Canadian complicity in it were new, very serious, and thank goodness the Board of Inquiry had been called.
Meanwhile (and I can find no mention of this at The Torch) the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service had a looky-see and concluded that all charges of complicity were unfounded:
The newly released records raise questions about a military investigation that earlier this year concluded that allegations about sexual abuse of Afghan children by members of the Afghan army and police were unfounded. The Canadian Forces National Investigation Service also stated that its thorough investigation concluded allegations of such incidents were never reported to Canadian military commanders.
Lies, all lies. And then this unmitigated crap:
Having sex with children is against the law in Afghanistan, but some military officers have argued that since it is practised by some Afghans, particularly in Kandahar, then the Canadian Forces should not get involved in what should be seen as a “cultural” issue.
This just takes my breath away. For how long have the anthropological illiterates on the right side of the aisle been accusing progressives of "cultural relativism," not having a clue what the term means, but evidently confusing it with moral relativism? And what are we to make of the fact that child rape is a crime in Afghanistan, always has been? Is that "cultural" enough?
(Not to get sidetracked, but people who talk about "culture" should do some serious reading and thinking to avoid uttering such claptrap. Is NAMBLA "cultural?" What about US anti-pedophile laws? Are they "cultural" too? Who are the culture-bearers? Are alleged "cultural traits" decided by majority vote? Good grief, where to start. Anyway, moving right along...)
Lies and more lies:
Maj. Francis Bolduc, deputy commanding officer of the Canadian Forces National Investigation Service, said his organization’s examination of the issue found no evidence to support the sexual abuse allegations.
He said a thorough review of military police records showed no complaints were made about the issue and “all the allegations were unfounded.” Bolduc noted that the investigation found the sexual abuse concerns were never reported to commanders.
And even more lies, from the Conservative politicians running the show:
Last June, Defence Minister Peter MacKay told the House of Commons that troops would not turn a blind eye to the abuse of children. “Let us be clear, in no way, shape or form have Canadian soldiers and certainly the Canadian government ever condoned or excused allegations of sexual abuse against children in this country or anywhere else,” he said.
As it turns out, DND brass were in the know when the story first broke last year. First they thought of outright denial. Then they crafted some talking points to get themselves off the hook. Then came a bogus NIS investigation and a narrowly-mandated military Board of Inquiry that is dragging on to this day. And no doubt Man-love Thursdays are still destroying the lives of Afghan kids, right under our noses.
In the span of about one year, the 15-year-old, named Sitara, has been yanked out of school, off a path that hinted at promise, and sold by her father for 700,000 Afghanis (about $15,000) into a marriage that, already, she has “nothing left for.”
Read the whole thing and weep--not just for the women, some of whom by now even long for the return of the Taliban, but for our soldiers, dying in a pointless cause.
Realpolitik? Get out now and cut our losses on every front: military, social, political. The war is useless, unwinnable, fueled by ideology and wild hopes and cockeyed optimism.
The cheerleaders are still cheering, but the cheers seem a tad muted these days. And from beyond the grave, here's a healthy dose of realism.How many more such voices of the dead will we have to endure?
In a fit of evening enthusiasm, Jay Currie has sprung to the defence of his pal Arnie Lemaire, aka Blazing Cat Fur, aka Mr. Kathy Shaidle, after my last post. His increasingly heated repartee in the comment thread here included the accusation that I had libeled BCF by permitting a defamatory phrase to be published--one that he cheerfully reproduced himself, however, making him as vicariously liable as I.
To his credit, Blazing Cat Fur has as yet shown no stirrings of litigiousness, contenting himself with his usual low-level baiting from the safety of his lair. But Currie took it upon himself nevertheless to ride in on his white horse to rescue what he imagined was a pussy in distress.
That got me thinking again about the rough-and-tumble nature of the blogosphere, which, over time, has gradually schooled me into raising my personal bar when it comes to freedom of expression. I posted upon that at length some time ago, and won't repeat myself here. Suffice it to say that when I am offended, I am usually content these days to ignore it or to offend right back. I believe deeply in civility, and generally insist upon it at my place, but being uncivil to the uncivil has sometimes proven a temptation too great to be resisted.
But it is ironic that Jay now apparently wants to lower the bar once again, although this isn't unexpected. The Speech Warriors™ have their obvious agenda, but setting that aside, they pretty much believe that anything goes--until, that is, their own ox is gored. Then there aren't enough fainting-couches to hold the lot of 'em, or enough pearls to clutch.
I have myself been called a "terrorist supporter," a "traitor," a "Nazi," a "shill for Hezbollah," and endless variations of "anti-Semite," in one instance by Jay himself, although he quickly apologized. (I'm not going to provide links unless readers sincerely doubt me on this.) That sort of thing is fairly typical of the conservative style of badinage, in fact, and is arguably far more defamatory than the comment I excised. Maybe they just don't listen to themselves. In any case, I've grown used to it.
If we are all to accept the new standard that Jay seems to be advocating, however, then I would suggest that he's digging a fairly deep hole for himself and for a lot of his buddies. Let's charitably assume, then, that he wasn't being entirely serious.
On the main issue, however--Arnie's political likes and dislikes--Jay seems serious enough. As noted in the earlier post, words that appeared to be Arnie's were in fact Ezra Levant's. This was an Aha! moment for Jay, but for the life of me I can't see why. Quoting someone else's hateful words approvingly is an equally hateful act. Is Canada a "Gentile homeland?" Doesn't that expression have a vague, sour whiff of Blut und Boden about it?
Can't be, is the triumphant response. Why, Ezra Levant is Jewish. (This doesn't seem to work when I quote Norman Finkelstein, for some reason, but never mind.) And that brings me to something I've been wanting to say for some time, with which I'll conclude.
My main objection to Levant, apart from his logorrheic style and his deliberately misleading summaries of human rights cases, is his frenzied attempts to be edgy. There's something almost self-destructive about the way he carries on, and it's gotten him into a heap of trouble over the years, but that doesn't faze him one bit. And part of his shtick is to use terminology that, in the mouths of anyone not Jewish, would be denounced (and rightly so) as anti-Semitic.
Now, the last thing I'd call Ezra is a self-hater. He is, rather, a provocateur who enjoys peeing on other people's carpets. Whatever his beef is with the Canadian Jewish Congress--and it seems to be a longstanding one--he is never content simply to pose his arguments. His screeds are invariably bedecked with gratuitously offensive terms, like "official Jews," or "Jewville." Bernie Farber isn't exactly my best friend either, but the invective that has been flung his way by Ezra is beyond indecent.
If that were confined to some heated discussions within the Jewish community--and such discussions are not unknown there--that would be one thing. But Ezra has attracted a following, who mindlessly lap this stuff up. They now feel quite at liberty to use the same sort of vocabulary, which objectively speaking is classically anti-Semitic, because of the enormous alibi with which Levant provides them.
Does that mean that all of his acolytes are anti-Semites? Obviously not. But by effectively giving licence to use hateful terminology, Levant has contributed to its currency. And who, watching from the shadows, is benefiting from that?
For years [Charles] Johnson [of Little Green Footballs] was steadfast against Jihadism. And a hero to the right-wing. But he is an honourable man and he refuses to tolerate racists, neo-Nazis or conspiracy-mongers. Now that the radical right have launched their crusade against Obama and Johnson has refused to follow, they are mightily miffed. Here’s what one commenter reminded them:
Charles has done more for the cause of freedom and Conservatism than any one else on the blogosphere. Again, I don’t mind you having disagreements with him. It’s your business not mine but putting his blog name next to those terrorists in that category is shameful and an insult to anyone’s intelligence.
Speech Warrior™ Arnie Lemaire [better known as Mr. Kathy Shaidle, or "Blazing Cat Fur"]:
Yes Hal pity he has degenerated to such an extent.
[Emphases mine: no other comment necessary. --DD]
UPDATE: (September 17) Kateland has just brought this to my attention. Good grief, when his mask slips, it sure keeps slipping.
"It is time," says Arnie, "for the CJC to show the same tolerance for Christianity that has been shown for Jewish prayer by our Gentile homeland."
Some time ago blogger "shlemazl" posted a little piece asking rhetorically what the difference is between the neo-Nazis and myself. But I have a real, if similar question. What's the difference between the statement just quoted and something you can find any day of the week on Stormfront?
UPPERDATE: Just as well I took a screenshot. Arnie has now put in italics the words from Ezra Levant that it turns out he was quoting. And he fixed a dysfunctional link at "Gentile homeland" to the putrid article by Ezra, whose faux-Judenhass vocabulary ("No Joy in Jewville," "Official Jews," etc.) has provided a fine on-going alibi for genuine anti-Semites.
Adbusters is suing the CBC and Global for refusing to carry their anti-consumerist ads back in 2004. They've been battling their way through the courts just to win the right to bring suit ever since. The Supreme Court of Canada has now brushed aside technical challenges by Global, and ruled that Adbusters may bring its case to the lower courts.
There is a good article about Adbusters here, a critique from Alberta here, and a page of spoof ads here. [H/t forgottobuytinfoil, b/c]
Michael Ignatieff has just announced that the Liberals will not stand in the way of the Conservatives' EI reform bill, introduced in the House of Commons yesterday.He must have seen this. Given that even speedy passage will take us well into October or even later, might the government Ways and Means motion tomorrow pass unopposed?
Addendum: let's play a little juxtaposition. Note Iggy's criticism--only a few hours old--of the BQ and the NDP for supporting the EI legislation.
"President (Alvaro) Uribe has made MASSIVE progress," Brison said of the Colombian leader. "His administration has made a hugely positive difference in the lives of Colombians. [all-caps in-joke added]
"We can ignore them. We can isolate Colombia on ideological grounds. But that would be an extremely irresponsible position."
[F]requent extrajudicial killings of civilians attributed to the Colombian Army, which the United Nations special rapporteur on extrajudicial executions recently described as "systematic." The Attorney General's Office is reported to be investigating cases involving more than 1,700 alleged victims in recent years. Uribe refuses to acknowledge the magnitude of the problem.
Ongoing anti-union violence, with the offenders rarely brought to justice. Colombia has the highest rate of killings of trade union members and leaders in the world. More than 2,700 are reported to have been killed since 1986, according to data collected by the National Labor School (Escuela Nacional Sindical or ENS). The ENS recorded 49 such killings in 2008, up from 39 in 2007. It recorded 20 of these killings this year as of mid-June. Ninety-six percent of the killings remain unsolved.
The increased activity of new armed groups linked to paramilitaries, despite their supposed demobilization. The new groups operate in a similar fashion as the old paramilitaries, engaging in threats, targeted killings, and forced displacement of civilians.
Partly as a result, there has been a recent rise in certain abuses, including forced displacement. Last year, more than 380,000 persons were internally displaced. Violence in the city of Medellin has also shot up, largely due to the activities of new groups.
This video is a little dated (2007), but in light of the week's events, germane. Someone should do a Librocon edition.
Freedom of expression ends, I would have thought, where someone else's epidermis begins. But I might be wrong. It seems there's a whole new meaning to the phrase "poster child." If this punk wins, in any case, I have my felt-tip marker ready, slogans prepared, and conservative skins (pun intended) very much in mind.
Swamp creatures, look out!
There are Nazis all over Canada??!!
News to me. Quick, Dawg, grab your gun and join me in fighting them today. You and I will fight the Nazi menace the only way that works: through physical force. In 48 hours, I can get a dozen people with guns, who each know another dozen people with guns, who will happily do an Inglorious [sic] Basterds on their asses.
I’m (deadly) serious.
Are you…?
Oh wait: you don’t believe in private gun ownership, which leaves you pretty dickless in this fight.
Unless there’s no need to have such a fight.
Because you and I both know you’re just talking smack about “Nazis all over Canada.”
You can’t have it both ways. If they’re real, let’s get ‘em. They’ve got to be destroyed. I’m ready. Call me. I’m in the phone book.
But they aren’t real. This fake Nazi menace is as real as those “mass graves” you keep looking for, and “fire doesn’t melt steel”, and Lee Harvey Oswald wasn’t a communist, and that “DDT kills babies” shit and all the other self-aggrandizing BS you people have been foisting on us for the last century.
You’re just a moral exhibitionist with way too much time on his hands.
All that said: the minute you get in HRC shit, I, like Jay, will be there to help you out too.
Gee, we seem to be doing all the heavy lifting on our side, huh?
That would be the Half-Pint of Bitters, blowing smoke, as usual. It's all there: her trade-mark inaccuracies--who says I oppose private gun ownership?--her gaseous huffing and puffing, and what passes in her circles for wit (but on that, admittedly, they're half right). She obviously doesn't read the papers, either.
As it happens, I know who the players in this case are, but there's a court order in place so I can't provide names. But to help her out, I did provide several links to prove what she knew anyway, and challenged her to lock and load.
Instead, she turned tail and fled, which is what her sort do when facts rain down upon them.
Then Kate McMillan picked this up, and her anvil chorus of moronic commenters duly responded.
Well, fair warning, y'all. Mess with me and you'll be wearing it. My felt-tip pen, as noted, is loaded and uncapped, and my hand is steady. Power to the people! Peace now!
Red Librocon trade critic and moral imbecile Scott Brison, defending the killing machine that is the Colombian government:
If we isolate Colombia in the Andean region and leave Colombia exposed and vulnerable to the ideological attacks of Chavez's Venezuela, we will be allowing evil to flourish.
Better to lend credence and support to a regime that cheerfully kills off troublesome trade unionists, Indians and peasants who might otherwise be exposed to those "ideological attacks." Wouldn't want evil to flourish, after all. [H/t Alison. Read her post.]
And a scathing account it is: In one case, armored bulldozers of the Israeli forces systematically flattened the chicken coops of a farm that reportedly supplied 10 percent of the Gazan egg market, killing all 31,000 chickens inside. In another, the forces carried out a strike on a sewage plant wall, sending 200,000 cubic meters of raw sewage into neighboring farmland, the report said. The panel did not find a justifiable reason for the Israelis’ actions in either case....
Israeli forces twice shelled civilian hospitals in Gaza, but in neither case was the attack justified, the report found. In the attack on Al Quds Hospital, the shelling of the building and an adjacent ambulance facility with white phosphorus shells caused fires that took a day to extinguish, and at no point was any warning given of an imminent strike, the report said. The panel found no evidence of the enemy fire that the Israeli military cited as rationale for its attack....
Another event that the panel judged equivalent to a war crime took place in the Samouni neighborhood in Gaza City, when Israel soldiers shelled a house where soldiers had forced Palestinian civilians to gather. In seven cases, the report found, “civilians were shot while they were trying to leave their homes to walk to a safer place, waving white flags and in some cases, following an injunction from the Israeli forces to do so.”
As for the Palestinians:
Palestinian armed groups, the group found, fired repeated rockets and mortars into southern Israel. By failing to distinguish between military targets and the civilian population, those actions also “constitute war crimes and may amount to crimes against humanity,” the report said.
Responding to Israeli allegations that Palestinian fighters used civilians as human shields, the panel found that Palestinian armed groups did launch rockets from urban areas in Gaza, and that Palestinian armed groups “were not always dressed in a way that distinguished them from civilians.”
However, the mission found no evidence that Palestinian combatants “mingled with the civilian population with the intention of shielding themselves from attack,” the report said, nor did it find evidence to suggest that Palestinian armed groups “either directed civilians to areas where attacks were being launched or forced civilians to remain within the vicinity of the attacks.”
How do you get out of the bind that people think you're in?
I've been giving this some thought, ever since Michael Ignatieff, if perhaps inadvertently, put our party in a classic squeeze play. All partisanship aside, what's happening now is an interesting political moment, one in which mere tactics threaten to trump strategy, not to mention ideology. But that can't be permitted. We're better than that.
I meant what I said in an earlier post about backing off. This is an internal battle within the Librocon party, and the NDP should not get involved. Whether the blue-sweater guy or the American becomes the next Prime Minister, the show will go on as before: no major shifts in either foreign or domestic policy, corporate and US interests duly served, windy and pointless speeches, minor or sometimes major scandals, and the comfy pundits giving us their colour commentary on conflicting wardrobes and personalities.
But what does "back off" mean?
Simple. Abstain from the confidence vote.
Back neither horse. This wouldn't be a refusal to take sides, because the Harper-Ignatieff team is only one side. The current internal tiff will result at best in a changing of the guard at some point. The other side--the people's side, if I may--is where our party has always been. The NDP raises issues that the Librocons never want to address: poverty, inequity, the plight of Native people on reserves, the environment, human rights at home and abroad. We've always stood up for working Canadians, and against the corporate machine that chews them up and spits them out.
Stay out of this, Jack. Abstain. And, when an election does take place, tell the voters why.
No, you can't prop up a government that you have rightly excoriated since it came to power. Everything you've said about them is true. A few EI goodies? Come on. EI was never a serious election issue, despite the best efforts of the Red Librocons, and they soon dropped it. EI reform resonates only with the unemployed. Most Canadians would like to keep the jobs they have, or, if just entering the job market, find one.
EI would be a poor, shabby excuse to sup with the devil. It's not nearly a long enough spoon. You'll be consumed by the flames. Your supporters will feel utterly betrayed, I promise you. Overnight the NDP will have become just another party--a Blue Librocon satellite.
But you can't vote with the Red Librocons either. Iggy got himself into this mess. Don't shore up his folly. Let him fight this battle on his own. Let him explain to the electorate why he wanted to force an election with no defining issue, and just as the economy is picking up. Let him attempt to make his distinction without a difference between his faction and the Blue Librocons.
In the meantime, put out our issues. Stand up for them as you always have. Define alternatives. Tell the truth.
The voters will not reward you with power in the next election. They're jaded, and more and more are staying away from the polls. The electoral system ensures that even many who do cast ballots will waste them. They're sleepwalkers, inhabiting a system guided only by its own inertia.
But, even in their slumber, they will remember.
Take the long view. Avoid this elementary trap, and stay true to our founding principles. The nearly one in five Canadians who voted for our party in the last election will be reassured. But of far more importance, you'll have demonstrated to all electors that we stand apart from the smoke-and-mirrors of current political culture. Because we offer something more than the comic-opera staged combats that currently mesmerize them.
There's an opportunity here, Jack. Don't pass it by.
Second reading of Bill C-23--the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement--is likely to be a slam-dunk. The red wing of the Librocon Party has pledged to support its referral to committee.
Here is what red Librocon Bob Rae tells us:
Dear --
Thank you for your message about the House of Commons debate on the ratification of the Canada-Colombia free trade agreement, with its side agreements on labour and the environment, together with an understanding on investment and taxation.
If there is no election, as a result of a decision by either the Bloc or the NDP to support the Harper government, it is indeed likely that this bill will go to committee, where there will be substantial discussions on the impact of the treaty. The Liberal Party will be supportive of the bill proceeding to committee, but further support will depend on satisfactory answers to our questions and concerns.
Bob recently had the opportunity to travel to Colombia, and met with business and trade union leaders, as well as leaders of non-governmental organizations and of course the Colombian government itself. Though better informed about the situation, Bob remains determined to listen and learn during the debate.
Unlike other parties, Bob is not ideologically opposed to all trade agreements which provide for freer and more open trade. Bob of course remains deeply committed to human rights and development, and is eager to hear competing views about the agreement.
Once again thank you again for writing to Bob with your concerns.
Yours Sincerely,
Christopher Leslie
Parliamentary Assisstant [sic]
Office of the Hon. Bob Rae
613-992-5234
raeb@parl.gc.ca
Bob wants to hear the debate, does he? This former supporter of organized labour, who sat just a few feet from me asking for support when I was a member of the Ontario Federation of Labour executive board, will now be voting in effect to support the targeted killings of union members in Colombia.
On his travels, Bob must have learned that, of all labour union assassinations in the world, Colombia carries out 70% of them through state-supported paramilitaries. He must know--because the USW and other unions will have informed him--that 2,700 such assassinations have been carried out over the last twenty years: 27 so far this year. Along, inevitably, with 77 indigenous people, who have been displaced in huge numbers as their land becomes attractive to state-supported developers.
"Our members met with opposition parties in May and introduced them to a young human rights lawyer, Yessika Hoyos Morales, whose own father was one of the trade union leaders murdered," said [Ken} Neumann [National Director of USW]. The NDP and Bloc pledge support for her. "Her experience alone should be enough to move Liberals to doubt the wisdom of rewarding a regime that has not proven that it can, or even wants, to control its paramilitaries."
Neumann said the only right thing to do is to uphold a critical recommendation made by the Trade Committee, which calls for an independent, impartial and comprehensive human rights impact assessment before any consideration of free trade with Colombia.
"The parliamentary committee's recommendation has yet to be followed, while human rights continue to decline in Colombia," Neumann said.
Colombian trade unions, whose members are being slaughtered, have not been silent:
A declaration by the General Labor Confederation (CGT), the Confederation of Colombian Workers (CTC) and the Unified Central of Labor Unions (CUT) says the only beneficiaries of the agreement will be "big monopolies such as Colombia Goldfields Ltd., B2Gold, Coldcorp Mining Inc. and the Frontier Pacific Mining Corporation." Neither Canadian nor Colombian citizens will benefit.
"The political, economic, social, cultural, ethical and environmental impacts will be catastrophic for a country like Colombia," the Colombian groups say.
I'm proud to report that my own union, the PSAC, has joined with other public service unions to demand that this deal with the rogue Uribe government be put on hold until an comprehensive human rights investigation of Colombia has been carried out.
But to the Librocons, none of this matters a damn. Corporate profit trumps the lives of workers and indigenous communities every time. No word as yet from former human rights advocate Michael Ignatieff, but it seems likely that he and his caucus will shortly vote to support the perpetrators of genocide and assassination.
After all, our American overlords are propping up Uribe's genocidal regime with a further $32 million approved this past Friday, bringing to $545 million the total going to Colombia this fiscal year.
NDP critic Peter Julian has a few words to say about this murderous array of forces against the poor of Colombia:
This summer, Liberal trade critic Scott Brison and foreign affairs critic Bob Rae travelled to Colombia, where they say they were convinced that sufficient progress on human rights is being made to warrant going ahead with the deal.
"They simply didn't meet with trade unionists," said NDP trade critic Peter Julien in a Parliament Hill interview. "When I went to Colombia, the government had a very carefully prepared plan - fake union leader, people who had been bought out, all cleared by the government... The message we got from real trade unionists was very clearly against the agreement... The human rights concerns are even greater now than they were two years ago."
Julien says Brison's claim that human rights groups have endorsed the deal is false. "Every reputable human rights organization on the planet has spoken out against this agreement," Julien told Straight Goods News. "Human rights organizations oppose this agreement. Labour activists oppose this agreement, and the people who speak out there are speaking out at great risk to their personal safety. So I am appalled at how irresponsible the Liberals have been. Bob Rae and Scott Brison are right wingers trying to pretend they've done their due diligence."
Indeed. Make no mistake: the red wing of the Librocons will be voting for murder--and lying through their teeth about it as they do so.
[H/t Alison, b/c]
UPDATE: The wretches went ahead. Commenter Alison:
F*cking Libs f*cking passed it.
"Liberal trade critic Scott Brison stressed that the bill to legislate the Colombian trade pact is still to be scrutinized by the Commons trade committee."
where the LibroCons hold a majority
"It will hear from witnesses on any human rights implications - pro and con, he said"
having apparently already forgotten that Colombia Senator Robeldo told the International Trade Committee on March 26 this year that labour rights have indeed worsened this year and that signing the CanCol FTA will effectively "absolve, pardon, and reward" Uribe for his support of human rights abuses and will also condemn Colombia to even lower labour standards than they already have in order to compete with influx of subsidized Canadian foodstuffs, resulting in local farmers being unable to compete and losing their land. Shorter Red Librocons: "What's a few dead Colombians? They don't vote and they don't make party donations." UPPERDATE: And a lot more from Alison at her place. The sheer murderous cynicism of the Librocons has to be read to be believed. It was never about free trade: it was all about protecting Canadian mining companies.
For three years, the merry little jigger on the right has been able to count on many supporters to keep him from falling, as the photo indicates. (The capering fellow to the left replaced another little person who got Shifted.) Their dances are sprightly and sharp and cool, but one move says it all. Jump Back Jack @1:08:
Look, whether it's one little man or the other, the same party wins. Don't make strategic alliances with Librocons. You always get tricked. You never get their pot of gold. It's like trying to kick the football when someone named Lucy is holding it in place.
Jack, you don't have the moves to keep up with these guys, but they're a just product of the imagination--aren't they? You stand for real issues, and speak up for real people--you always have. If the capering fellow on the left decides to let go of his dance partner, let him wear it. Don't rush forward to help. They'll both just disappear in a puff of smoke--and so will you.
Let the two of them have it out. It's not your fight. Just keep standing up for what decent Canadians believe in.
The voters are tired of their empty promises. They never get near that pot of gold either. And by now they're sick of all the fiddles and jigs.
If the wee man on the right falls, go to the polls with a clear conscience, Jack, beholden to no one. Just tell the truth, and have no truck with these midnight doings.
