A blog about news and politics by Steve Janke

August 31, 2007

The vague and redundant Ministry of Health Promotion

The Ministry of Health Promotion is one of those ministries that doesn't seem to do anything unique. Everything it does was either done by another ministry in the past, or worse, is currently being done by another ministry simultaneously.

So I have to say that it looks like this Ontario ministry, with its vague mandate and its generous year-end handouts, seem to be more about promoting the electoral health of Premier Dalton McGuinty.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 12:46 PM | Comments (11) | Add Comment
Post contains 1226 words, total size 10 kb.

1 The Ministry of Health Promotion sounded like a joke when it was first announced. It's a great example of government waste and it seems like is was created as an excuse to give Jim Watson something to do.

Posted by: jonny_eh at August 31, 2007 01:23 PM (ZQ7AG)

2 What I have a problem with is the threat of "elect us, or else" Geeeeeeee whiz Mr. McGuinty. If you weren't so against guns, I'd swear you'd be tempted to hold one on the people of Ontario on Oct 11. The old hardline "Leftist" playbook has evolved...not changed much, just evolved.

Posted by: at August 31, 2007 01:41 PM (m8+ac)

3 This is the first election where I do not know who to vote for. The Liberals are typical in that they are wasteful and arrogant. But John Tory wants to fund all religious schools, which will result in me funding fundamentalism. Is there a libertarian party running?

Posted by: jonny_eh at August 31, 2007 02:47 PM (ZQ7AG)

4 Who says Jim Watson has nothing to do? This year's Toronto International Film Festival will hopefully be the setting for "Sean Penn V. Jim Watson II: Butt Out or Get Out!!" Janke - keep on keepin' on. Seemingly every day you're coming up with new and better dirt on the Liberals - love it.

Posted by: alan at August 31, 2007 03:24 PM (2bEDO)

5 Who says Jim Watson has nothing to do? This year's Toronto International Film Festival will hopefully be the setting for "Sean Penn V. Jim Watson II: Butt Out or Get Out!!" Janke - keep on keepin' on. Seemingly every day you're coming up with new and better dirt on the Liberals - love it.

Posted by: at August 31, 2007 03:25 PM (2bEDO)

6 To-day in the mail I got a nice glossy piece of cardboard telling me I can call a dietitian today for 'free' to learn how to eat healthy!!! It states "with my busy life, how can I eat healthy? Can what I eat help control diabetes? What can I feed my picky eater?"This makes me really angry. We are treated like idiots when a government tells us that only they can help us 'eat right'! Yes, the Liberal government of Ontario 'paid' for this piece of glossy cardboard! It says so right at the bottom of the card! No mention that it is taxpayers money that went to the idiots that produced this. No mention that they also paid someone to find the names of everyone in Ontario to send this out! Yes, it has my name and street address(rather than the post-office box that is my address. I notice there was not mention that we could get free meals like the provincial politicians can. No mention that there is a raise in my future through lower taxes. Just that Big Brother knows how I should eat and they use my money to shove this down my throat. Is this what the new ministry is doing for us?????

Posted by: George at August 31, 2007 04:22 PM (4xrBZ)

7 Every day there's another reason NOT to vote for McGuinty Liberals. As far as Jimmy Watson goes, Dalty has a hard time fitting him into cabinet so he creates portfolios for him. Let's say Watson seems to be a spare tool.

Posted by: Libby at August 31, 2007 05:26 PM (VVSSJ)

8 Every day more reasons not to vote for McGuinty and the gang. Jimmy Watson has been a spare tool from day one. Dalty has had to create portfolios for him, he doesn't fit into the traditional ones apparently. When new portfolios are created we pay the extra bucks for stuff we could damned well live without. Not sure how that should be phrased, spare tool/ useless tool?

Posted by: Libby at August 31, 2007 05:46 PM (VVSSJ)

9 OOps, sorry 'bout the double post. Error bugger again.

Posted by: Libby at August 31, 2007 05:49 PM (VVSSJ)

10 Of course its vague and redundant and its done all the time and never for altruistic reasons. The Min of Health made a total mess of its handling of funding for gambling addictions (source of funding is gov't cut of Ontario's 'charity' casino revenues). Basically, MOH addictions branch spent a lot of money on bureaucracy and not on programming (cuz if they actually solved the problem, their casino revenues might disappear!) That rather lucrative envelope moved over to the new MOHP as one of those healthy living things they 'promote'...just not sure if they are promoting gambling, Oct election, jobs for the boys...

Posted by: at September 02, 2007 12:55 PM (Zwcw7)

11 Maybe Dalty should create a Ministry of Sundries & Redundancies, Jimmy Watson would be a shoo-in for the post.

Posted by: Libby at September 05, 2007 08:00 AM (gZnTs)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

The twisted revolver at No Gun No Funeral

I am intrigued by the imagery used by the No Gun No Funeral website. It seems completely at odds with what Attorney General Michael Bryant's group wants to accomplish.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 10:54 AM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 791 words, total size 6 kb.

1 ...what a lot of gun owners insist needs to be done, and that is to increase the capacity of Canadian border control officers to stop American guns, purchased easily and legally in the United States, from crossing the border into Canada,... Or, we could really go way out there into fringe territory and actually punish people who commit murders. As long as I'm suggesting something so radical, I'll go one further and suggest punishing people who kill with knives and axes and cars and pool balls wrapped in a sock and even with their bare hands. The last time I checked, their victims wind up just as dead and (contrary to what that idiot Miller hinted at recently) their families grieve every bit as much. Perhaps if murdering someone would result in a very long -possibly permanent- stay in a prison, and if said prison was made into a very unpleasant and boring place to be, people might actually think twice about killing someone. Nawww...

Posted by: up north at August 31, 2007 12:44 PM (zhCff)

2 Put a hand reaching into the guy's pocket in the last picture and it would be more appropriate....

Posted by: at August 31, 2007 01:07 PM (m8+ac)

3 "A significant amount of that weapons smuggling happens on First Nations reserves spanning the Canada-US border, so there is another headache to consider." There is no way that the Ontario Sloganator-General would ever consider cracking down on that source. He would be crucified by the socialist media for "racial profiling" and any such action would result in more "peaceful demonstrations" such as the one in Caledonia now in its second year, where hopefully the protesters won't run out of new houses to harvest for their firewood before the government pays them off.

Posted by: JL at August 31, 2007 01:27 PM (X4u4p)

4 "It certainly sounds a lot easier just to target ordinary Canadians who have followed the law and registered their guns and are known to the police already, right down to where they live. These people have no power and no resources, and so are easy pickings." I believe this is referred to as the "low hanging fruit" method of law enforcement. Our fine Immigration officials are also fond of the method. After all, gotta be home by five.

Posted by: Marc at August 31, 2007 02:24 PM (+9+aa)

5 Excellent commentary. Killing someone is against the law so why is it important which object is used to commit an illegal act??? All the blame is being put on an inanimate object. This allows the governments to make more laws to restrict the movements of legal citizens. I believe that is the main aim of the gun hysteria displayed by politicians. They never mention that the Injustice System and political incompetence has led to so many criminals on the street. How many years ago did the federal Liberal 'Justice' Minister state that it was more important to focus an rehab for criminals than it was to protect the citizen. I am sorry, his name escapes me for the moment, but his words are burned into my memory for all time. As for finding the homes of gun owners. Has anyone checked how many computers have been sold by the registry? We know the government has a bad record for erasing info. Or just check the garbage behind the registry--they also have a bad habit of throwing information out. Then again there is probably big bucks to be made selling this info. And it is useless to have cars checked at the border. After the latest ruling that requires the border officials to have a court order before searching cars(the drug dealer bringing in cocaine from the US) came down it would be virtually impossible for cars etc. to be checked. Or maybe it is the panhandlers bringing them in on rail cars--after all, no one checks them as we found out after that murder in Toronto. Lets face it--we are wide open to criminal activity, and all any government wants to do is stomp on the innocent with more laws.

Posted by: George at August 31, 2007 03:31 PM (4xrBZ)

6 ...what a lot of gun owners insist needs to be done, and that is to increase the capacity of Canadian border control officers to stop American guns, purchased easily and legally in the United States, from crossing the border into Canada,... You mean, the way they've spent billions of dollars on the war on drugs, and completely shut down the smuggling of dope across the border? Unfortunately, Steve, you still love government. You hate the Liberals, but you cling to the idea that somewhere, somehow, if the right nannies are elected and if the right central planners come up with "sensible" government programs, that everything will be OK. But here's the thing: government nannies don't give a crap about you. Once you allow the anyone to claim a monopoly on anything, you leave yourself at the mercy of violent and dishonest people. Case in point: gun control weakens the ability of law abiding people to protect themselves. It puts them at the mercy of (a) criminal gangsters who don't give a damn about gun laws, and (b) government gangsters who have legislated to themselves a monopoly on the right to carry guns. Caledonia is a perfect example of the how both kinds of gangsters work together to deprive people of their property and freedom. The people in government are no more dishonest or greedy than anyone else - for example you could get robbed and abused by a private security company. But a private security company that abused its clients would quickly go out of business, because everyone would switch their patronage over to their competitors. But governments have no competitors. That's the definition of government. You could live perfectly well with no government at all. But if you insist that you still want some kind of nanny, and you don't want to live in a fascist police state, then fer god's sake stop trying to think of new ways to expand government and start thinking of ways to shrink it.

Posted by: at August 31, 2007 07:17 PM (tgNL5)

7 a few facts to demonstrate how much of this is opportunistic political spin and how much is crime control In Canada in 2003, there were 548 homicides, 161 resulted from shooting (29.3%). There were 302,000 Â“crimes of violenceÂ” and 5% of these crimes Â“involvedÂ” a firearm. This Â“involvedÂ” category is misleading, guns Â“involvedÂ” in crime are guns picked up by the police from a crime scene - say ones that were found in a closet. Guns are actually used in violent crime about 1.9% of the time. no gun = no funeralÂ” as a physical impossibility since 71% of homicides will not be affected Statistics Canada has reported that 2.27% of homicides in Canada were committed with a registered gun and only 1.21% were committed with a registered firearm that was owned by the accused (Statistics Canada study of 5,194 homicides between 1997 & 2005). A crackdown on the law abiding will accomplish what? In 2003, there were 161 gun homicides in Canada. Assuming that each shooting involved a separate gun we can calculate what percentage of Canadian guns were involved in these murders. If we take the official figure of seven million guns we get (161/7,000,000 = 0.000023 or .0023%). Only 23 ten thousandths of 1% of the Canadian gun stock was involved in a homicide. If we pursue our policy of regulating crime by strictly regulating gun availability to the general public we can reasonably expect that .0023% of our efforts will affect guns used in homicide and 99.997% of our effort will be wasted

Posted by: Bruce at August 31, 2007 07:32 PM (+fvpG)

8 * There are more people who believe in UFO's... than say the "Farmer Bob Rifle Registry" is reducing gun crime in Canada. *

Posted by: neo at August 31, 2007 08:08 PM (c86Sr)

9 * THE NUMBERS: Who's capping who? "Of Canada's two million licensed gun owners... 0.00555%... used their firearm to murder someone." "On the other hand, in 2005, 64% of accused murderers had a prior criminal record, including 6% for homicide." Yeah, that's what I thought. *

Posted by: neo at August 31, 2007 08:29 PM (c86Sr)

10 First, this forum and thread is much appreciated by us who know the government is on the wrong track with regard to firearms in this country. We spend years preaching to the converted and true believers and as expected nothing happens, except dorks like Bryant, Miller and McGuinty get all kinds of press. The reference to the Montreal cop who sold info to the mob is but one minor example of how compromised the security of the Canadian Firearms Centre is. A few month ago, in Ottawa the postal codes for many or all registered firearms owners were published. For months, then legitimate, law abiding citizns have been betrayed by the very people who are supposed to honour their privacy- then there are the 14 year olds who can hack the CFC system. So, you see, our system is like swiss cheese- full of holes where the crooks can access he databases and target anyone, anywhere, anytime. For the Ontario Liberals to use the weaknesses of their federal counterparts against those Canadian sheeple is ironic and just plain wrong.

Posted by: David P from campbell River at September 01, 2007 10:38 AM (0WQh0)

11 Liberals are large on sybolism and weak on subsatnce...they will spend billions on feegood symbolism but little to actually attack root cause of crime because this takes 2 things liberals haven't got....a work ethic amd commitment to resolving issues definitively. Of course Bryant touts the symbolism of his church (the UN new age substanceless relativism of the avaricious craven bureaucrat)...it is his religion. I can tell you Bryant's tyransparent plan in 4 parts: 1) whip up emotional distraction over the liberal dystopian state's inability to come to grips with real crime and the unjust violence in the world. 2) Use philistine symbolism and manufactured "stats" to focus public angst on a hapless decoy that distracts attention from the state's ineptiude and failed ideological tinkering 3) Promise "bold" (symbolic) legislative moves to vanquish this manufactured boogyman 4) When real criminals continue to extract their violent bloody toll of society, you simply say you didn't go "far enough" with the previous symbolic distraction and promise a "real crackdown" It's the old Hegelian problem-reaction-solution political deception was first enumerated in Machiavelli's opus on deceptive statecraft...these opportunistic climbers in partisan politics have been shamming us with this shit for over 200 years.....difference is, 150 years ago, a lying washout like Bryant would be eventually found out and dealt with by the mob. Belly crawling slime like Bryant should be tarred and hung....but that would be too much like true social justice.

Posted by: Bill at September 03, 2007 07:29 PM (INHn8)

12 Liberals are large on symbolism and weak on substance...they will spend billions on feel-good symbolism but little to actually attack root causes of crime because this takes 2 things liberals haven't got....guts and commitment to resolving issues definitively. Liberal like Bryant like to talk...they think crime and all the evils in the world can be dealt with by endless navel gazing and nattering utopian platitudes. Of course Bryant touts the symbolism of his church (the UN new age substanceless relativism of the avaricious craven bureaucrat)...it is his religion. I can tell you Bryant's transparent plan in 4 parts: 1) whip up emotional distraction over the liberal dystopian state's inability to come to grips with real crime and the unjust violence in the world. 2) Use philistine symbolism and manufactured "stats" to focus public angst on a hapless decoy that distracts attention from the state's ineptiude and failed ideological tinkering 3) Promise "bold" (symbolic) legislative moves to vanquish this manufactured boogyman 4) When real criminals continue to extract their violent bloody toll of society, you simply say you didn't go "far enough" with the previous symbolic distraction and promise a "real crackdown" It's the old Hegelian problem-reaction-solution political deception was first enumerated in Machiavelli's opus on deceptive statecraft...these opportunistic climbers in partisan politics have been shamming us with this crap for over 200 years.....difference is, 150 years ago, a lying washout like Bryant would be eventually found out and dealt with by an angry mob. Belly crawling slime like Bryant should be tarred and hung....but that would be too much like true social justice.

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at September 03, 2007 07:36 PM (INHn8)

13 I have visited your site 921-times

Posted by: Visitor585 at September 05, 2007 10:46 PM (AJN0v)

14 Hello first time to come to this forum, I like it very much!sd5f46s5df465sd4f

Posted by: lebron galaxy 9 at December 03, 2012 08:24 AM (z0AbP)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

August 30, 2007

Michael Ignatieff, the Liberal Party, the Senate and Puffins

The news is that Michael Ignatieff is going to borrow a page from the Americans. He wants his political party, the Liberal Party of Canada, have an animal symbol, as the Democrats have the donkey and the Republicans have the elephant.

In a stroke of brilliance, he has suggested the puffin. It is such an appropriate choice.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 04:26 PM | Comments (23) | Add Comment
Post contains 427 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha *GASP* ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha ha

Posted by: at August 30, 2007 04:57 PM (m8+ac)

2 They've got it right this time - adopt a symbol of a bird that hides it's sh**t. They have been doing that for many years and would like to do it again if Canadians are stupid enough.

Posted by: alonzo at August 30, 2007 05:03 PM (Hx6MZ)

3 So, Janke, are you saying that the Liberals are "full of Iggy"? Why couldn't Ignatieff be the Liberal leader? Life isnt fair.

Posted by: at August 30, 2007 05:16 PM (tgWhh)

4 This is just too funny. When I first read it, I thought you were making it up.

Posted by: Roy Eappen at August 30, 2007 05:20 PM (XvZQc)

5 This sort of thing is usually dangerous. Political parties don't normally get to pick their symbols; usually, it's the media who picks it for them, especially if the symbolism is seen as effective. Part of the problem with the puffin is its name. Too much like "puffing," a word associated with huffing, hot air, the Big Bad Wolf, and so on. A better symbol for the Grits would be the Canada goose -- a national bird with a tendency to let its excrement annoy everybody.

Posted by: PhantomObserver at August 30, 2007 05:23 PM (SB7aG)

6 Iggy ? How about "Iggy Poop" ?

Posted by: James Walker at August 30, 2007 05:25 PM (U5GvN)

7 "Iggy Poop" Ha, ha, ha, ha, ha.

Posted by: muttsrus at August 30, 2007 05:30 PM (New6r)

8 Hold on a minute folks is a Liberal [ we are not Americans] looking to copy an American idea? How would this play if it was suggested by a Tory? The Liberal Puffins would have to work really really hard to bury the amount of excrement that they produce!

Posted by: ian at August 30, 2007 05:54 PM (eF3vp)

9 The poor puffin. Iggy should adopt the hidden poop as the symbol of the Liberal Party and leave the bird alone. The Liberals have hidden family values under the poop. How much lower can the Liberals go?

Posted by: George at August 30, 2007 05:55 PM (NsRpY)

10 "We're a huffin and a Puffin and we'll bring this country down!"

Posted by: at August 30, 2007 08:07 PM (m8+ac)

11 They'll be Puffin on this (points down) before I ever think about voting for them again.

Posted by: at August 30, 2007 08:09 PM (m8+ac)

12 Should we chalk it up to the wandering, meandering mind of a professor or just a simple bird brain? Wonder if he's also planned for a large holding tank? The LPC is starting to look like comedy central but they're dead serious.

Posted by: Libby at August 30, 2007 08:23 PM (kXzy3)

13 Well Iggy isn't stupid... part of me wonders if he took a shot at Dion to ruffle the party feathers some more.

Posted by: Aviarist at August 30, 2007 08:34 PM (m8+ac)

14 * "Excrement-hiding bird championed as Liberal symbol" The element of this that's too funny for words... is that the Fiberals have been branding Iggy as "the smart one". *

Posted by: neo at August 30, 2007 09:22 PM (PVVxu)

15 This is so funny on so many levels that I think my head is going to explode. How the hell that man could stand there, saying those words out loud. From now until the Sun goes out, the Liberals will have a little puffin, hiding its shit, as their logo, whether they want it or not.

Posted by: Darrell Goodman at August 30, 2007 10:56 PM (x53g+)

16 This is so funny on so many levels that I think my head is going to explode. How the hell that man could stand there, saying those words out loud. From now until the Sun goes out, the Liberals will have a little puffin, hiding its crap, as their logo, whether they want it or not.

Posted by: Darrell Goodman at August 30, 2007 10:58 PM (x53g+)

17 Sorry for the double post...I got an error the first time, thought it was because of the s word. Guess it got posted after all.

Posted by: Darrell Goodman at August 30, 2007 10:59 PM (x53g+)

18 There was a large picture of the puffin bird on the front of the National Post this morning. I couldn't stop laughing, because it actually looks like dainty Dion. I can't wait until Dion is booted and Iggy takes over as the leader of the liberals. The media will have a hay day making fun of his innate dumbness.

Posted by: Honey Pot at August 31, 2007 06:12 AM (Xk9Wj)

19 Still laughing, too damned stupid for words. Poor, hapless Iggy, he just cleared the air on his take on Iraq, well he thinks so, now he's off to bird land. Of all the symbolic birds, to suggest the one that hides it's poop is the most appropriate for the Liberals so, inadvertently, he got that right. He could be in for a stinky ride on this one however.

Posted by: Libby at August 31, 2007 07:04 AM (a7sil)

20 Gotta ask: If Iggy is the 'smart one' is he planning to hide Steffi? Bring on the election...and puffin art.

Posted by: bluetech at August 31, 2007 07:50 AM (TCzS6)

21 PUFFIN? ....as in "puffin' on my hog"?

Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at August 31, 2007 09:27 AM (g7gYB)

22 I can hardly wait until Rick Mercer gets hold of this.

Posted by: Brian in Calgary at August 31, 2007 10:17 AM (g7gYB)

23 Puff the magic Iggie,lived by the sea............

Posted by: Shawn at August 31, 2007 12:12 PM (WM45z)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Stephane Dion's image used in a mean-spirited negative personal attack

Liberal Party leader Stephane Dion has repeatedly promised to avoid personal attacks. The high road would be his, he insists. Indeed, at one point, he said the Liberal Party as a whole would present a positive message to Canadians.

Criticism is not the same as negativity. Stephane Dion can (and does) criticize Prime Minister Stephen Harper's policies.

But when Stephane Dion implicitly allows his image to be used in a partisan political cartoon in which Dion is roasting Stephen Harper alive on a spit, Stephane Dion's promise is seriously undermined.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 09:22 AM | Comments (30) | Add Comment
Post contains 809 words, total size 5 kb.

1 ...i confess! i confess! I was channel surfing and landed on CBC ViewsWorld, err, Newsworld. There was a good bit on Dion in Newfoundland. His motto was a pickup off Nfld - "ABC" (Anybody but Conservatives). Out west that has a differeent Edmonton saying, but I digress. What is with the cod liver oil these folks drink in Newfoundland? I talked with an in-law from NFLD and they said they won't forgive Harper for backing down on money transfers promised them in the last election. So I said, oh what about the fish stocks, AdScam, Human Resorces, Gun Registry, Bilingualism then?

Posted by: tomax7 at August 30, 2007 09:55 AM (jHhd0)

2 *Yawn* This was produced by the Young Liberals. Dion didn't produce it.

Posted by: rob at August 30, 2007 10:02 AM (td0xh)

3 Is the one pouring on the sauce Danny Williams? This looks like the work of very young Liberals, say 11 or 12 year olds. Stephane Dion speaks with forked tongue.

Posted by: muttsrus at August 30, 2007 10:04 AM (QqKUN)

4 Are you ever stupid, Janke. This wasn't even produced by Dion.

Posted by: Angry on a Great White Toilet at August 30, 2007 10:20 AM (BoP1l)

5 I'll be the first post the obvious and ask "How would the Liberals react if Stephen Harper did this?" These kind of things are just silly and stupid. Someone in the Young Liberals or the grown-up party itself should have nixed this apron long before it was sold at Liberal functions.

Posted by: alan at August 30, 2007 10:22 AM (2bEDO)

6 This is a funny cartoon. Harper should be pleased. They have him as a skinny man, thinner than Dion.

Posted by: at August 30, 2007 10:41 AM (Fdiku)

7 Are you ever going to stop playing the victims - poor, poor conservatives being attacked (by KIDS), boo hoo. This is just stupid. Dion didnt' do this and all you are trying to do here is stir up poop as usual. It must be awful to have to live like that - looking for negatives all the time. Take some prozac and get a real life. Can you imagine trying to make such an issue of something done by kids? I can't believe it - pitiful.

Posted by: Sam at August 30, 2007 11:07 AM (BnPhA)

8 * steve... c'mon now, it's not steffi's fault that you can't speak fiberal. *

Posted by: neo at August 30, 2007 11:40 AM (H/yjG)

9 "Can you imagine trying to make such an issue of something done by kids? I can't believe it - pitiful." I feel sorry for the YL's who have to put up with people who refer to them as 'kids'. They're 25 and under and, I suspect, most are legally adults. They should be treated as such.

Posted by: at August 30, 2007 11:41 AM (j9WI0)

10 I'm pretty sure I made it clear that Dion did not make this cartoon, and that I didn't blame him for it. I'm warning him that if he continues to proclaim that he is not going to engage in negative personal attacks, he has to make sure none of his surrogates create negative personal attacks employing his name or image. When one branch of the Liberal organization uses Dion's name or image in a negative personal attack, it won't matter how much Dion says he's not being negative. People won't care as long as it is official or semi-official campaign literature or campaign advertising. If it's Dion's image, if it's from the Liberal Party, and if it's negative and personal, then Dion is being negative in the eyes of people who see this material. That might not be fair to Dion, but that's the way it is. Sheesh, try to help some people and all I get is grief.

Posted by: Steve Janke at August 30, 2007 11:46 AM (eGtvb)

11 I feel sorry for the YL's who have to put up with people who refer to them as 'kids'. They're 25 and under and, I suspect, most are legally adults. They should be treated as such. Well unless your name is Justin Trudeau. Then you're a Young Liberal still at 35.

Posted by: Reid at August 30, 2007 12:17 PM (rXo+C)

12 It's the lack of leadership, Stupid.

Posted by: Joanne (TB) at August 30, 2007 12:24 PM (/LCVQ)

13 Has Monsieur Dion calculated 'ow much greenhouse gas dat barbecue produce? (dat's not fair!) As far as the Young Liberals are concerned, I can't help but wonder if they haven't issued a dagger yet -like another well-known youth group.

Posted by: up north at August 30, 2007 12:40 PM (2aAyG)

14 The NL Liberals' cartoon shows Dion getting help from a contentedly smiling pig holding a drink while roasting the Prime Minister. Given that pork is symbolic of cynical vote-buying in politics, I find the Young Liberals' dramatic impression of their leadership very insightful. So, are NL Young Liberals pork-loving cannibals or do they just think their leader is? But how does Iggy feel about the recent Liberal hoedown? If you go to the CTV story referenced by Steve above, and click on the image of Citoyen Dion, Iggy looks like he's either about to puke, or just did. Perhaps he couldn't digest the gruesome message?

Posted by: Alan at August 30, 2007 12:51 PM (gCgGd)

15 How did their love in go in Newfoundland this week? Too bad the Spit Roaster didn't get a public press conference with Danny Boor Williams. The Liberals were all set up for it with a real Harper bashing event. Williams won yet another promise of an even better deal from Dion IF he gains power, sometimes it helps to play hard to get. Seems Danny got cold feet or got the right dose of Imodium to get the diarrhea flowing out the right orifice. He sure has been out of control for some time.

Posted by: Libby at August 30, 2007 12:55 PM (8V7Mi)

16 Further, a likeness of any human being being roasted on a spit is about the most unfunny image ever given the atrocities we are dealing with today. What type of brain would conjure up such a thing is what we should be thinking about. Not long ago we had some Islamic "radicals" plotting to behead our Prime Minister.

Posted by: Libby at August 30, 2007 01:04 PM (8V7Mi)

17 You know Steve, following that link above and finding the pic with Iggy. It strikes me; that's twice this week I see pictures of Dion with his hands raised a la surrender gesture.

Posted by: Lib Kicker at August 30, 2007 02:19 PM (m8+ac)

18 Lib Kicker: I find it interesting that the majority of the comments after that article hacked apart the Liberals. And that CTV has "closed" the article to further comments. It sure sucks when the sheeple don't fall in line. And to me that picture looks like the woman in the background has just driven an icepick inbetween Iggy's shoulder blades (he has a look of agony on his face) and Dion is saying "My hands are clean."

Posted by: Reid at August 30, 2007 02:36 PM (rXo+C)

19 ...WOW, look at all the leftoids coming out of the woodwork...

Posted by: tomax7 at August 30, 2007 03:21 PM (jHhd0)

20 More proof that Liberals love pork.

Posted by: Cool Blue at August 30, 2007 04:15 PM (9KsAf)

21 Could the image of Stephane Dion burning Prime Minister Harper alive over an open fire be an indictable offense under the Criminal Code of Canada, since it could be interpreted as publicly inciting violence towards an identifiable person? Shouldn't Stephane Dion publicly condemn the NL Young Liberals for their hateful message and the use of his likeness as the torturer? If Mr. Dion does not publicly condemn the actions of the NL Young Liberals, how could he rationalize his silence on this matter with his party's strong condemnation of torture? Shouldn't the NL Young Liberals immediately issue a formal public apology to Prime Minister Harper and all Canadians? Shouldn't the NY Young Liberals recall all the torture-scene aprons they sold and return the money they raised from sales of this hate literature?

Posted by: Alan at August 30, 2007 04:26 PM (iGltq)

22 To put this in perspective, during the 2005/2006 federal election campaign, Mike Klander, the executive vice-president of the federal Liberal party's Ontario wing, was forced to resign after posting on his website a comparison of NDP candidate Olivia Chow with a chow chow dog, with the heading "Separated at Birth." Now we have the official youth wing of the Liberal Party of Canada in Newfoundland-Labrador selling clothing depicting the Leader of the Official Opposition cooking the Prime Minister of Canada's impaled body over an open fire. The torture imagery and the threatening caption are much worse than what Klander resigned for. Whoever approved the design, production and sales of this hate message must be held publicly accountable for their actions.

Posted by: JL at August 30, 2007 05:54 PM (iGltq)

23 So, the torture of our Prime Minister is funny to Liberals? This will make a great election ad for the Conservatives, it shows true Liberal values, they have none! Disgusting.

Posted by: Hunter at August 30, 2007 09:48 PM (tHko3)

24 A really lame, boring, braindead "cartoon"....

Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at August 31, 2007 09:33 AM (g7gYB)

25 How many aprons were sold, and as this event was for the liberal caucus, how many liberal MPs bought them. Will they turn up at bbqs for Dion out west. We have Iggy with the poop bird, and now dion agreeing to the torture of PMSH. Those saying dion did not produce this apron, sorry, that wont fly. Hey, maybe the young liberals are really working to get dion out of power and want him to lose the next election. If that is the mindset of young liberals, that party is in worse trouble than I thought. The person producing this apron, would probably be charged under the charter for refusing to do it. Could be worse, the guy on the spit could have been a muslim and then listen to the outrage. Aren't they protesting another cartoon now. Maybe the muslims will object as they are against pigs, and therefore it is an insult to islam.

Posted by: Mary T at August 31, 2007 02:16 PM (zm8/C)

26 Stephane Dion is just another Liberal. i.e. He cannot be trusted.

Posted by: Jan at August 31, 2007 02:51 PM (WIo+J)

27 I take it that the PIG is Danny Williams. How appropriate. Horny Toad

Posted by: Horny Toad at September 01, 2007 01:23 AM (tITNm)

28 This reminds me of when Joe Clark was struggling to hold on to the federal PC party leadership in the early 1980s. Mulroney went on television to publicly proclaim his support for Clark but did absolutely nothing to discourage his friends and supporters from undermining Clark (not that Clark needed the help to be honest). I didn't like what I saw as Mulroney's hypocrisy then, and I don't like Dion's hypocrisy now.

Posted by: Brian in Calgary at September 01, 2007 03:23 PM (g7gYB)

29 For those of you old enough to remember, the Liberals consistently ran the most despicable negative advertising and disinformation campaigns against the Reform Party and the Canadian Alliance. When Liberals are the brunt of negative advertising, look at how the cry. You will see nothing but negative attacks by the Liberals in the next election, despite what Dion says. That is the only way they know how to campaign.

Posted by: Gary Drummond at September 03, 2007 10:14 AM (svwap)

30 For those of you old enough to remember, the Liberals consistently ran the most despicable negative advertising and disinformation campaigns against the Reform Party and the Canadian Alliance. When Liberals are the brunt of negative advertising, look at how they cry. You will see nothing but negative attacks by the Liberals in the next election, despite what Dion says. That is the only way they know how to campaign.

Posted by: Gary Drummond at September 03, 2007 10:14 AM (svwap)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

August 29, 2007

Did Michael Bryant deliberately obscure the link between No Gun No Funeral and the riding association?

If you look at the registration records for the two domains attached to Michael Bryant's No Gun No Funeral website, there are two obvious differences.

If those differences are connected, then it suggests a deliberate effort to obscure the link between the website and the constituency office.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 10:02 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 519 words, total size 5 kb.

No Gun No Funeral is registered directly to Michael Bryant's constituency office

Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant has admitted that the website No Gun No Funeral is his. It is promoting his idea of a handgun ban, but is doing so anonymously. Or it was until it was revealed that all the people who administer the site were members of the Michael Bryant's constituency office.

Bryant insisted, however, that constituency resources were not used to make the website.

Perhaps we should revisit that question, since it can now be revealed that the .com version of the domain was registered in the name of the constituency office itself.

But then maybe none of this will matter, as the site itself seems to have suffered a serious technical problem, with the SQL database that serves up content now offline.

Update: The site is back up (it's 1pm on Thursday). No apparent changes that I can see. The registration information isn't any different either (though changes can take up to 24 hours to propagate). I would say they had a serious SQL Server issue, or a major upgrade or patch being applied -- something behind the scenes.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 09:00 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 1087 words, total size 8 kb.

Jack Layton will protect Canada's claim to the North by making it cold

NDP leader Jack Layton will protect Canada's claim to sovereignty in the Far North by making sure it stays cold.

No, I don't know what one has to do with the other either.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 12:04 PM | Comments (10) | Add Comment
Post contains 390 words, total size 3 kb.

1 Jack must be really desperate, the Arctic is represented by only three seats in the H of C. "The NDP knows that to protect our northern sovereignty means addressing social, economic, and environmental concerns,Â” What does that mean? Would the NDP build factories on Baffin Island, maybe an auto assembly plant in Nunavut? No, the perennial fourth place party will continue to spout nonsense, proving why they are an economic disaster wherever they form government.

Posted by: dmorris at August 29, 2007 02:47 PM (BireE)

2 He'll make it "cold" to Dippers by just being himself and opening his yap.

Posted by: at August 29, 2007 03:28 PM (m8+ac)

3 ...make the North cold? But but but, what about the Polar Bears? Won't they freeze to death? And what about the penguins nesting up at Baffin Island, where will they go?

Posted by: tomax7 at August 29, 2007 03:31 PM (jHhd0)

4 He station his ditzy wife up there...That'll send a mega-chill through out the entire region.

Posted by: zilla at August 29, 2007 04:32 PM (eRTJ1)

5 the quotes contain all that needs to be said about taliban Jacks ratings. " "

Posted by: missing link at August 29, 2007 08:02 PM (0Hcwj)

6 The quotes below contain all that needs to be said about taliban Jacks ratings. " "

Posted by: missing link at August 29, 2007 08:03 PM (0Hcwj)

7 yes you do. He will force canada to reduce GHG emissions by 0.1%, thereby reducing the temperature of the arctic by 10 degrees by next year, thus ensuring it won't become a hotspot of exploration by the russians. Get it? NDP math.

Posted by: Guy at August 29, 2007 08:33 PM (ngUF3)

8 Do you really want to have a claim in the north? It's nothing but mud and mosquitoes in the summer and ice and blizzards in the winter. Better to let some other idiot government waste billions of dollars of their people's money getting all "sovereign" on the arctic - and if they ever succeed in scratching any oil or valuable rocks out of the mud and ice you can always buy their production at a discount on the open market when they get into a debt or currency crisis. An economically destitute Canada would not be able to maintain sovereignty over Saskatoon if affluent foreigners were to come and start buying up Canada at firesale prices. Ironically, it's the fact that so many Canadians are obsessed with sovereignty over other people's property and so unconcerned with sovereignty over their own property (starting with their wallet), which will lead inexorably to a national fire sale.

Posted by: at August 29, 2007 08:33 PM (tgNL5)

9 Jack is just trying to catch up to his nemesis, Elizabeth May and her Greenies who are polling ever closer to his NDP. Whether they warm up to him in the North is of no consequence when he's getting the chill across the Country. He'll look cute in his mukluks blabbering on while chowing down on whale blubber.

Posted by: Libby at August 30, 2007 07:23 AM (/e0N+)

10 Obviously, the above unknown poster is perfectly willing to surrender Arctic sovereignty to the Russians, and to have them develop its resources, and to live with the resulting pollution. North America's record on the environment, while not perfect, is positively pristine compared to Russia's.

Posted by: Brian in Calgary at August 30, 2007 01:13 PM (g7gYB)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

August 28, 2007

Paul Cheema, suspect in the murder of his wife Shemina Hirji, is found dead

A stunning development in the case of the murder of Shemina Hirji. The prime suspect in the case, husband Paul Cheema, has been found dead in the family home. Police have the house cordoned off and little else is being reported.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 08:45 AM | Comments (6) | Add Comment
Post contains 393 words, total size 4 kb.

The paucity of inbound links to No Gun No Funeral

The key to success for any low-budget grassroots website is inbound links. A blog is a good example. Unless you are a celebrity of some sort, a new blog will get zero direct traffic. That is, no one is going to know the name of the blog or even know to look for it. Instead, you build up traffic by going to like-minded websites (other blogs, forums, etc) and leaving comments and links back to your new site. Visitors come trickling in, and if you are lucky, one day you reach a tipping point when people come to your site because they know about it already.

So when I study the inbound links to No Gun No Funeral, I am struck by the fact that the only inbound links are from conservative blogs who are criticizing the site either for its message or for the way it was being delivered without full disclosure of the source.

There are no links from liberal-minded blogs, from left-of-centre forums, from any site that would send traffic supportive of the No Gun No Funeral message.

Given that this purpose of this site, ostensibly, is to collect petition signatures, this doesn't look good.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 08:17 AM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 964 words, total size 7 kb.

1 Steve You owe me a keyboard. Those stats sure indicate They don't get it and have lost touch. Oct 11 is getting closer.

Posted by: John D at August 28, 2007 08:30 AM (5hdOB)

2 Since the TO Sun exposed Bryant's sleazoid little scam the NGNF web site has become a liability and I believe they have abandoned it. The neat thing about this is it sends a message to these philistine Liberal skanks that Ontarians have a low tolerance for strawman misdirects where law and order are concerned. They realize the reason GTA has become violent is because of criminal friendly utopian justice policy....which Bryant promotes. They see that him blaming lawful firearms owners for the Gang crime in Toronto is like banning ladders to prevent burglaries.....and they resent Bryant thinking they are stupid enough to swallow such vacuous strawman arguments. So Bryant's handlers know they struck a nerve in negative public response with this gun ban misdirect and have largely abandoned the NGNF site in an attempt to distance themselves from this albatross. But we won't let them forget it will we? ;-)

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at August 28, 2007 09:01 AM (INHn8)

3 Not one liberal site link? Hmmmmm. Yes, that is weird.

Posted by: muttsrus at August 28, 2007 09:01 AM (tOQix)

4 Not one link listed by Yahoo. I just want to be clear that we are relying on the search engines to be accurate. But to catch eight conservative links and zero liberals ones is odd. Note too that Canadaka is a forum with multiple sections. It has Liberal and NDP sections. But the link comes from the Conservative section.

Posted by: Steve Janke at August 28, 2007 09:08 AM (eGtvb)

5 Not one liberal site link? Hmmmmm. Yes, that is weird. Not weird to me. I think it just indicates that even liberal bloggers have at least some sense of reality.

Posted by: Brian in Calgary at August 28, 2007 02:29 PM (g7gYB)

6 Um... just as a question, wouldn't a grassroots operation have grassroots support? You know, the little people who are trying to get this operation off the ground? Oh, that's right. It's not a grassroots operation. It's a political site owned by a politician. Gotta wonder if he has claimed the costs for this site out of his campaign budget.

Posted by: Surecure at August 28, 2007 09:47 PM (Dn18P)

7 Anyone see that turdbag Bryant lying through his teeth at the press scrum over Truscott'a exoneration? After running road blocks to Truscott's appeals and OSCJ trial, he was making out like he was in "Steve's" corner rooting for him...what a total soulless media whore...They don't get any lower than Bryant.

Posted by: Bill at August 28, 2007 11:14 PM (INHn8)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

August 27, 2007

More of Michael Bryant's associates tied to No Gun No Funeral website

The site created by Ontario Attorney General Michael Bryant to promote a handgun ban in Canada, No Gun No Funeral, has strong links to the Liberal Party and to Michael Bryant in particular. More information is available, and even more links are discovered.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 11:29 PM | Comments (7) | Add Comment
Post contains 801 words, total size 7 kb.

1 A Liberal came up with the MMP system? I'm going to take a hard look at that before I vote on it. I sure hope this isn't a backdoor method to retaining power. Nice blog Steve. Cockroaches hate light too.

Posted by: at August 28, 2007 07:59 AM (5hdOB)

2 Reject MMP it's a scam to allow liberals to split the vote by running sycophant indi candidates and win the house through cooperative alignment after the election. An insider sleaze paly if there ever was one. If a Liberal is fogging a mirror they are actively plotting to scam you.

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at August 28, 2007 09:10 AM (INHn8)

3 I am offended by the nightly ads on tv for "workingfamilies" that tell us that Mike Harris and Ernie Eves cut this and destroyed that, yada yada but for the "last four years" things have improved greatly and things are finally back on track. These are not Liberal Party ads? I guess they are banking on Mr. Barnum being correct.

Posted by: muttsrus at August 28, 2007 09:25 AM (tOQix)

4 Steve, you're investigative work is truly amazing! I am somewhat surprised that the MSM hasn't picked up on this story. Perhaps they are lazy and content for you to do all the hard investigative work, or perhaps they are simply looking the other way, hoping the story will disappear? You wrote: "The phone number associated with the website was answered by the Michael Bryant constituency office, announcing that you have reached the "Michael Bryant Election Campaign". Does that not confirm a direct link between BryantÂ’s NGNF website and his election campaign? If the website is directly linked to his election campaign (as indicated by the common phone number) shouldnÂ’t its development and maintenance costs be reported as a campaign expense for the equivalent value of the professional services rendered, even if these costs are donated? If that phone is in Bryant's constituency office, I wonder who is paying for that phone line? If it is funded by his re-election campaign, then the website support is at least partially financed by his election campaign and should be reported. One the other hand, if the phone line is funded by the constituency office, then wouldnÂ’t that constitute a misuse of government resources? I also wonder whether the person answering that phone line or returning its voice messages is being paid as a constituency office (ie. government) employee or is a campaign worker? If the person is a constituency office employee, they shouldnÂ’t be collecting government salary for campaigning. If the person is a campaign worker, why are they working out of a government office? Is BryantÂ’s campaign paying rent to the government for use of that office? On Aug 23 in The Star, Michael Bryant was quoted as calling John Tory Â“truly boneheadedÂ” for criticizing the Liberal government for sending Crown lawyers and judges to luxury resorts at a cost to the public of nearly $700,000. Given BryantÂ’s sloppy work of covering up his stealth campaign website, perhaps he should look in the mirror for the real bonehead. I wonder if someone is working on a Â“No Bryant No BoneheadÂ” website? "We are a group of Ontarians dedicated to competent government. In particular, we support the election defeat of the Ontario Sloganator-General, Michael Bryant."

Posted by: Alan at August 28, 2007 09:48 AM (g39sw)

5 and then there is the matter of how well it will work Statistics Canada has reported that 2.27% of homicides in Canada were committed with a registered gun and only 1.21% were committed with a registered firearm that was owned by the accused (Statistics Canada study of 5,194 homicides between 1997 & 2005). In short, these new gun control proposals will have a direct and immediate affect on the law-abiding, perhaps some small affect on perceptions of safety and a vanishingly small affect on organized crime. However clever it may be for provincial politicians to define the problem in a way that makes it a federal responsibility, as a crime control measure Â“No Guns = No FuneralÂ” is doomed to failure. In 2003, there were 161 gun homicides in Canada. Assuming that each shooting involved a separate gun we can calculate what percentage of Canadian guns were involved in these murders. If we take the official figure of seven million guns we get (161/7,000,000 = 0.000023 or .0023%). Only 23 ten thousandths of 1% of the Canadian gun stock was involved in a homicide. If we pursue our policy of regulating crime by strictly regulating gun availability to the general public we can reasonably expect that .0023% of our efforts will affect guns used in homicide and 99.997% of our effort will be wasted.

Posted by: Bruce at August 28, 2007 07:02 PM (+fvpG)

6 I agree that if the Liberals are pushing it= VOTE AGAINST IT. It has to be another scam. Just like all the others.

Posted by: zilla at August 28, 2007 07:49 PM (eRTJ1)

7 I know nothing about the "No Gun, No Funeral" site. But one blogger above says "A Liberal came up with the MMP system?" Well, no. The Citizens' Assembly on Electoral Reform was 103 citizens selected at random by Elections Ontario, and chaired by Judge George Thomson. Check it out: http://www.citizensassembly.gov.on.ca/assets/OCA%20eng%20web_MASTER-001.wmv The result has multi-party support: "The three of us reflect three competing, democratic, partisan traditions in Ontario. We differ on many matters of public policy. We strongly unite, however, in our commitment to an electoral system that is democratic in more than name. The CitizensÂ’ Assembly on Electoral Reform produced an imaginative and practical proposal that will give us more choice, fairer results and stronger representation. We urge all Ontarians to come together and vote Yes for MMP in the October 10 referendum.Â” Carolyn Bennett, MP, Liberal Party Ed Broadbent, former NDP leader Senator Hugh Segal, Conservative Party" http://www.voteformmp.ca/about_campaign/campaign_activities

Posted by: Wilf Day at August 29, 2007 11:21 AM (nSXWF)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Garth Turner seems confused about what it means to be "no cost"

Garth Turner is embarking on a speaking tour to 10 western cities. Garth Turner was very insistent that taxpayers would not have to pay for this.

But as Dan Cook points out, taxpayer-funded flights will take Garth Turner westward.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 06:38 PM | Comments (14) | Add Comment
Post contains 224 words, total size 2 kb.

1 Garth explained on his blog that he was going to use his MP travel vouchers I believe he called them. He said he never uses them because he drives back and forth be his riding and Ottawa and does not claim his gas or transportation charges. I do have a question, are these a use them or we the taxpayers pay for them anyway or is the Govt only billed for the ones that are used

Posted by: Ken at August 27, 2007 07:56 PM (dfmT8)

2 Steve, stop picking on Garth! He's entitled to his entitlements!

Posted by: Paul M at August 27, 2007 07:59 PM (9QyRM)

3 Garth is now officially a lieberal. Just like Jean and his trips to whistler and the USA for his private hospital stays. Again the MSM won't even cover this. Keep upthe great work Steve. Rod

Posted by: rod at August 27, 2007 08:38 PM (nBhM7)

4 The message coming from Dion is that he consults with the public. He likes to hold roundtables with all kinds of stakeholders. He is getting input from many sources. See the many "Town Hall" videos here to see what I'm talking about. So my take is that Garth's tour is an extension of Dion's consultative process. Trying hard to remake Dion's image. From not-a-leader to the consultative, collegial, always available to the media, pandering to his audience, wanting to be under-estimated, kind of guy.

Posted by: Calgary Junkie at August 27, 2007 08:41 PM (g7gYB)

5 Ummm.....No. I respectfully disagree CalgaryJunkie. The Globe and Mail has it right. This is Turner's mock leadership run for the Liberals. In other words he's trying to take Dion's job away NOT work in conjunction with him. (http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070827.WBwblogolitics20070827173802/WBStory/WBwblogolitics/)

Posted by: Sentinel at August 27, 2007 09:17 PM (9QyRM)

6 As someone who's worked on the Hill, I think the way it works is this. MPs are assigned a large number of "travel points." It costs: 1 point to get to your riding, whether it's in Churchill, Manitoba, or Toronto, Ontario 1 point for a short-haul flight 2 points for a medium haul flight 3 points for a long-haul flight Frequently, MPs hoping to make a long-haul flight (Ottawa-Vancouver), if they're riding is in central Canada, fly with a stop-over there, thus using 2 points instead of 3.

Posted by: AV at August 28, 2007 04:58 AM (36fTm)

7 Oh please, this is just too much nit picking to be worthy of writing about. Garth Turner has explained about the costs. Hey, what about the Conservative MP's travelling around at taxpayer expense? Double standard here. I live in a riding with a useless Conservative MP (I mean he is useless and has done nothing) and we've had several visits from other Conservative MP's at "taxpayer" expense. I can't believe how bad this nit picking crap has become. Why we've even had Green party and NDP visitors. Sad that one has to spend their whole life (I guess you are a conservative shill) looking for negativity. Very sad. How do you feel about Harper and his gang hiding the expenses of his use of the Challenger for over a year? How much is the primper costing taxpayers? Get a life.

Posted by: Sam at August 28, 2007 07:55 AM (BnPhA)

8 When Garth was asked about why he continually attacked Harper on his site he replied "He Deserves It" Well, if anyone wants to know why his trip and all his other mis steps are put under a microscope...the answer is simple. He Deserves It. You cant continually throw stones at someone or a group and then claim innocence when theyre thrown right back at them. This innocent "WHO ME?" attitude he and his staff are putting on is disgraceful and is fooling no one. If you cant take it, dont bother dishing it out. Can we all put into his fund to ensure his ticket out west is ONE WAY? PLEASE?

Posted by: Dont you remember? at August 28, 2007 07:57 AM (W5P+x)

9 When you see Conservative members (IE Cabinet Ministers) travelling from riding to riding...its their job. I dont know of any past CPC back benchers when they were the official opposition going on any cross Canada junkits. Only seems to be liberals doing it. Garth nit picks about words that are said...then blows them out of proportion all the time when it comes to the PMO and other CPC MP's. He stated "no cost to taxpayers"....now hes said what he meant was "no additional cost"... Well it ISNT what he said. Maybe he and his "crack" staff better improve their communication skills. If you cant take the heat Turner, get out of the kitchen. Theres some byelections coming up...Im sure the PM would be happy to accept your offer of resignation now. You should consider it ...

Posted by: One more thing... at August 28, 2007 08:01 AM (W5P+x)

10 I might buy this if Garth was even a member of the shadow cabinet or critic for a dept per say. He is not, he is doing this just to slam the CPC and he is using taxpayers money to do it, if these people want to hear him so bad the can spring for the airline seats for him and his wife. This tour is nothing but pure politics and he is using taxpayer's money to do it. At the very least he should be funding it out of the LPC budget, Yes I do know that these points are used to travel to caucus meetings but that is the exception not the rule.

Posted by: Ken at August 28, 2007 11:42 AM (dfmT8)

11 You Cons really got to get a life. Your boy Harpliar can only manage a tie with weak leader Dion in the latest G&M poll and all you can do is harp on about Turner's travel expenses. If the Libs smarten up and draft Frank McKenna Harper becomes toast.

Posted by: not Garth Turner at August 28, 2007 12:13 PM (ry7L0)

12 Despite the liberal hand-wringing in this thread. The gist of the matter is Garth Turner can horde his 'tax dollar vouchers' and parlay them into a self-promotion tour. Free of guilt because they were his to burn any way. What ethics on this guy. I hope he gets lost and ends up in Russia. I'm not sure that's what these points were designed for. But this is the same party that sends a chauffeur on vacation with his charge.

Posted by: Levesque at August 28, 2007 05:17 PM (jQxJp)

13 Who cares where he flits off to and who the hell wants to listen to a megalomaniac? He'll be a big boost for the Party he left as well.

Posted by: Libby at August 28, 2007 06:04 PM (3DMSZ)

14 Garth Turner is such a phony. His defence is: a) Why do conservatives care so much about me? - Well, if you're so irrelevant, why are going on a ten-city tour of a region you don't represent? b) This tour is non-partisan. - It's called the "Lost Tory Tour" c) He says all MP's, including his leader, travel the country. - ie) you're running to be leader of a national party. Did I say Garth Turner is a phony? I was wrong. He's a liar. Almost everything that comes out of his mouth is meant to trick people into supporting his huge ego. The two biggest liars in politics are Garth Turner and Dalton McGuinty. May they both get what they deserve from the electorate soon.

Posted by: Dennis (Second Thots) at August 29, 2007 04:18 PM (GipX9)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Stephane Dion must topple Stephen Harper's government

Liberal leader Stephane Dion has no choice. The threats must end. If Stephane Dion can make Kyoto work with his plan then he must force an election and just do it, instead of threatening to possibly call an election if Prime Minister Stephen Harper doesn't implement Stephane Dion's plan on Dion's behalf.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 09:58 AM | Comments (18) | Add Comment
Post contains 1216 words, total size 8 kb.

1 You say absurd! That is not fair. That is divisive. You empty headed bath water. Go away and amend your plan to suit me or I will taunt you a second time.

Posted by: Doug Newton at August 27, 2007 10:32 AM (NcVyq)

2 ALL OF THE ABOVE! Dion doe not find it easy to make decisions. He finds it much easier to tell others how to decide. Harper is the one who has caused problems for himself though. Instead of sticking to his guns with Rona Ambrose, he puts Baird in place to court Ontario. Harper knows Y2Kyoto is a farce and a scam but he is playing the game anyway. It will be his own fault if we again get the Liberals calling the shots. This is what happens when you don't have a backbone.

Posted by: George at August 27, 2007 11:10 AM (NQMwH)

3 Between Duceppe and Dion, they should gang up on us and put their money where their mouthes are. Yea, George for calling the warts that Harper has, and not overlooking some of the foulups committed by the CPC. The real thing is governance by threat works, so don't count on any one cutting off their nose to spite their face. The two D's are smart enough to realize that- If it works, don't fix it. So, yes Dion is a nut, a coward and a cynic, but in this instance, not stupid.

Posted by: Dave from Campbell River at August 27, 2007 12:05 PM (0WQh0)

4 Dion's been a total embarassment to the pro-Kyoto crowd. I want to know what Elizabeth May has to say if Dion does not force a non-confidence vote. Is the alliance over?

Posted by: at August 27, 2007 12:42 PM (ucyrd)

5 I have asked on many Liberals blogs for Liberal supporter to defend and debate the Liberal GHG strategy when Dion had the chance to actually do something. So far I have been kicked off of Cherniaks site for asking Jason for a fact based debate on the enviornment, Had Garth call me names and ignore my challenge and got called names on Red Tory for challenging Dion's lies. But nobody wants to talk facts. Please somebody....anybody.... Cowards all of them. If the CPC cannot tear down this lying Liberal called Dion, then they need more help than we think. "I cannot lie" Dion should be made to pay for this LIE!

Posted by: Jeff at August 27, 2007 12:46 PM (qt+7e)

6 'The real thing is governance by threat works, so don't count on any one cutting off their nose to spite their face.' Yah, until someone calls your bluff. Confidence motion of Kyoto or bust. Confidence motion on Afghanistan vote in Feb 2008. Oh, and these motions BEFORE PMSH sets out a new agenda.

Posted by: wilson61 at August 27, 2007 12:48 PM (NBDsb)

7 Why the hell would we even bother with Kyoto? Fully implemented (and that includes the U.S. being on board), Kyoto will, according to its supporters, avert a temperature rise of about a tenth of a degree. That's not even measureable because it cannot be distinguished from natural climate variability and would fall within the margin of error of any temperature variance. For that we get to spend billions and possibly wreck our economy? Insanity! Yet the Greenies and alarmists, who claim the planet is doomed unless we stop human-caused global warming, still continue to support Kyoto even though they know it will have no impact. They do this because they know that were they to propose the truly draconian energy-rationing and taxation schemes they believe is needed to save the earth, people would closely scrutinize their alarmist claims. And then the jig would be up for them. The public would quickly realize that their entire case rests on the pseudo-science of fudged climate models.

Posted by: JMD at August 27, 2007 02:24 PM (I5WhA)

8 C'mon folks, remember "that's not fair, do you think it's easy to make priorities"? He's a typical Professor, he and Iggy are a fine team, Flick and Flak. They both look like NUTTY PROFESSORS. Don't think either of them are suited to be PM's. One can't make up his mind on anything, the other had a change of heart re the Iraq war because it was not a fit with the Liberal agenda, NO OTHER REASON. We really need an election but those bozos will not provoke one, none of them are in any state to do so. But, then, they aren't all that swift, what have they got to lose?

Posted by: Libby at August 27, 2007 02:31 PM (3ja9X)

9 Dion is simply huffing and puffing but he won't blow the house down. He's playing a typical Liberal move of running on the left. If he were to win government he would never implement Kyoto, just like Chretien never got rid of the GST. He knows it will wreck the economy but is only using it as a wedge issue. So yes, he's a liar and a coward, but considering the Liberal's track record of broken promises has worked before you can't call his a fool.

Posted by: Andrew Smith at August 27, 2007 05:02 PM (kaZ2m)

10 Dion is simply huffing and puffing but he won't blow the house down. He's playing a typical Liberal move of running on the left. If he were to win government he would never implement Kyoto, just like Chretien never got rid of the GST. He knows it will wreck the economy but is only using it as a wedge issue. So yes, he's a liar and a coward, but considering the Liberal's track record of broken promises has worked before you can't call him a fool.

Posted by: Andrew Smith at August 27, 2007 05:02 PM (kaZ2m)

11 I think Steve JankeÂ’s third option is the closest to the truth: "Or maybe he knows his plan is just so much nonsense, but he's using the environment as a means of gaining power, secretly knowing he has no intention whatsoever to implement this plan or any other when it comes to greenhouse gases and Kyoto." In that case, Dion would be a fraud and a deceiver. If the Liberals were to win the next election, even while running on the suicidally modified Clean Air and Climate Change Act, Dion would simply claim that the time lapsed between his economy-destroying pledge and taking office make it impossible to keep his election promise. He would shamelessly blame the Conservatives for him not being able to keep his election promise, and he would then re-label the existing Conservative plan with a few cosmetic tweaks such as giving Rick Mercer a new comedy stint to promote Â“The New Two-Tonne Challenge.Â”

Posted by: Alan at August 27, 2007 05:24 PM (uwPRb)

12 Alan hit the nail right on the head with this one, if he grows a set, and brings the govt down, and wins a majority, that is actually what he will say,, oh,,it took to long for me to get to power, I can not do it with out destroying the economy. Remember this is the same Mr. Dion that when he was in Cabinet before he became Env Minister, wanted nothing to do with it. Quote from Ms.Stewart She notes StÃ©phane Dion was the federal/provincial minister at the time and he was against Kyoto. "When the prime minister only gets xxxx from everybody, why is he going to be supportive?" asks Stewart. Today, she sighs, Europe is "way ahead of us. Way ahead." - Northumberland

Posted by: Ken at August 27, 2007 06:23 PM (dfmT8)

13 Enough picking on poor Stephane. You might prompt him to stop taunting and fart in our general direction instead. GHG be damned.

Posted by: Waterlooney Clayt at August 27, 2007 06:48 PM (pJ7ud)

14 What is that saying "He doesn't have the BALLS", but we all know that already. Seffie has to be one of my all time favorite LIEberals. rod

Posted by: rod at August 27, 2007 08:44 PM (nBhM7)

15 Steve, you hit the nail on the head when you wrote that Dion is trying to be the Prime Minister from the Opposition bench. The Liberals have for decades called themselves "Canada's Natural Ruling Party" - and, as the saying goes, if you repeat something enough times eventually you'll start to believe it. So Liberals believe they are entitled by some Divine right to govern Canada, regardless of the outcome of elections; after all, they're just loaning power to Harper until they can get the electorate back with the program...

Posted by: Tom at August 27, 2007 09:36 PM (JW99v)

16 Dion doesn't have the balls to go to the polls. He wants the other leftists, bloc/ndp, to do so because he knows the public don't see him as a contender so he harps on about Afganistan and Kyoto. You can forget about any debate with liberal bloggers...their response is to take "cheap shots" at conservatives.

Posted by: Walter at August 28, 2007 10:44 AM (W9A3H)

17 There could be, however, many Liberals "igging" him on. An election sooner rather than later with another Conservative minority as a second best senario would be a chance to get rid of Dion and select a new leader.

Posted by: muttsrus at August 28, 2007 12:08 PM (xKKgC)

18 Do not forget that ol' Strong is in the backroom crying that he is not getting all the money he counted on when he set up Kyoto. The longer the CPC delays, the less $$$$ he gets, so the heat comes down from on high to Steffie to pass it along. As a puppet on a string Stef is just doing as he is told- never an original thought has or will issue from him. Whether the Libs have a hope in hell of winning means naught. It's a matter of doing what is told by the real power.

Posted by: Dave from Campbell River at August 28, 2007 03:26 PM (0WQh0)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

August 25, 2007

Another redesign of the blog

Yeah, I did it yet again. I just can't seem to hit that point where I'm totally satisfied with the way Angry in the Great White North looks and performs. Sometimes when I fiddle with the design I move farther away from that mysterious point. This one, I think, is getting closer. Let me explain some of the changes.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 10:41 PM | Comments (26) | Add Comment
Post contains 777 words, total size 4 kb.

1 I like it. Simple and clean.

Posted by: ferrethouse at August 25, 2007 11:56 PM (N8BWX)

2 Viewing the re-designed site on my Mac PowerBook G4 with Safari 2.0.4, the stuff that's supposed to be in the right sidebars appears beneath the post, not beside it. Same computer with Firefox 2.0.0.6, however, displays the right sidebars where they're supposed to be. Otherwise, I think the new look is much superior to its predecessor. Much easier to read and navigate.

Posted by: Scott Gilbreath at August 26, 2007 12:33 AM (7zAJr)

3 I like it, change sometimes is a good thing and agree with the others.

Posted by: badbeta at August 26, 2007 02:54 AM (NAqnY)

4 Thanks Scott. I see where the problem is. I can fix that easily enough.

Posted by: Steve Janke at August 26, 2007 06:45 AM (3/y8I)

5 OK, that's fixed Scott. Give it about 15 minutes to 30 minutes from the time of this comment to propagate the change across all pages. The home page has already been done.

Posted by: Steve Janke at August 26, 2007 06:58 AM (3/y8I)

6 The new look? It is marvelous and very appealing all around. Well done Steve. Your blog is very important to us and has a prominent place on our Start Bar. Keep doing your very important work it is priceless.

Posted by: Jan at August 26, 2007 07:40 AM (RhyHE)

7 Best yet, Steve!

Posted by: Joe Molnar at August 26, 2007 09:06 AM (KRjFA)

8 This is good!

Posted by: Twolane at August 26, 2007 09:50 AM (myuVS)

9 From the Scribner-Bantam English Dictionary: Conservative: 1.opposed to change in social and political institutions Makes us dinosaurs crazy when you do this, Steve. LOL (actually, it does load a bit faster now -and it's not all that different) Though I did really like it way back when the whole screen was blue...

Posted by: up north at August 26, 2007 10:53 AM (VLPd7)

10 Looks good. Loads faster for me.

Posted by: Peter S. at August 26, 2007 11:29 AM (5hdOB)

11 I like it! It's clean, easier to read, and downloads faster. Bravo...keep up the GR-8 work!

Posted by: 'been around the block at August 26, 2007 12:25 PM (87YyB)

12 Greetings. Your excellent postings are a testiment to your large and loyal traffic. Personally I find this blog very hard to read. There is too much White without enough contrast. It produces glare. If your sidebars were a muted contrasting colour it would make it SO much easier on the eyes. I read your posts and enjoy them but seldom comment or linger looking for other info because of this. Hope this helps. Cheers.

Posted by: sandra at August 26, 2007 03:03 PM (A/RmO)

13 I forgot to mention that some others now have the option to be notified of other comments on the same posting. It is a great help as many of us don't have the time to keep going back to the site to see what other comments have been added. This way we get the info throught our email. Great way to got dialogue going. Cheers.

Posted by: sandra at August 26, 2007 03:10 PM (A/RmO)

14 I very much enjoy the commentary on this blog, but not the site's setup. The easiest to read sites I visit regularly are Dust My Broom, and Small Dead Animals, maybe you could try their style. It does load a lot faster now, though.

Posted by: dmorris at August 26, 2007 07:53 PM (BireE)

15 Looks good Steve!

Posted by: paul m at August 27, 2007 08:53 AM (0g/96)

16 Nice redesign and it loads a whole lot faster. Also, the color scheme is much easier on the eyes. I think your on the right track with this design.

Posted by: phil n at August 27, 2007 09:34 AM (Pb/F0)

17 Makes us dinosaurs crazy when you do this, Steve. in fact this ones MAD, oops I might have gone ot but "up north" made say it. I'm just a victim.

Posted by: DrWright at August 27, 2007 11:26 AM (7G7PK)

18 Makes us dinosaurs crazy when you do this, Steve. In fact this ones MAD, oops I might have gone ot but "up north" made me say it. I'm just a victim here. Click my URL if you want to know what I'm getting at. It looks less cluttered, Ps my dinosaur is gone

Posted by: DrWright at August 27, 2007 11:34 AM (7G7PK)

19 REALLY like this redesign Steve!

Posted by: mecheng at August 27, 2007 12:06 PM (qFcf9)

20 Your blog looks great! And - a bonus - it has substance, too. ;-)

Posted by: Gabby in QC at August 27, 2007 02:21 PM (E2GmW)

21 Looks good, Steve. However, I still have a horizontal scrollbar, for no reason that I can see. Have you got a right margin or pad somewhere that you don't need? DG

Posted by: Darrell Goodman at August 27, 2007 05:54 PM (ncHir)

22 * i see the word "angry" in the banner is now highlighted... did you catch hell for highlighting "white" and decide to change it? *

Posted by: neo at August 27, 2007 07:27 PM (dwcH5)

23 Yes I did neo. Well, not hell. But when I looked at it, I wondered if I was emphasizing the wrong word. I was just playing on the colour white, but obviously white is more than just a colour. I thought I was being paranoid, and then someone emailed me to say that the emphasis could be misconstrued. Clearly I should have followed by gut, and so I re-did it. And I think it actually looks better! Darrel, not sure where the scroll bar is coming from. I've looked at the site using a div viewer, and there are no rogue divs that I can find.

Posted by: Steve Janke at August 28, 2007 11:11 AM (eGtvb)

24 My name is Elena. To me of 20 years. I would like to get acquainted with you if you not against. I Look forward to hear you soon with impatience. Adult Dating Adult Dating

Posted by: datindgew at August 28, 2007 09:10 PM (77XWv)

25 My name is Elena. To me of 20 years. I would like to get acquainted with you if you not against. I Look forward to hear you soon with impatience. Adult Dating Adult Dating

Posted by: datindimf at September 01, 2007 09:33 AM (GIErR)

26 Hello first time to come to this forum, I like it very much!sd5f46s5df465sd4f

Posted by: nike mercurial 9 at December 03, 2012 11:11 AM (Noqlf)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

August 24, 2007

Pulling the curtain back from the Camp Okutta video

The War Child Canada shock video Camp Okutta raised alarms for many viewers, including me, because of what appeared to be children firing weapons and being exposed to pyrotechnic special effects. Though no one seriously though live rounds were used, even blanks are dangerous, something not always appreciated by people accustomed to mock gun battles on television dramas. Given the recent news of children allegedly being injured on another television production, the concern was real.

War Child Canada immediately responded to those concerns, and gladly provided some insight into how the video was produced, and the precautions taken.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 02:12 PM | Comments (22) | Add Comment
Post contains 691 words, total size 5 kb.

1 Nice to see they like to blow the donated cash on shock-ads for even more donations.

Posted by: zilla at August 24, 2007 02:44 PM (Bj1qM)

2 In response to concerns about finances, the entire campaign has been orchestrated by pro-bono advertising and production help. We did not buy any advertising space or promotions. Great companies involved in the process simply decided to donate their time. Once again, it is a pro bono campaign, created by an advertising agency named John St.

Posted by: at August 24, 2007 02:54 PM (BgnQP)

3 In response to concerns about finances, the entire campaign has been orchestrated by pro-bono advertising and production help. We did not buy any advertising space or promotions. Great companies involved in the process simply decided to donate their time. Once again, it is a pro bono campaign, created by an advertising agency named John St.

Posted by: Elliot WCC at August 24, 2007 02:54 PM (BgnQP)

4 Elliot, that is all well and good, but there are still major safety infractions concerning the way those children were firing those weapons. What little personal protective equipment they had, which all I can see is under rated foam for their ears, was not even inserted properly, on that one child it is insert across the ear canal not inserted into it. You might as well not even have it on. The list of safety infractions is quite lengthy and I can only assume that any parents that were there and allowed their children to continue has no fire arm training either.

Posted by: Ken at August 24, 2007 03:08 PM (dfmT8)

5 If the ERU guys were involved they should all be suspended and sent back to the Ontario Police College for retraining. The safety aspects that were clearly blown in the video are inexcusible. Oh and unless the fake grenade blasts were created by Compressed air.........chemicals were involved. That would also explain the use of pyrotechnicians. Not to mention if the "dust" was created "away" from the children.....why exactly do you see it dropping on top of them? Nope..........not going to buy it.

Posted by: EESASTORM at August 24, 2007 03:22 PM (Lr4pJ)

6 Wow, must be a slow day - even with Montebello and the CPC election funding violations. I'm pretty sure you missed it, so I'll point it out for everyone: These people are trying to draw attention to a very serious issue about extreme exploitation of children. Why do you want to be the pedantic ass complaining about gun safey when they fired a few rounds of blanks and set off some pyrotechnics to make such an important point? Would child soldiers be wearing ear protection and BEW? Including them would ruin the suspension of disbelief required to make the campaign effective. I'm own both long guns and handguns and I'm a big advocate of gun safety. Nevertheless, I can understand the desire to make a campaign that carries the necessary emotional weight and the commensurate need to relax certain guidelines. They are guidelines, remember, not laws - and there will always be people looking to deflect attention from their own personal partisan politics towards trivial matters like this.

Posted by: anon at August 24, 2007 04:05 PM (8gUSm)

7 Anon, As am I to a grown adult, and I too know the rules of firearm safety, Are you telling me these children did, did they waive the right to PPE. Are you telling me it is ok to possible endanger and exploit these children to make the point that other children are exploited. Please explain what anyone's personal partisian politics are in this issue. I have seen no one advocate for the use of children soldiers and myself as a soldier find it inherently tragic, exploitive and evil. I find your reasoning as posted ludicrous

Posted by: Ken at August 24, 2007 05:04 PM (dfmT8)

8 If the York ERU are involved in this...hand in your badges boys. You just tossed any credibility you might have had. Nothing that WCC says is now credible to me. Something about this reminds me of those phony campaigns from years ago and it makes me uncomfortable. Maybe it's the "organic explosives" they tried to pawn off that insults my intelligence or the "no one got sprayed with dust" after watching debris hit the table and spray the kids. It seems they are now spinning this one as they have been caught. The York ERU really needs to answer how they can justify what they did with those children. How many children spoke to the counselors? Judging by some facial expressions, there had to be one or two. BTW What are the GPS co-ordinates where they shot the videos? I'm sure that they wouldn't have any problems with anyone wanting to "inspect" their camp. If they are being totally honest and above board... I feel bad for those Child Soldiers, I feel worse that someone is discrediting their plight with theatrics and that less knowledgable people will buy into it. I'm also not clear on how WCC will do this? Do I give money so that they can buy the children's freedoms from the warlords? Will WCC hire a private army to go in and "rescue" the children? Will WCC wine and dine despots and ambassadors? Their answer invokes more questions...

Posted by: Peter S. at August 24, 2007 05:38 PM (5hdOB)

9 Frankly, whether or not the ERU team was involved there are several glaring failures in the handling and safety surrounding both the use of pyrotechnics and firearms in the videos. More important, I think, is the fact that the video - as cheesy as it is - detracts from the real issue because of the controversy it has spawned along with posters/etc. around Toronto. In reality, the single image at http://www.warchild.ca/campokutta.html showing the child's hands holding empty brass brings the message home much better than contrived videos with clean white kids in snazzy t-shirts and a happy go lucky camp counselor.

Posted by: Rafael at August 24, 2007 05:53 PM (Vxtwf)

10 I am curious as to why this charity is using FAKE cinema and FALSE pretence to scoop up donations? Is the cause not worthy enough? Are the "Pro Bono" contributers not expecting any remuneration for all those trauma, explosive, arms, safety etc etc salaries? This looks like a SCAM!

Posted by: zilla at August 24, 2007 07:20 PM (YGosC)

11 gladly provided some insight into how the video was produced, and the precautions taken. They undoubtedly took the very wise and cautious step of securing a big, fat government grant before a single frame of video was shot. We should all be so careful.

Posted by: at August 24, 2007 08:57 PM (tgNL5)

12 Yet another charity with Scads-0-Dollars to burn on niche ads. I wonder if the veneer was peeled off, how many salaries, Escolades, mortgages etc. would be revealed as being funded by this (yet another) charity.

Posted by: zilla at August 24, 2007 09:16 PM (YGosC)

13 The funny thing is..every kid i know who has seen this 'training aid' wants to know where they can go to a camp that allows them to do the things shown in the video!

Posted by: Kursk at August 24, 2007 09:45 PM (x8+jh)

14 "The funny thing is..every kid i know who has seen this 'training aid' wants to know where they can go to a camp that allows them to do the things shown in the video!" Thats what the Khadr family did, they went to Terrorist training camps. Daddy was stuck in pakistan prison but Chretien got him released so he could raise his kids. remember THAT?

Posted by: at August 24, 2007 10:36 PM (YGosC)

15 My daughter wants to go. Now I'm going to have to tell her the video isn't real. Course It's not like she hasn't shot a rifle before she's almost 10 eh.

Posted by: DrWright at August 24, 2007 10:41 PM (GM0MJ)

16 Gee, it was awfully good of the folks at WCC to contact you so promptly. Hmmmm. I wonder why they might have done that...

Posted by: Red Tory at August 26, 2007 04:20 AM (Hpefv)

17 Hey Red Tory....this look familiar? Anonymous said... Well, considering that the making of the video appears to violate a number of firearms laws and firearm safety regulations/requirements. AK (prohibited firearm) can't be used at a range. (see SAP comment) Prohibited firearm(s) transported to a location other than an approved range (see SAP comment) Discharge of a prohibited firearm at a location other than an approved range. Special Authority to Possess (SAP) required to transport. CFO doesn't issue SAP's anymore. This has been identified by WCC as a pro-bono or charitable contribution, therefore it is a charitable event. If WCC had done so for "educational purpose" without promotng it's website or releasing the video, that might have washed. Their public statement wipes out that argument's possibility. Charitible events do not qualify for CFO approval to issue an SAP. The York ERU may have just handed firearms owners a very compelling argument. By apparently violating the laws they enforce or by being apparently granted something that has previously been grounds for refusal. Just because they are the Police doesn't mean they can apparently violate the laws they are paid to enforce. BTW, the ERU would have to be "on duty" in order to "qualify" as "duty purpose". Therefore someone is being paid. That's our tax dollars being misused. Yep, thinking of the children here. They are being taught that it's OK for the police to apparently break the law, even if it's "fun". Nice one. Thanks

Sunday, August 26, 2007 10:12:00 AM

Posted by: at August 26, 2007 12:15 PM (5hdOB)

18 I suggest you take it up with the authorities in question then. Knock yourself out.

Posted by: Red Tory at August 26, 2007 04:33 PM (Hpefv)

19 Planning to. As a matter of fact. I'll be seeing a Firearms Officer in the morning...

Posted by: at August 26, 2007 07:02 PM (5hdOB)

20 These guys were making bombs....small ones. A rapidly accelerating peeble could have easily taken out an eyeball. Forget the guns and blanks. They've got MORE SERIOUS PROBLEMS with the safety and legality of those "pyrotechnics". Making "bomblets" is illegal. 14 years in jail. You need a FEDERAL permit to fabricate ANY device or combine chemicals. Use of any explosive material for anything other than its intended purpose is illegal, too. Why not tell us the exact nature of the explosions?

Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at August 27, 2007 08:52 AM (g7gYB)

21 That kind of deflagrating action from safe, organic chemicals? Wow! What is it they've discovered? Call the Canadian Institute of Mining, it could be a real breakthrough! The only possible thing they might have used would have been NONEX, but they didn't and are too stupid to say that they did, so that says a lot for their "experts", and "professional gun wranglers" and "trauma specialists". If it was all so safe, then why did they need all the extra creeps JUST IN CASE?

Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at August 27, 2007 09:04 AM (g7gYB)

22 Every poster on this thread is a complete moron. The message, not the messenger,,,, sheesh, you people are as pathetic as any I can fathom. Unless there were injuries and some gross violation of the law, what the hell are you all going on about? Pyrotechnitions are licensed explosives handlers. BTW, fireworks we all enjoy on Canada Day are made from gunpowder...you can also take a 2 day blasting course just about anywhere and get a license to buy TNT and dynamite....yup!, right here in Canada. My sister has one.....imagine, a wee defenseless GIRL has a license to blow stuff up. I mean REALLY! The police department was there, EMT's and trauma councelors....what the hell more did you think was required?...maybe a priest? or how about Barney the dinosaur?....Or are you really just trying to disguise you aversion to anything resembling a firearm?...Think it's deplorable that a child fires a gun? I'll bet that is it, isn't it? No little Socialist dogma trying to poke it's head out from under your mock outrage? EVERY man, woman and child over 6 should have to pick up a rife and a handgun at least once in their lives and become at least exposed to what guns are.....and more importantly, what they are not. You don't have to change your opinion of them, but at least become informed and know what the hell you are talking about .,for a change. Guns are pieces of wood and steel...cold, lifeless objects. They only become dangerous when the wrong people pick them up. Asshats all of you.

Posted by: arctic_front at August 29, 2007 06:08 PM (/be2/)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Is Working Families planning to expand into the tricky business of user-generated content?

WorkingFamilies.ca is insisting that it is an independent organization, not tied to the Liberals, and that it is only discussing issues.

When you control a website, it is relatively easy to make sure you don't cross the line.

But once you invite your user base to contribute content, you have to be careful. If you've cultivated a rabidly partisan fan base, your delicately constructed facade of non-partisanship can quickly disintegrate as your users make votes and not issues the most important subject of discussion.

I bring this up because it looks like WorkingFamilies.ca might be planning a move in this direction.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 12:09 PM | Comments (4) | Add Comment
Post contains 742 words, total size 5 kb.

1 Please keep us updated on this organization, Steve. WorkingFamilies may well turn out to be non-partisan. But, the proof will be in how arms-length from the Liberal Party it operates (or would be seen as operating by a person of reasonably normal intelligence).

Posted by: Brian in Calgary at August 24, 2007 12:48 PM (g7gYB)

2 It would be interesting to see were this Working families outfit is coming from and were it intents to go. Sofar I don't think that McGuinty and Ontario Liberal party can be trusted,but the proof is in the pudding, and not enough of it has been served.The PC of Ontario is correct to have this affair being looked into by the Elections Ontario officials.If that will reveal anything, remains to be seen.

Posted by: Jan at August 24, 2007 01:45 PM (RhyHE)

3 If election Ontario rules this is fair, them some PC loyalist that is not being paid by the party would be allowed to do the same and begin third party advertising. Someone correct me if I am wrong on this scenrio. Mr. McGuinty on the tube 24 hours a day, saying i will not lower your taxes but I will not raise them either, here watch me sign this pledge. No campaign financing rules to worry about at all. The " officially not a part of the party " group with the most money wins. This might be an amusing election after all.

Posted by: Ken at August 24, 2007 03:16 PM (dfmT8)

4 Oh for G*d's sake. "Working Families" is a leftoid buzz word meaning families that need substitute daycare to take care of their kids, so that the State can bring them up to be good little uber-in-lockstep-jackboot-we-love-the-State goons. Jack Layton uses the term all the time, implying that the NDP are the political party that honours "working families." Right, Jack. I'll make a note of that. Well, I've got news for you, Mr. Layton and "Working Families." The jig's up. You're a bunch of partisan hacks and a lot of Canadian voters are getting wise to your agenda. Thanks, Steve, for exposing these poseurs for what they are: brazen political, partisan hacks. I hope that Elections Ontario does the right thing and closes them down.

Posted by: 'been around the block at August 25, 2007 06:10 PM (87YyB)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Michael Bryant's crazy hotel bills

Dalton McGuinty's Liberal government seems to have issues when it comes to protecting the public purse. Nothing criminal, but reckless. The latest involves Attorney General Michael Bryant. First, a legal conference paid for by the government quadrupled in price from one year to the next, in no small part because it was held at a luxury resort instead of a more utilitarian conference centre. An isolated case? Well, it turns out that Michael Bryant spends a lot of money on hotels. Very nice hotels.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 09:08 AM | Comments (8) | Add Comment
Post contains 417 words, total size 3 kb.

1 We note that when confronted with these insular ruling class excesses, Bryant acted like a typical indignant autocrat punk. As I have stated here and elsewhere before; Bryant is the lowest form of life ever to inhabit human skin. He is a visible reminder that Ontario is sinking into the abyss of Cuban style statism and is a constant reminder that the voters who would put such an obvious ambitious self styled Ubermensch in office are as blank on political sense as they are on human nature....only sub human intellect would allow a megalomaniac to get near the levers of political power.....obviously Ontario has far too many idiots going to the polls.

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at August 24, 2007 09:24 AM (INHn8)

2 I wonder if an access to information request would find out if there were indeed ppv movies expensed. And further what the titles of said movies might be.

Posted by: Reid at August 24, 2007 09:28 AM (rXo+C)

3 This is a letter that the Lib MPP for Sault Ste. Marie posted in the Sault Star. I couldn't find the original maybe you can dated Aug 21. http://www.saultstar.com/webapp/sitepages/content.asp?contentid=663178&catname=Letters&classif=Editorials Taxpayers' money belongs to the people Letters - Wednesday, August 22, 2007 Updated @ 7:37:48 AM A letter appeared in Tuesday's Sault Star discussing the allocation of taxpayers' money in Ontario. Contrary to the claim made by letter writer Frank Doran, I have never and would never suggest that Ontario taxpayers' money belongs to any particular political party, since we all know it belongs to the people of this province. Each government sets its spending priorities in accordance with the interests of the citizens they represent. I am proud to be part of a Liberal government that has not only made our community a priority but has delivered record levels of investment. I would also respectfully ask The Sault Star to be more thorough in verifying the claims of its letter writers. David Orazietti, Sault Ste. Marie MPP

Posted by: Pissedoff at August 24, 2007 11:31 AM (uEALw)

4 It's attitudes like Bryant's that will put Ontario into Have-Not territory. This is total and utter disrespect for the people, arrogance beyond belief. If McGuinty and his lies from last election are overlooked and they get back to power, this province is toast. We won't be the Bread Basket, we'll be a basket case. Have to worry about the demographic of this province. As it is in Federal elections, the 905 corridor is where elections are won or lost. McGuinty is not the sharpest knife in the drawer but he knows which one to use to butter up his Liberal base in Toronto and environs, Liberals taking care of Liberals,oblivious to what's going on around them. People get into politics to do things for the people, not for themselves.........that's the joke for today. Bryant is no joke, he's a real prig.

Posted by: Libby at August 24, 2007 11:32 AM (rITbk)

5 "Boneheaded" sounds like one of the PPV movies that Bryant might've watched in his hotel room and had the taxpayers fund.

Posted by: amanda at August 24, 2007 01:23 PM (2bEDO)

6 If Bryant has not proven by now that he and the Liberal Party should not be re-elected it will never happen. We certainly should hope that the people of Ontario have enough sense to be woken up by then.

Posted by: Jan at August 24, 2007 01:54 PM (RhyHE)

7 What do you expect from the Head Pig?

Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at August 25, 2007 08:50 AM (g7gYB)

8 Why is this story not given more attention in the media? Oh, right, it's the Liberals and it's a bunch of Legal Eagles and they're worth it. Truthfully they should be skewered, the Bums.

Posted by: Libby at August 27, 2007 02:37 PM (3ja9X)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

August 23, 2007

Canadian kids used as props and exposed to real danger in order to protest putting kids at risk [Updated]

A viral video showing Canadian kids firing assault rifles is supposed to make me think about child soldiers. Actually, I was happy that none of the kids in the video lost an eye.

Update: War Child Canada has responded to explain just how carefully the video was managed.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 10:20 PM | Comments (23) | Add Comment
Post contains 1281 words, total size 9 kb.

1 I'd look first for the company which supplied the props, such as the AKs and grenades. The reputable ones generally supply a safety supervisor to monitor how the props are used. Cheers

Posted by: J.M. Heinrichs at August 23, 2007 10:39 PM (Owdur)

2 Someone definately needs to answer some questions and take responsibility. Their parents thought this was a good enough idea to let them participate? This just made my skin crawl thinking about "our kids" welfare participating in that video. I looked at that and didn't even really think about the real Child Soldiers plight. Totally irresponsible. Education is one thing, but geez...

Posted by: Peter S. at August 23, 2007 10:49 PM (5hdOB)

3 I took a good look at the firing a few times. I'm a pretty experienced shooter, and I do not think they were firing real guns. I think they were holding real guns, and were moving them around like they were firing, but the firing and the mechanisms moving, and shell ejection were added digitally in post-production. The AK47 uses a 7.62x39mm round that is roughly the same in power and recoil as a .308 winchester (aka 7.62 NATO) that I own. There is no way that those AK-47's were putting out that little recoil from that hot a round. Even if they used blanks with as little powder as neccessary to cycle the action it would have kicked more than it looked. So, my vote is that it was digitally editted. Tacky, lame, propaganda, yes. Child endangerment, no.

Posted by: Paul M. at August 23, 2007 11:17 PM (GYqHM)

4 Digitally edited? CGI muzzle flashes? Who can afford that sort of thing? But maybe you're right. I sure would like to know how this was done.

Posted by: Steve Janke at August 23, 2007 11:58 PM (3/y8I)

5 The kids were using yellow foam earplugs, which I use for shooting quieter guns. Take a close look around the 1:05 - 1:10 mark. Other than that, I don't see anything that was done right.

Posted by: Jack at August 24, 2007 12:11 AM (2HU+O)

6 War Child Canada shirts are American Apparel sweatshop free garments, made in the USA. I guess Canadian shirts aren't good enough.

Posted by: Andrew at August 24, 2007 12:40 AM (dqBP8)

7 I am getting a little tired of "Causes" telling me that we condone something because it doesn't effect us. Canada has condemned child soldiers for as long as I can remember. Perhaps this gentleman would vote for the western democracies to utilize our military and invade all those countries that allow it. What would he have this country do, most countries ban it and it utilized by terrorist and insurgents in the most part three world countries. I love these orgs that come at you with a problem but offer no workable solution to the problem, should we cut off aid to the insurgents in the Congo, I am pretty sure we have never gave aid to these people, so that solution is out, or maybe we can have a big meeting, gather in a room, eat lots of timbits, gather donations from the public and accomplish sweet f&*k off. That seems to be the way to pretend to get things done

Posted by: Ken at August 24, 2007 06:38 AM (dfmT8)

8 The little pyro bombs would definitely be a hazard and most likely illegal, as is the manufacture of any explosive compound, or device intended to injure or maim someone. I heard no commands given on the Firing Line, nor orders to remove magazines, and to check the bolts and chambers. I was a 14-year old child soldier once. Training was never like this.....very careless. Wait 'til some kid's eye gets put out....

Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at August 24, 2007 07:02 AM (g7gYB)

9 Hi Steve, We would like to discuss your concerns. I have just e-mailed you! Regards.

Posted by: Elliot WCC at August 24, 2007 09:18 AM (BgnQP)

10 When I first saw this ad, my hope that it was real over rode my better sense of satire. I thought that this would be an ideal camp to give insulated, pampered, soft yuppie urban spoiled brats some empathy with their counter parts in nations where the people have to fight to keep tyrants from governing....make them appreciate the value of a maintaining healthy democracy....then I went nawwww too real to be real....no one in this insulated nanny state urban backwater would ever promote true empathy with the real world.

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at August 24, 2007 09:32 AM (INHn8)

11 As for the hysteria over danger levels, I have been a range officer in charge of about this many kids we had in organized target clubs and had at least this many on the firing line at one time with live ammo. There was no problems in the 8 years I was there...kids follow instructions far better than adults....they had fun and they learned respect for firearms....when we were finished with them these kids were far better informed and aware of firearms and firearms safety than the average Adult. They are all the better for their experience. In this ad the arms are obviously movie props ( yes this is a legit business in Canada)...the AK has been banned for civilian use/ownership in Canada for over a decade and the spread of the muzzel flash from SL blanks tells me the muzzels are restricted to contain any chunks of debris from packing the blanks (carbord/chalk/wax) and makes firing live functional ammo impossible. A safety trainer and prop manager were probably present ( this is mandatory in Canada) when these kids were on a hot line firing blanks with these props. I'll wager making this ad was the most fun these kids ever had.

Posted by: WL Mackenzie Redux at August 24, 2007 09:49 AM (INHn8)

12 It did kinda look fun... But those rifles aren't even firing proper blanks. Watch closely -can anyone see even one brass casing flying through the air ? Obviously -and especially so for any ex-servicemen here- this is complete bullshit. I'd love to take surfer-boy out to a real grenade range and see if he thinks crouching behind a park bench will help, after he throws a live grenade. I frankly doubt that the kids were put at any real risk. I would, however, like to know if this do-gooder nonsense was paid for from money that you and I and the rest of us worked for (our tax dollars, in other words).

Posted by: up north at August 24, 2007 10:14 AM (8aekZ)

13 Hi there, Like I mentioned above, we will address your safety concerns. In response to concerns about finances, the entire campaign has been orchestrated by pro-bono advertising and production help. We did not buy any advertising space or promotions. Great companies involved in the process simply decided to donate their time. Regards

Posted by: Elliot WCC at August 24, 2007 10:19 AM (BgnQP)

14 Elliot WCC, Thanks for answering my question about financing this. Now, as long as we have you, what is the point of this video ? As Ken pointed out, above -would you like us to send the PPCLI and maybe a squadron or two of fighter-bombers over to wherever and kill off any regimes that use child soldiers ? Or, God forbid (!), have the Americans go in and do so ? I'm not trying to be mean, but, what exactly would you have us -the Canadian people- do ?

Posted by: up north at August 24, 2007 10:36 AM (8aekZ)

15 Shorter Steve Wanke: "Sue me again for libel. My blog gets more hits that way!"

Posted by: Angry on a Great White Toilet at August 24, 2007 10:52 AM (BoP1l)

16 Steve - is there any way you can put an ignore option on your blog? That way we wouldn't have to read such tripe from Toilet-troll.

Posted by: Brian in Calgary at August 24, 2007 12:40 PM (g7gYB)

17 Steve - why not just act a little bit like a real journalist and call WarChild up and ask them how the video was done before posting a headline like "Canadian kids used as props and exposed to real danger ..."? As I hope you have noticed amazing things can be done with special effects nowadays, and even professionals can be fooled by what they see in a video. It is irresponsible for you to throw out accusations on the basis of a few views of a video and a Toronto Star story that doesn't even discuss the details of how the video was made. Further, the New Mexico story is interesting, but in this case irrelevant. Does the Ontario Attorney General have anything to say about this particular video? Did you call the Attorney General's office to find out? Are you asking for another libel suit?

Posted by: Wonderment at August 24, 2007 01:29 PM (SCOk/)

18 THIS WAS BLATENTLY UNSAFE! No ifs No ands No buts! Zero eye protection and limited ear protection. No excuses what so ever. BTW...I have also taught hundreds of kids how to shoot safely. Everyone knows that eye and ear protection are mandatory.

Posted by: EESASTORM at August 24, 2007 02:02 PM (Lr4pJ)

19 How is that title wrong Wonderment? The kids are "props" for the WCC videos. The camp counselors are the "actors". Let's see...things that go BANG! and BOOM! ARE dangerous and accidents can happen. Don't believe me? Ask your parents.

Posted by: Pete S at August 24, 2007 02:10 PM (5hdOB)

20 It's wrong because much of what you see in the video in terms of muzzle flashes and explosions were actually done with CGI, *not* BANG! and BOOM! on the set with the children present. (So I guess there are ifs, ands, and buts.) I'll reiterate - you can't tell what was going on behind the scenes just from watching the video. The CGI special effects were donated to the WarChild video by an advertising agency. You can't have an accident with a CGI special effect. Or do you guys believe the multitudes of Orcs in Lord of the Rings were real, too? If Steve had bothered to ask WarChild ahead of time, he would have found this out. Check out: http://redtory.blogspot.com/2007/08/warchild-update.html

Posted by: Wonderment at August 24, 2007 03:31 PM (SCOk/)

21 Making bombs, even little ones IS ILLEGAL. These clowns at Camp RumpRanger have been manufacturing them. The video is proof obvious. They're not MINING decoratives stone...

Posted by: Feldwebel Wolfenstool at August 25, 2007 08:56 AM (g7gYB)

22 Wonderbread. I wonder how can CGI simulate "powder and smoke" without distorting the image it overlaps? If blanks were used; where are the Blank Firing Attachments that are typically used when firing blanks in a semi-automatic rifle? I wonder how something required to make it work, is missing. I couldn't see any paper wads getting tossed downrange. "Something" is required to build up the pressure and allow the gas to work the piston that causes the action to cycle and chanber the next cartridge for the next shot. I saw one muzzle profile for sure in the video. I saw the commonly seen "flash eliminator/compensator" used on AK's prior to the newer generation that has been developed. Something doesn't seem right. Time to root around some more. ...just thinking out loud.

Posted by: Peter S at August 27, 2007 01:46 PM (5hdOB)

23 I just watched video. From :33 to :38 you see the landmine explosion. They say the dust was directed away. In the video you can see it drifting in the direction of the children. At :33, you see a piece of debris cross near a small boy. He reacts just as it passes by and looks down to follow it's path and looking at it on the ground. FWIW. Many years ago in the CF. We had an Artillery Simulator demo. Light Sim, place under issued helmet. Boom! Watch helmet travel approx 40-60 feet up in the air. The purpose was to demonstrate the strength and danger of pyrotechnics. From past experience with this demo and the resulting debris, I didn't watch the helmet, I watched the blast. The Arty Sim Whistle flew out into the group. I got lucky, saw it flying, and put my hand out and managed to stop it before it hit the person next to me. It's trajectory was in line with her face. FYI, It stung like a bitch. I got an elbow for "being an ass and blocking her view of the helmet." Blissfully innocent that she almost got a piece of hard plastic in the face. I also got an apology and a thanks when I showed her what she didn't see coming.

Posted by: at August 27, 2007 02:35 PM (5hdOB)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

Elizabeth May notes most of her party really needs to exercise more

An amusing statement by Elizabeth May on the average shape of the progressive protester in Canada makes me wonder what the Green Party would look like if the membership ate fewer potato chips and went out for a walk once in a while.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 06:15 PM | Comments (3) | Add Comment
Post contains 399 words, total size 3 kb.

Did Stephane Dion hand over the secret keys to ClimateForChange.ca?

I keep coming back to the SSL certificate. Why is the SSL certificate for ClimateForChange.ca listed to be the certificate for stephanedion.ca? The more I think about it, the more uneasy I become. There is just no way that should have happened by accident. What I do understand of how certificates work suggests that this connection is a big deal.

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 02:02 PM | Comments (19) | Add Comment
Post contains 1018 words, total size 7 kb.

1 did you know that the G&M has an article about workingfamilies.ca??

Posted by: tori at August 23, 2007 04:11 PM (0RN+c)

2 It's quite telling that you choose to be bothered by this rather than the Conservative's scheme that has them at odds with Election Canada.

Posted by: rob at August 23, 2007 04:41 PM (td0xh)

3 Angry is trying (on Buckler's instructions no doubt) to change the channel. Unfortunately, a money-laundering scam is very hard to sideswipe :-) Be brave Angry. Write about the Citizen piece. It will set you free. Liberty, freedom and all that.

Posted by: at August 23, 2007 05:09 PM (qSzdx)

4 bzzzzt I...do...not...know...Buckler. I...do...not...know...Buckler. end...of...transmission bzzzzt Seriously, as always, this story is mine. 100%. I don't know if the PMO folks have even seen it. I stumbled on the connection entirely on my own.

Posted by: Steve Janke at August 23, 2007 05:19 PM (PDZgn)

5 Looks to me that "rob" and the brave annon poster are themselves trying to "change the channel" from this latest example of Liberal corruption.

Posted by: Paul M at August 23, 2007 05:43 PM (HTYBA)

6 Nice job btw Steve!

Posted by: Paul M at August 23, 2007 05:44 PM (HTYBA)

7 Me thinks Stephan's gremlins were dispatched to try and change the channel on your discovery, Steve. Prepare for some kind of digital attack on your site. The slimy Liberals invented dirty tricks, they wont stop now.

Posted by: zilla at August 23, 2007 05:47 PM (WX90B)

8 Sorry to hi-jack but will the investigation on the personnel files "left by the movers"that were trundled out by the Libs be completed before the end of the year

Posted by: at August 23, 2007 05:49 PM (eF3vp)

9 I've taken a brief look at the site. If you try to make a donation, your information is sent to https://secure.fasttransact.com - where they are using a proper & valid cert. The credit card merchant name is 'Canadian Centre for Policy Ingenuity' (btw - your ip address, dns name and browser version are all logged). However, the stephanedion.ca cert could not have been put on the server without having control of the cert. Perhaps it is just a left-over from when sd.ca was on this server. It could have been moved, and then cfc.ca run on the same server instance.

Posted by: Mike F at August 23, 2007 06:18 PM (zGSom)

10 However, the stephanedion.ca cert could not have been put on the server without having control of the cert. Perhaps it is just a left-over from when sd.ca was on this server. It could have been moved, and then cfc.ca run on the same server instance. Thanks for that, Mike. A question, though. Isn't a certificate associated with a site, not a server? Why would a query report that SD certificate for CfC? Each site would its own certificate, wouldn't it? Multiple certificates on one server hosting multiple sites. My understanding could be off, but either a certificate is associated with a site or it is not.

Posted by: Steve Janke at August 23, 2007 06:26 PM (PDZgn)

11 Hey Steve, The Private Key is a file that sits on the server. It need not belong to the same domain "name", but if it doesn't, it must resolve to the same IP (which typically means, the same hosting location). There doesn't =have= to be a conscious handover of the cert. However, if this is hosted by a provider, they are sloppy and unprofessional to leave a private key kicking around for other organizations to see & use. This also reflects poorly on the IT people that help the liberals, why wouldn't they pony up the cache to be a signing authority and create their own keys? Oh ya, that's right, they're broke! *giggles* It'd've only cost them a few bucks to not leave this trail at all... sloppy...

Posted by: Lore_Weaver at August 23, 2007 07:33 PM (JW1Ht)

12 I had a feeling my understanding of keys and certificates was faulty. The fact that there is no proactive handover bothers me. But then I'm not a network architect, so maybe this represents the best that could be done.

Posted by: Steve Janke at August 23, 2007 07:54 PM (3/y8I)

13 When you assign a SSL certificate to a website, you first generate a certificate signing request (CSR) from the webserver which will be serving the pages. During this process you provide information such as url, organization etc etc. The fact that this site is showing that URL associated with it, means that the person running the webserver has administrative access to the web server of both sites, and either purposfully or accidently assigned the certificate for **dion.ca to **change.ca. When you are prompted to accept the certificate there is also an option to view the cert, which may provide further information. Long and short, the person in change of the web server, or the website itself depending on the provider had access to both. The **dion cert would have been created first, and then assigned to the **change site.

Posted by: IT dude at August 23, 2007 09:53 PM (HbxPA)

14 That IT dude. It sounds like we're back to the same people behind both sites.

Posted by: Steve Janke at August 23, 2007 10:27 PM (3/y8I)

15 "It sounds like we're back to the same people behind both sites." Let's be clear: the same sysadmins behind both sites. To me, this isn't proof positive of astroturfing. It merely proves that the climateforchange.ca people are using the same web server and sysadmins as some Liberals. Could be a coincidence, or maybe not.

Posted by: Dirk at August 23, 2007 11:00 PM (LHYMr)

16 I said as much in my first addendum in my previous post. But the known links between the two organizations, and the presence of the CfC site on a server that seems to otherwise be solely for the use of Liberal Party websites, and the question of the SSL certificate together suggest something stronger. Enough for a warrant, but not a conviction, in a legal sense. In other words, enough to justify a few pointed questions from journalists, I think.

Posted by: Steve Janke at August 23, 2007 11:55 PM (3/y8I)

17 It would be "enough to justify a few pointed questions from journalists" but we're talking about Liberals here, thus no interest.

Posted by: Libby at August 25, 2007 10:24 AM (r+CiU)

18 I do this kind of stuff for a living, normally, the private key is protected by a password. This is to prevent it's fraudulant re-use if somebody gets ahold of it. It is not normal for the private key to be stored in the clear but it does happen. Whether or not it is stored encrypted (ie. protected by a password) or in the clear is, initially, decided by whomever requests the certificate. The server won't start (with the specified certificate installed) unless it has access to the corresponding private key. I imagine the same crew who managed the sd.ca site also manage the change.ca site and were either too lazy or cheap to request a new cert (certs cost $). Either way, they are likely breaking the agreement they made with whomever issued them their cert. Nothing new for the Libs though... breaking an agreement, taking the easy way out etc etc.

Posted by: Mike C at August 25, 2007 03:54 PM (eRQcE)

19 FYI, I have just sent a request to both Starfield and Valicert (the two superior certificate authorities in the certificate chain) requesting that the server certificate for stephanedion.ca be revoked for contravening their CA's subscriber agreement.

Posted by: Mike C at August 25, 2007 04:08 PM (eRQcE)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

August 22, 2007

Just how closely connected are ClimateForChange.ca and the federal Liberal Party?

ClimateForChange.ca s going to sue the federal government over its Kyoto Plans. An example of grassroots action? Or a political move by one of the opposition parties?

But how could that be if ClimateForChange.ca is an independent non-profit group?

more...

Posted by: Steve Janke at 10:39 PM | Comments (19) | Add Comment
Post contains 1405 words, total size 11 kb.

1 Holy cow dude... Bennett Environmental Inc."

Posted by: Darcey at August 22, 2007 10:55 PM (uPJWd)

2 Just when you think the libs depravity can't get any worse. They always seem to find a shovel to dig that hole a little bit deeper.

Posted by: missing link at August 22, 2007 11:54 PM (0Hcwj)

3 Notify the media immediately. I'm actually not joking. Notify a news outlet ASAP.

Posted by: at August 23, 2007 12:53 AM (aFH8Q)

4 Wow, super sleuthing, Steve. There seems to be a recurring pattern with these "grassroots movements". Maybe it's just my dial-up but I cannot access the ClimateforChange website.

Posted by: muttsrus at August 23, 2007 06:06 AM (QiDWO)

5 Liberals are all for saving the environment. They are saving real grass online, likely for smoking.

Astroturfing seems the new Liberal way. Professional reporters should be outraged, but since most are too lazy to do any real reporting, they will ignore this issue. They like the message, and love the messenger.

Posted by: Black Knight at August 23, 2007 06:20 AM (g7gYB)

6 It's not just you Steve, it's a crock. And who will charge Canada? The UN who doesn't care about the genocide re Christians in darfur? Our biggest trade partners USA and Mexico who haven't signed Kyoto? Or an alliance between a bunch of effete eurabians and the miffed Canadian chattering classes. So Stephane Dion wants to sue the CPC for not being active enough in an area where the Libs "didn't get it done.". That's mental. Great thread.

Posted by: DrWright at August 23, 2007 06:41 AM (eUoQ8)

7 I still cannot access the ClimateforChange website. Hmmm. What could wrong over there?

Posted by: muttsrus at August 23, 2007 06:49 AM (QiDWO)

8 There is usually a link between donations and support, we don't give money to things we don't agree with. The Liberals are out to sue their grannies or anyone else because they're so broke, financially and morally. It seems the Kyoto scam is their main battering ram, even though it's gotten through to the majority it's just about the dumbest concoction ever signed by any Prime Minister in recent memory. The very idea we should send money to reward polluters like China so they can keep the coal fires burning and pollute more is brainless. Chretien and pals like Moe Strong are not concerned with the climate of planet earth, they may be concerned with private interests however.

Posted by: Libby at August 23, 2007 07:03 AM (W5lKo)

9 "Notify the media immediately. I'm actually not joking. Notify a news outlet ASAP" If you do, Steve, PLEASE notify Greg Weston, who is still miffed that he, a member of that august PPG, was not allowed into a PRIVATE meeting between Pres. Bush & PM Harper, yet he manages to describe what went on in that meeting. Great imagination, that! Maybe Weston could learn a few sleuthing tricks from you about how to get REAL information, Super Sleuth Steve!

Posted by: Gabby in QC at August 23, 2007 07:20 AM (E2GmW)

10 steve, I hope you are checking ANY website that "appears" to be a grassroots site and supports liberal policy. This stinks. Badly. I also hope you got some good screen captures, because you know the reason why this site is down...

Posted by: tori at August 23, 2007 08:08 AM (0RN+c)

11 Is Groupe Everest still operating ? I am wondering if the link showing the address on O'Connor is an outdated trade index listing. I Googled the address and it seems to be claimed by the Canadian Centre for Policy Ingenuity. From their website contact listing: Canadian Centre for Policy Ingenuity 302-35 O'Connor Street Ottawa, ON, K1P5M4 Executive Director, Louise Comeau ClimateForChange, John Bennett The Business of Climate Change, Johanna Leffler Perhaps the Groupe Everest office suite has a new occupant?

Posted by: Concerned Torontonian at August 23, 2007 08:26 AM (8hDo1)

12 I Googled the address and it seems to be claimed by the Canadian Centre for Policy Ingenuity. From their website contact listing. You're right on that point. Groupe Everest reborn under a new name? Or just a weird coincidence given the Liberal history with the Sponsorship Scandal?

Posted by: Steve Janke at August 23, 2007 09:02 AM (eGtvb)

13 Why bother suing? Just bring the government down and go to an election. If the opposition parties can't muster themselves to pass a non-confidence motion on this than they clearly have no credibility left on the issue of Kyoto. I hope Layton puts forward a non-confidence motion on this (can he do that?) and forces Dion to decide one way or the other. It would also highlight what an embarassment the Dion-led Liberals have been for the pro-Kyoto crowd.

Posted by: at August 23, 2007 10:16 AM (j9WI0)

14 Steve, There is one detail missing from your excellent work. You mentioned the Canadian Centre of Policy Ingenuity hosting climatechange.ca/org And who's behind that outfit? None other than Brian Guest. http://www.policyingenuity.org/globe-08-20-2005.html That would be the same Brian Guest who worked on Stephane Dion's leadership, and is tight with Godfrey, former Ottawa mayor Bob Chiarelli and a bunch of other Libs. A fuller political bio is found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Guest

Posted by: JimmyRiddle at August 23, 2007 01:32 PM (9WEFx)

15 Steve, There is one detail missing from your excellent work. You mentioned the Canadian Centre of Policy Ingenuity hosting climatechange.ca/org And who's behind that outfit? None other than Brian Guest. http://www.policyingenuity.org/globe-08-20-2005.html That would be the same Brian Guest who worked on Stephane Dion's leadership, and is tight with Godfrey, former Ottawa mayor Bob Chiarelli and a bunch of other Libs. A fuller political bio is found here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brian_Guest Jimmy

Posted by: JimmyRiddle at August 23, 2007 01:32 PM (9WEFx)

16 I'm interested in learning how the environmental groups who, along with Dion, are going to come out swinging against Manitoba now that Doer has announced http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/story.html?id=2439bd1f-81f3-49c3-81da-3a17a58673d6 that he's not going to meet the Kyoto targets and has pushed everything ahead to 2020 as a target date....

Posted by: Sean Cummings at August 23, 2007 01:50 PM (0vR7a)

17 Actually I want to see Dion and Layton comment on the agreement by Danny Williams to take $billions in oil from NFLD-Labrador. Will they accuse Harper of being in the pockets of big eastern oil companies?

Posted by: paulsstuff at August 23, 2007 02:43 PM (Cpdi7)

18 Layton and Duceppe are talking tough, while Dion looked weak in his press conference today. A confidence vote is the best, hardball way for them to hold Dion's feet to the fire on just how serious he is about defending Kyoto. Dion alse revealed his lack of understanding of Parliamentary procedure. He let out that he wrote a letter to Harper, asking him to reinstate Bill C30 when Parliament returns (after a theoretical prorogation). Check out Effects of Prorogation The principal effect of ending a session by prorogation is to terminate business. Members are released from their parliamentary duties until Parliament is next summoned. All unfinished business is dropped from or Â“diesÂ” on the Order Paper and all committees lose their power to transact business, providing a fresh start for the next session. No committee can sit during a prorogation. Bills which have not received Royal Assent before prorogation are Â“entirely terminatedÂ” and, in order to be proceeded with in the new session, must be reintroduced as if they had never existed.

Posted by: Calgary Junkie at August 23, 2007 02:45 PM (g7gYB)

19 xyngq ncdmuzh tluacrbq ezimbgq ligxuqfsj vpazxy yulj

Posted by: at September 02, 2007 10:20 PM (OlgLv)

Hide Comments | Add Comment

209kb generated in CPU 0.0501, elapsed 0.1889 seconds.
113 queries taking 0.1555 seconds, 535 records returned.
Powered by Minx 1.1.6c-pink.

Search Thingy

Monthly Traffic

Pages: 11727
Files: 26
Bytes: 134.7M
CPU Time: 10:41
Queries: 1023240

Content

Posts: 3596
Comments: 36932

Feeds

August 31, 2007

August 30, 2007

August 29, 2007

August 28, 2007

August 27, 2007

August 25, 2007

August 24, 2007

August 23, 2007

August 22, 2007

Search Thingy

Recent Comments

Categories

Archives

Blogroll

Monthly Traffic

Content

Feeds