Friday, April 29, 2005

The Grit Fiscal Orgy Continues

I note from the Toronto Star (hat tip to Neale News) that the Liberal party bribing of Canadian citizens is proceeding apace.

SUSAN DELACOURT OTTAWA BUREAU CHIEF OTTAWA - The federal Conservatives are keeping a running tally of the gusher of new announcements coming from Prime Minister Paul Martin's government these days. As of last night, the Tories estimate, the Liberals have unleashed $6,237,378,024 in a bid to soothe an angry electorate. It's on the party's website, under the heading: "Paul Martin's
Non-Election Promises."
Of course, they're bribing us with our own money folks.

Equally upsetting (again from Neale News, plus my morning Mop & Pail) is the news that the bribery is working. Polls indicate that the Liberals have arrested their slide in popularity and are possibly regaining ground on the Conservatives.

Sigh. I have no words to describe my deep respect for my fellow voters.

Scandal, where is thy sting?

I won't be blogging this weekend as I'm on retreat with the Jesuits.

Canada's Grit Orgy Continues

I note from the Toronto Star (hat tip to Neale News) that the Liberal party bribing of Canadian citizens is proceeding apace.

SUSAN DELACOURT OTTAWA BUREAU CHIEF OTTAWA - The federal Conservatives are keeping a running tally of the gusher of new announcements coming from Prime Minister Paul Martin's government these days. As of last night, the Tories estimate, the Liberals have unleashed $6,237,378,024 in a bid to soothe an angry electorate. It's on the party's website, under the heading: "Paul Martin's
Non-Election Promises."

Of course, they're bribing us with our own money folks.

Equally upsetting (again from Neale News, plus my morning Mop & Pail) is the news that the bribery is working. Polls indicate that the Liberals have arrested their slide in popularity and are possibly regaining ground on the Conservatives.

Sigh. I have no words to describe my deep respect for my fellow voters.

Scandal, where is thy sting?

I won't be blogging this weekend as I'm on retreat with the Jesuits.

Wednesday, April 27, 2005

Advice to Paul Martin

"There is a case for telling the truth; there is a case for avoiding the scandal; but there is no possible defense for the man who tells the scandal, but does not tell the truth."

G.K. Chesterton
Illustrated London News
July 18, 1908

Prime Minister Jack Layton

I note from my morning's Globe & Mail that the Liberals and the New Democractic Party have struck a deal under which there will be $4.6 billion in new spending on NDP initiatives. With this deal Jack Layton has become the defacto Prime Minister of Canada and the leader of our new governing party with only 19 seats in the House of Commons. This is an amazing feat for any politician.

It's been clear for some time that Paul Dithers wasn't up to the top job, but most Canadians thought we'd be allowed to decide on a change of our government through a general election. Not so. Jack Layton is now the boss. Enjoy!

Tuesday, April 26, 2005

Mystery of 1,000 exploding toads


The Scotsman via Neal News.

VISITORS to parks in the German city of Hamburg were warned yesterday to watch out for exploding toads.

Several thousand have so far mysteriously and spontaneously blown up, sending entrails and body parts over a wide area.

Eyewitnesses say the toads swell up to three-and-a-half times their normal size before they explode.

Vets and animal welfare workers said the mystery disorder had cut a swathe through the city?s toad population.

Werner Smolnik, a nature- protection worker from Hamburg, said at least 1,000 toads had died in this manner over the past four days amid scenes reminiscent of "a science-fiction film".

He said: "It is a complete mystery. We have a lot of ideas which we are following up, but at the moment we haven?t the faintest idea if any of them are correct. It could be an unknown virus, or a fungus that has infected the water, or a defence mechanism against aggressive crows which have appeared in the area."

He went on: "You see the toads crawling along the ground, swelling and getting bigger as they go until they are like little tennis balls, and then they suddenly go ?boom?."

Janne Kloepper, from the Hamburg Institute for Hygiene and the Environment, said: "If this keeps up, there will be no toads left in Hamburg."
Germans get exploding toads. We get an exploding political party.

20th Edition of the Red Ensign Standard

I note that Dana and Bob at Canadian Comment have hoisted the 20th edition of the Red Ensign Standard yesterday. Good work to you both. Go have a look at this compendium of Red Ensign brigade member writings.

Mr. Gagliano's Righteous Rage

Every once in a while one reads a statement so breathtakingly beyond belief that you cannot believe it has actually been uttered. So it is with Alfonso Gagliano, the erstwhile Minister of Public Works in the Liberal Government of Jean Chretien. If there is one Minister of the Crown whose name is indelibly stained with the words, "sponsorship scandal" it has to be that of Mr. Gagliano. Does he accept guilt in this unholy scam? He does not. From CBC News we learn of this extra-ordinary utterance from poor Alfonso, himself.

"He's [Paul Martin's]going to destroy the party and break up the country," Gagliano said during a television interview with the CBC's French-language network. ....

"Of course, if [Quebec Liberal Premier Jean] Charest makes a miracle and forms a second government, it could possibly be put off," he told the broadcaster."But I think that at this stage, the separation of Quebec from Canada is not stoppable. It's a question of time. It's going to happen."
Understand that. It's not Mr. Gagliano, Mr. Chretien and the host of Liberal parasites, execrable political operatives, rogue civil servants and scurrilous Liberal party hangers-on who are at fault in this grotesque betrayal of the public trust. It is not they who have created the conditions that may cause Canada to fracture.

No indeed; it is Mr. Paul Martin who is solely at fault. Why is this? Well, from the perspective of this sleeze-artist extraordinaire, Mr. Martin called a commission of inquiry into the sponsorship program and in doing so let the public know what the Liberal kleptocrats were up to on such a gross and grandiose scale.

You see, the sponsorship program was supposed to operate in the twilight world of political patronage and here is Judge Gomery, appointed by Paul Martin, focusing a million candle power beam of light into the dank dark recesses of the Liberal underground gravy train. The stink of this grotesque scandal is enough to shrivel the soul of a saint, yet Mr. Gagliano sees no fault in himself.

Paul Martin, as Leader of the Liberal Party, former Finance Minister, Treasury Board member, and the man who controlled the Liberal Party apparatus in Quebec, must wear the disgust of the public. But Mr. Martin's sins are primarily sins of omission.

Mr. Gagliano, on the other hand, ought to find himself a good confessor. His mortal sins are scarlet. Liberal scarlet! Get thee to a monastery. You are not fit for polite society.

Saturday, April 23, 2005

A Church Must Renew Its Battle

Go read an excellent commentary published by the Sunday Times by Daniel Johnson called, "New evils for old: a church must now renew its battle." Here's a taste.
For more than a generation, John Paul II personified the Catholic church as no pope had ever done before. For almost a fifth of humanity, the 1.2 billion Roman Catholics, he was the "Holy Father"; but for the rest of us, too, he did not merely represent the church - he was the church. What will the church be without him? During his pontificate the world around him altered beyond recognition and Catholicism underwent a transformation so profound that it was not far short of a reformation. Hardly a single aspect of Catholic Christianity was left untouched by the most formidable theologian to occupy the throne of St Peter for centuries.

Without its mighty patriarch to make sense of the modern world, the church is bound to feel disembodied and disoriented. Not only Catholics, but countless others - Jews as well as Christians, believers and unbelievers alike - will grieve for Pope Wojtyla. It was his unique form of greatness to remind a sceptical world that faith could still move mountains.
The article was written just before the conclave began, which elected Benedict XVI.

Don't Do it Jack

I see from the media that Jack Layton, the leader of the New Democratic Party, is going to meet with Prime Minister Dithers this weekend to work out a concordat to maintain the corrupt liberal party in power. So much for the vaunted superior ethics and principles of the NDP. Jack, you are embarrassing yourself and crippling your party.

Those who play with pigs soon find themselves covered in mud. Shame! Shame! Shame!

(And to do so just to scuttle a reduction in business taxes? Yea gods!)

Friday, April 22, 2005

Papal Slogan

Mark Shea, at Catholic and Enjoying It, has this great comment about Benedict XVI.

My contribution to the Papal Slogan Search"John Paul II, We love you" was simple and direct. I think this Pope needs a more hip postmodern, and pop cultural referent slogan. I vote for "You're XVI, you're beautiful, and you're mine"

Why They Ran

Hat tip to Kathy Shaidle at Relapsed Catholic.

A must read from Peggy Noonan at the Catholic Educator's Resource Center.

Did you see them running to St. Peter's Square as the bells began to toll? They came running in from the offices and streets of Rome, running in their business suits, in jeans with backpacks over their shoulders. The networks kept showing it in their side shots as they filled time between the ringing of the bells and the balcony scene.

So many came running that by the end, by the time Benedict XVI was announced, St. Peter's and the streets leading to it were as full as they'd been two weeks ago, at the funeral of John Paul II.

Why did they run? Why did this ancient news ? "We have a pope" ? representing such irrelevant-seeming truths and such an archaic institution ? send them running?

Why did they gather? Why did they have to hear?
Go read the rest and be edified.

Linda Williamson's Take on Martin's Speech

Hat tip to Occam's Carbuncle. Linda Williamson of the Toronto Sun makes some devastating points about the PM's televised State of the Party speech.

Watching Paul Martin address the nation last night, I couldn't help thinking of all the times he and his predecessor didn't speak to Canadians directly.

Not after 9/11, even though 24 of our countrymen were murdered by terrorists. Not when we joined the war in Afghanistan. Not when we declined to back the U.S. in Iraq; not when we naively rejected the U.S. missile defence program.

Not when the government refused to compensate thousands of victims of the tainted blood scandal, many of whom are dying as they continue to await justice today (despite a hasty Liberal flip-flop on the issue Wednesday night, which will change little). Not even when the government decided to redefine the institution of marriage.
All true, of course. But this is the zinger.

Think about what Martin asked of us last night: He wants us to let ethically compromised Liberals continue to spend our money for almost a year, until the ongoing inquiry into how they stole our money is complete.
And this.

He wants us to believe it would be bad for the country to have an election before Gomery's final report on AdScam comes out -- some eight months from now. This, from the guy who called the last election before any of the really damning facts were known. (He said he had to do it so he could fix health care "for a generation," remember? Great job he did, eh?)
Well done Ms. Williamson.

He Pled Mercy, Not Justice

I watched the Prime Minister's plea for time and mercy last night and found myself at odds with the underlying premise of his request. He stated that Canadians ought to wait until the Gomery Commission has concluded before we pass judgement on the Liberal Party. In his words, "Only he [Judge Gomery] can tell us what happened and who was responsible."

I beg to differ. While it may be true that Judge Gomery is best placed to determine the details of the criminal corruption which took place, the Canadian public has already been given enough information to be able to conclude that the Liberal party has been operating in a very corrupt manner and that the corruption is of a systemic and endemic nature.

Liberals do not deny this. The Prime Minister himself does not deny this. He calls it an, "unjustifiable mess." What Canadians can, and should, do is determine for themselves whether they want this party to govern Canada for the foreseeable future. Do we want to live in a parliamentary democracy or a Liberal kleptocracy?

The sponsorship program established by Jean Chretien and the Liberal Party to "save Canada" was instead use to loot the public treasury and has become the greatest threat to national unity since the conscription crises of the first and second world wars. I will be shocked if there is one seat in the Province of Quebec that does not go to the separatist Bloc Quebecois. The fault for this can be laid at the feet of the Liberal Party of Canada.

The Grits must go!

Thursday, April 21, 2005

Liberalism and Liberals

"As much as I ever did, more than I ever did, I believe in Liberalism. But there was a rosy time of innocence when I believed in Liberals."

G.K. Chesteron

The Scuttling of the Good Ship Grit

Prime Minister Dithers has asked for time on the various media tonight to plead his case. It appears things have reached the point with the Liberals where a Nixonian "Chequers" speech is required to save their collapsing government.

I have a better idea. Why doesn't Mr. Dithers show up for question period in the House of Commons and make his case there? He's the guy, after all, who promised to restore the parliamentary democratic deficit and in doing so empower parliamentarians in carrying out their traditional role of holding the government of the day to account.

Meanwhile back at the sponsorship swamp we see from a Toronto Star article today that the Liberal kleptocracy is even more egregious than imagined.

Benoît Corbeil, who served as executive director of the Liberal Party of Canada's Quebec wing in the late 1990s, told Radio-Canada that of the 20 or so lawyers who volunteered for the party during the 2000 federal election, some "seven or eight" were appointed to the judicial bench.

"Anyone who wanted to be a judge or win mandates needed to have friendly relations with those people," he told the network.
Corbeil also said he received his marching orders from "a senior Liberal" who was neither an MP nor a cabinet minister, and whose identity he plans to reveal when he testifies at the Gomery inquiry in the coming weeks.

Corbeil, identified by former Groupaction president Jean Brault as a Liberal insider who sought $400,000 to cover party bills during the 2000 election, insists he didn't keep a set of secret books for the party, even if he admitted during the interview to accepting a cash-stuffed envelope from Brault on one occasion.

Asked whether his political masters, who included former public works minister Alfonso Gagliano, knew about the illicit donation, Corbeil said "everyone knew what was happening."

Gagliano denied all Corbeil's allegations in a separate interview with Radio-Canada.
You may take comfort from Gagliano's denials. I must admit to a degree of scepticism.

Not content with corrupting the electoral system by which we the people choose our government; with engaging in the theft of millions of hard earned taxpayers dollars; with perverting the system by which the federal government acquires goods and services, with running a criminal patronage enterprise under the guise of ?saving the country? we now see that the Liberal Party for its own partisan political advantage was undermining the integrity of the nation?s system of justice by selling judgeships to the highest bidders.

The rotting stench grows more foul by the day. The question remains, however, what are we the people going to do about it?

Want more? How about this from the same Toronto Star article?
In one $2.6 million sponsorship deal at a Montreal amusement park from 1997 to 2001, Boulay's company charged taxpayers $315,000 in commissions, then turned around and charged the organizers a commission of $343,750 for delivering the money. He even charged back $800 ? plus a $125 commission ? to bring Montreal Alouettes cheerleaders to one pro-Canada event at that park.

But Boulay defended his business practices and denied using his Liberal connections for profit. He is the third witness to deny key parts of the testimony from Brault, who has alleged federal Liberal organizers demanded more than $1 million from Groupaction, sometimes in cash, in return for getting government business.

Wednesday, April 20, 2005

Living Wills

An acquaintance sent me an email with this version of a living will.
I,________________________(fill in the blank), being of sound mind and body, do not wish to be kept alive indefinitely by artificial means.

Under no circumstances should my fate be put in the hands of peckerwood politicians who couldn't pass ninth-grade biology if their lives depended on it.

If a reasonable amount of time passes and I fail to sit up and ask for a cold beer, it should be presumed that I won't ever get better.

When such a determination is reached, I hereby instruct my spouse, children and attending physicians to pull the plug, reel in the tubes and call it a day.

Under no circumstances shall the members of the legislature enact a special law to keep me on life-support machinery. It is my wish that these boneheads mind their own damn business, and pay attention to the health, education and future of the millions of Americans who aren't in a permanent coma.

Under no circumstances shall any politicians butt into this case. I don't care how many fundamentalist votes they're trying to scrounge for their run for the presidency in 2008, it is my wish that they play politics with someone else's life and leave me alone to die in peace.

I couldn't care less if a hundred religious zealots send e-mails to legislators in which they pretend to care about me. I don't know these people, and I certainly haven't authorized them to preach and crusade on my behalf. They should mind their own business, too.

If any of my family goes against my wishes and turns my case into a political cause, I hereby promise to come back from the grave and make his or her existence a living hell.





I think that a living will is a great idea. Here is my version.
I, John the Mad, being mad but otherwise sound, do not want to be denied food and water should I find myself in what medical practitioners euphemistically call a "persistent vegetative state." Nor do I want to be murdered by a probate judge, subsequent appeal courts, or crusading right-to-die physicians. They must not presume that I am suffering because I am in a twilight existence.

Should Lady Mad, while I am incapacitated, take up living with another man and have children by him, I declare her to be in a conflict of interest and want decisions respecting my treatment and care to be made by a person not so conflicted. Having said this, knowing her character as I do, I do not anticipate that she would place herself in such a conflict. She is a lady, after all.

You should not presume that I will never get better or that I choose death.
I may well be busy dealing with matters of a spiritual nature in a place you cannot reach. Moreover, it is documented that people have emerged from such states and I fully intend to be one of those cases. I will not go gentle into that good night, but I do not fear death. I do, however, fear dying of thirst. It is a wretched and painful way to die and cannot be said by any reasonable standard to be a kind or a caring end.

If, after a reasonable time lapse I fail to sit up and ask for a pint of Guinness, it should be added to the fluids given to me through my feeding tube. Guinness may be considered a reasonable, and at times preferred, substitute for water. Alternatives may consist of a decent merlot or cabernet sauvignon. Wee drops of the creature are to be liberally administered on the Feast of St. Patrick. I will do my best to burp my appreciation.

I do not care how many petitions to kill me are signed by members of the contemporary culture of death. They give me the hives and I don't want, and refuse in advance, what they call mercy. I insist, at a minimum, on the level of care required by law for dogs, cats and serial killers on death row.

Parliamentarians are encouraged to use the "notwithstanding clause" in the Canadian constitution's Charter of Rights and Freedoms, if necessary, to override probate judges or other members of the judiciary who want to kill me because they consider judicial and legal process to be of greater substance than my right to life. I am a believer in the democratic process even as I am appalled at how members of parliament act from time to time.

Catholics are welcome and encouraged to petition parliament on my behalf if, and only if, they are doing so in conformity with canon law and the magisterial teachings of my Church. Such law and teachings, while not requiring heroic measures to keep me alive on life support, are genuinely merciful because they are concerned with my spiritual life as well as my physical dignity. I reject the spurious mercy of the eugenicists, proponents of euthanasia, organ harvesters and sundry right to die fanatics who confuse mercy with convenience and "allowing to die with dignity" with murder.

Protestants, Orthodox Christians, Jews, Muslims, Buddhists, Hindus and other religious believers, agnostics and atheists are all welcome to begin or join political bandwagons to prevent my starvation, subject to the canon law restrictions referred to above.

All are invited and encouraged to pray for me. The religious know why. Agnostics can take comfort that such prayers may be of value. Atheists are reminded that it can't possibly hurt.

Remember. If you kill me in the name of mercy I won't come back to haunt you. I'll have gone to a better place, ... I hope. But if you do me wrong, Mercy may ultimately choose to deal with you in the name of Justice. He does both.

John the Mad
Upper Canada

I've Been Told

Rue at Abraca-Pocus tears a strip off me for my last post. Go have a look at her post and the comments section, where Curt makes some good comments.
Uh... I wanted to say something about the above-quoted author sounding like he would be happiest leading a Crusade against "progressive Catholics"... or, how his comment illustrates the 'I claim to follow all the rules and therefore am Holier Than Thou' attitude some Catholics have over other Catholics, or, his general hateful tone, but I'm still reeling from the OBVIOUS spelling error.

Dude, you're making Baby Jesus cry. It's Papam, and not Papum.

Thank you. The spelling howler has been corrected. (I failed grade nine because I failed Latin. My teacher warned me I'd need it one day.) As for the rest, my mini-apologia is in your comments section. I thank Curt at Northwestern Winds for springing to my defence.

One more thing though Rue. If you want to accuse folks of having a hateful tone, you really shouldn't post a photo of the new pope with a line above it saying,

Cardinal Joseph "Der Panzerkardinal" Ratzinger has been elected Pope.

I expect this is your sense of humour, but as I've learned very recently, humour is sometimes greatly misunderstood.

A new crusade? Hmmm. Now there's an idea. (.... See what I mean.)

Tuesday, April 19, 2005

Habemus Papam!

We have a pope!

A short time ago, with those words, Rome and the world was introduced to Joseph Cardinal Ratzinger as His Holiness Benedict XVI. I was praying for his election and I rejoice in the choice. Thank you Lord.

Ratzinger is brilliant, prayerful and doctrinally sound in a world which is morally corrupt and educated far beyond its intelligence. Having just turned 78 we may not expect a long papacy, but he is about the same age as was Good Pope John XXIII when he was elected pope. John XXIII convened the Second Vatican Council and had an enormous impact on the Church.

His Holiness Benedict XVI was a trusted confidant to John Paul II and from accounts I have read, is a wonderfully warm man.

The "progressives" within the Church will have begun to cover themselves in sackcloth and ashes as I write. If you listen closely you can hear them wailing and weeping and gnashing their teeth. (It's enough to warm the heart of any true Irishman)

More later when I have time.

Monday, April 18, 2005

JPII Had a Great Sense of Humour

This delightful anecdote is from Terry Mattingly's web site.

During CNN's coverage before the pope's death, Monsignor Lorenzo Albacete said that he told Pope John Paul II that he had agreed to speak to the network about the pontiff when he died. The pope replied: "How do they know I'm going first?"

More on Christopher Hitchens

A good friend read my post on Christopher Hitchens and emailed some great comments.

Hitchens really is an astonishing man. The first article I read by him was in Vanity Fair or the New Yorker, and he called Mother Theresa of Calcutta a "thieving Albanian dwarf".

Every day is Guy Fawkes Day for Chris.

I subscribe to the Atlantic Monthly. The issue before last Hitchens wrote a piece about Graham Greene. Same kind of stuff. He tried hard to slag Greene, but could only manage some catty gossip - Greene the Catholic liked to screw around. Goodness: if that is all Hitchens found, Greene must have been a saint. Read the Power and the Glory by Greene, or The Quiet American. That is genius.

I am always reminded of the savages who believed in eating the heart of a strong enemy in order to acquire his powers. The character assassin hopes to lever himself into the same strata as his victims. Some of the Coo Coos who shoot big name people have a similar if less sophisticated moral template.
John Paul the Great can rest in peace. It seems that being slagged by Hitchens is additional evidence of his moral greatness.

Sunday, April 17, 2005

Christopher Hitchen's Smear

I ran across a remarkable article by Christopher Hitchens called Papal Power, John Paul II's Other Legacy. It was posted at Slate on April 1, 2004, while the pope lay on his deathbed. The article appears to be a rather meandering and unfocused piece. Hitchens manages in a single article to:
- mock the Catholic belief that the Holy Spirit guides the cardinals in the selection of a new pontiff;
- insinuate that the short reign of John Paul I was due to murder or "celestial pique;"
- denigrate the heroic personal struggle of John Paul's final months in office;
- an extraordinary accusation that John Paul II was directly involved in covering up the priest scandal in the USA;
- attack Catholic clerics for trying to prevent Terri Schiavo's judicial execution;
- assail the (Catholic) President Ngo Dinh Diem of South Vietnam;
- lay into the (Catholic) Kennedy brothers and accuse them of murder;
- denigrate Cardinal Spellman and "various Catholic Cold-War propagandists" from Clare Booth Luce to William F. Buckley;
- focusing his venom on Bernard Cardinal Law; and
- accusing the Vatican and John Paul of frustrating the attempts to bring Cardinal Law to justice.

You might think this is too large a meal to consume at one sitting, and you are right, but this is not due to sloppy writing. It is deliberate on Mr. Hitchen's part. The cascade of accusations against individual Catholics and Catholic beliefs in general is intended to fling enough mud to try and make something stick. Individual targets don't really matter. It is the Church in particular, and religious belief in general, that he is attacking. Note the tone.

This is yet another of the self-imposed tortures that faith inflicts upon itself. It means that you have to believe that the pope before last, who held on to the job for a matter of weeks before dying (or, according to some, before being murdered) was either unchosen (sic) by God in some fit of celestial pique, or left unprotected by heaven against his assassins. And it means that you have to believe that the public agony and humiliation endured by the pontiff was also part of some divine design.
Or this:

But there could obviously not have been any graceful retirement in the case of John Paul II. The next vicar of Christ could hardly be expected to perform his sacred duties knowing that there was a still-living vicar of Christ, however decrepit, on the scene. Thus, and as with the Schiavo case, every last morsel of misery has been compulsorily extracted from the business of death. For the people who credit the idea, apparently, heaven can wait. Odd.
Not so odd really, Mr. Hitchens. Heaven can indeed wait. And whatever you may think of John Paul the Great, humiliation is not a word that attaches to his person. He was grace in action. It is clear why Hitchens missed the point. Grace does not appear to be an attribute he possesses himself.

I must make two other comments points on his diatribe. Had he merely mounted an attack on Cardinal law I would not have posted on his article. I don't defend Cardinal Law's cover up of homosexual priestly abuse of adolescent boys. As the father of two young boys myself I'm enraged by such things.

Nor do I think it proper that Cardinal Law should have been permitted to say a memorial mass for the late pontiff. If he had any sense he would not have celebrated the mass, but if he had any sense the abuses committed under his leadership would have been much more limited. He's a disgrace to the Catholic priesthood and should retire to a monastery to do penance for the rest of his days.

But Christopher Hitchens goes too far when he says the Vatican is undermining justice in the United States. There is no impediment that I'm aware of that would prevent American prosecutors from laying criminal charges against Cardinal Law, if such charges are warranted. They have not done so, despite Hitchens obvious yearning for them, so how is the justice system being impuned?

The second and more serious matter is the following allegation by Hitchens.

Even before this, he [Cardinal Law] visited Rome on at least one occasion to discuss whether or not the church should obey American law. And it has been conclusively established that the Vatican itself - including his holiness - was a part of the coverup and obstruction of justice that allowed the child-rape scandal to continue for so long.
Now if Hitchens wants to assert in an article that the late beloved pope is guilty of this charge it is incumbent on him to provide the evidence. He chose not to do so, although he went on about everything from the Terri Shiavo, to the Kennedy's, to Diem, to Clare Luce Booth. In my view, his omission is dishonest and unethical.

No obituary about John Paul II, for example, will omit to mention that he exerted enormous force to change the politics of Poland. Well, good for him, I would say. (He behaved much better on that occasion than he did when welcoming Tariq Aziz, one of Saddam Hussein's most blood-spattered henchmen, to an audience at the Vatican and then for a private visit to Assisi.)

But let nobody confuse the undermining of a Stalinist bureaucracy in a majority Catholic nation with the insidious attempt to thwart or bend the law in a secular democracy. And
let nobody say that this is no problem.

My, my. What is Hitchens saying here? He isn't specific, so refutation of the charge is highly problematical. If he is referring to Terri Schiavo, is he saying that it is illegitimate for American Catholics to make use of the American political system, or to have recourse to the American courts, in order to further their cause? If he is referring to the Vatican, we need specifics.

He doesn't say, but when one is engaging in a smear, specifics are rather inconvenient.

Friday, April 15, 2005

The Corruption of our Youth

On Monday, Liam the Mad's scout troop and a local brownie pack attended our city hall to visit the mayor and then observe city council in session. The first item on the agenda involved an application from a local business. The lawyer for the business was invited by the chair of the committee to make his presentation.

He slowly made his way to the podium and stood there peering around the room at the brownies and scouts looking very uncomfortable. He began his presentation in a halting manner. It went something like this. "I'm here representing "firm X" in its application to operate .... er, ..... uh, ..... eh, ...... an adult body rub parlour." (Gasps!)

Councillors sat riveted to their seats. Brownie and scout leaders sat up straight. The brownies were bewildered. The scouts showed a renewed interest in the proceedings.

As one councillor (who was the chair) explained to me later, no one had twigged to the content of the first presentation as the agenda was not specific about the type of application to be discussed. He assured me that the matter would have been deferred until later that night had they realized its subject matter. Once the lawyer began to speak the councillors sat there aghast, not knowing what to do.

A likely story. I no longer refer to city council as our bastion of local democracy. I have dubbed it The Chamber of Perverted Horrors. My councillor friend says it is the first time in years that such a matter had been considered by council. That much I believe. This is the suburbs, after all.

As for Liam. He's okay with what happened. He's heard worse. His younger brother's toots, for instance.

Brendan's Hideous Offence

Sorry, I haven't had the opportunity to post much on my blog lately. Since we are inundated with Liberal party malfeasance these days, we need to lighten up. (Or at least I do. It's that or have a stroke.)

Master Brendan came home yesterday from his grade one class quite upset. Earlier in the day, .... well, ..... er, .... (how do I say this delicately, so as to not offend my sensitive leaders), .... he suddenly expelled a significant quantity of personally manufactured green house gases into his immediate environment. I'm told the expulsion was rather noisy. He glanced around the room and, instead of muttering the usual courtesies and apologizing for his indiscretion, grinned and said to his classmates, "Smell the nature!"

Now his regular teacher was not there that day and the substitute teacher had left the classroom for a moment, so my young knight-in-training probably thought he was safe in making such a comment. Not so. Survival in school means maintaining eternal vigilance.

Apparently, the French teacher was standing in the doorway, overheard his editorial commentary and was not amused. J'accuse!

Brendan was escorted to the office, where he was forced to write and sign a confession and apology which was sent home for parental signature. In his confession he acknowledged his error, noted he was sad, and promised never, ever, to repeat that hideous offence (I paraphrase his wording).

My son's horror at having to personally courier his confession to his parents and grandma (who is currently staying with us) can only be imagined. Brendan knew he had blotted his copybook. Imagine his surprise, then, when his confession/apology was met with great gales of laughter by Mum and Grandma. What was this? Were they mocking him? He burst into tears and had to be comforted and reassured that his, "smell the nature" comment was truly very funny.

By the time John the Mad Dad arrived home Master Brendan had composed himself and was able to muster a smile when I also broke into laughter. He knew by then that at Castle Mad a fart is not a degenerate act sufficient to launch an inquisition. At the castle a fart is just a fart and farts are funny.

Of course, Dad the Mad had to give tactical advice on how to handle humourless French teachers. The appropriate après toot retort in such circumstances to is "Quelle Horreur", not "Smell the nature." He may as well learn now that the French have no sense of humour in foreign policy or farts.

At breakfast this morning Lady Mad also advised him to use discretion when talking about his parents' reaction. She referred to l'affaire as, "This unfortunate series of events." Brendan totally cracked up at this line. I last saw him with his backpack secured to his body walking out the door chortling and murmuring, "This unfortunate series of events."

Indeed it was.

Monday, April 11, 2005

Thoughts on the Pending Election

It has been difficult to find time to post on my blog lately as my mother-in-law is ill and is staying in the North Turret at Castle Mad for a while. The North Turret is where my computer is located and my time on it has been quite limited as a result.

Additionally, over the weekend I've been spending time with her at the emergency ward of our local hospital. She is concerned that she being a burden on us. I tell her she is family to us. Family burdens are accepted as part of life. It's just something we do, from love more than from obligation. No big deal mum. Just get well.


As for the rest of the country ... well, does one laugh or cry at Mr. Dithers insistence that the opposition is obligated to hear out the Gomery Commission witnesses to the bitter end before pulling the plug on this foul corpse of a government. I like the answer given by the Conservatives to that suggestion, i.e. that it will be the Canadian people who will decide when we go to the polls. (By that I take it that it is the polls that will decide when we go to the polls.)


If we do end up in a general election I have to make up my mind on how I can best contribute to the defeat of the Liberal contract racketeers, who currently govern this nation. Back on March 20th I commented on my disappointment over the position on abortion taken by the Conservative party members at the policy convention in Montreal. At the time I said this:

Recently, after a lifetime as a Liberal party supporter I became convinced that the Liberal Party had become openly hostile to my deepest beliefs religious and political beliefs and that I could no longer support it.

Accordingly, I joined the new Conservative Party just before last Christmas in the expectation that in the Conservative party I would find kindred spirits with whom I could fight the good fight. I was one of those who stayed with you to the end in the last election.

It seems I was wrong. Mr. Harper, where does this urban, Eastern, new party member send his resignation? I will no longer compromise with the culture of death and your party just joined it.
Alan, from Occam's Carbuncle, replied in my comments section with this observation, which I've been chewing on ever since:

Would banning abortion stop, or even significantly lessen the practice? Not likely. Not with legal abortions available in nearby jurisdictions. Only a fundamental shift in the values of society will work. That can only be accomplished by social means - advertising, education, religious revival, etc. Don't abandon the party over this. They need the Madness.
That one comment from a well respected Red Ensign brigade member stopped me from tearing up my new Conservative Party membership card. I'll stay ... and fight within the party for the right to life of all innocent Canadians, especially the defenceless ones in what my six year old calls their mummies' tummies.

In the meantime, a review of the positions taken by the party on other matters warms my heart, quite frankly. There are lots of positive policy planks emerging from the convention with which to beat (figuratively and electorally) the Grits. And the Liberals need to be defeated, for they have truly gone beyond the pale.

I remember well the rage directed towards Brian Mulroney and the Progressive Conservative Party for transgressions that were faint shadows of this current political scandal. Although he fled town before facing the electorate, we the people defeated his successor and reduced his party to two seats in the Commons. Was it so long ago? Can we not rouse ourselves to similar action today?

No one can honestly say that the Liberal Party of Canada deserves a better fate than the PC party of that 1993 election? If so, on what possible grounds? No, the Grits need to be defeated alright. It's stable cleaning time in Canada. Pass a shovel and start mucking.

Friday, April 08, 2005

Santo! Santo!

There are a number of matters that I would like to blog on today, but it is the day when the body of my beloved pontiff has been placed beneath the high altar of Saint Peter's Basilica in Rome to rest with his predecessor the Apostle Peter, who was the first Bishop of Rome.

I wasn't able to watch the funeral live (at 4 am EDT) on television, but from the little clips I have seen, the liturgy was moving. It could not be otherwise.

At least 300,000 people filled St. Peter's Square and spilled out onto the wide Via della Conciliazione leading toward the Tiber River, but millions of others watched on giant video screens set up across Rome.
In the Globe and Mail, it was said:

After the Mass ended, bells tolled and 12 pallbearers with white gloves, white ties and tails presented the coffin to the crowd one last time, and then carried it on their shoulders back inside the basilica for burial - again to sustained applause from the hundreds of thousands in the square, including dignitaries from more than 80 countries.

- Chants of "Santo! Santo!" - urging John Paul to be elevated to sainthood immediately - echoed in the square.
Indeed, not just in the square. I venture to guess that the cry of "Santo" resonates in the prayers of faithful Catholics throughout the world. If Karol Wotylia is not a saint then I do not understand the meaning of the term. He was truly a Servant of the Servants of God.

The bulk of the main stream media, wedded as it is to the false promises of the culture of death, attributes the public's reverence of John Paul II to his mastery of their craft. He was beyond a doubt a great communicator and a gifted individual and he would no doubt have been successful in whatever field he had chosen. But his wonderful capacity to communicate an idea, though a very useful attribute in a pope, was not central to his attractiveness as a person.

John Paul the Great attracted so many people for another greater reason. The truth is this pope possessed the light of God. You shouldn't be surprised when I write this and I am not being blasphemous. John Paul was not God, of course, for he was a man like other men. But the Judeo-Christian scriptures tell us that we are all made by God in the image of God.

This pope understood that and also understood the meaning of that great gift. As God's light shines in the darkness, so is our light to shine. We are called to be witness to God's light, to bear that light within our persons, and to be people of the light. John Paul heard, accepted and responded to that truth in a way that few of us do - completely and fully. That is what it means to be holy, and this pope was holy. That is why he was able to illuminate the truth so clearly.

The chattering classes simply do not understand what they have been privileged to witness. They sense the man's greatness but they are forced to fall back upon inadequate and erroneous rationalizations, for they have no authentic reference points to call their own. They compare John Paul to a rock star, because they confuse the superficial attraction of celebrity with the authentic attraction of holiness.

One can only shudder at how a columnist like Michael Valpy would have reported on the funeral of Jesus of Nazareth. In today's Globe & Mail, Valpy called John Paul a failure. Some failure! I can only pray that the College of Cardinals when they gathered in conclave, listen to the Holy Spirit and find another such failure within their ranks.

Saint John Paul the Great! It has a definite ring to it.

In the beginning, when God created the heavens and the earth, the earth was a formless wasteland, and darkness covered the abyss, while a mighty wind swept over the waters.

Then God said, "Let there be light," and there was light.

God saw how good the light was. God then separated the light from the darkness.

(From the Book of Genesis)

In the beginning was the Word, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God. He was in the beginning with God.

All things came to be through him, and without him nothing came to be. What came to be through him was life, and this life was the light of the human race; the light shines in the darkness, and the darkness has not overcome it.

(From the Gospel of John)

Thursday, April 07, 2005

Gomery Eases Publication Ban

Well, the rancid stench has been apparent for days, but Canadians are now being allowed to view the actual rotting carcass of the kickback scheme, known as the sponsorship scandal. Judge Gomery has eased the total ban on reporting the allegations of criminal wrongdoing by Liberals and most of the relevant crap is being aired by the mainstream media. From CTV News

For now, these are just allegations that have not been proven in court.

Brault claimed in his six days of testimony that he systematically kicked back huge amounts of taxpayer money to the federal Liberal party, a deception he claims involved senior Liberal organizers and people close to former prime minister Jean Chretien.

His testimony alleged secret meetings, phoney paper trails, unmarked envelopes stuffed with cash and bogus billings.

He said there were phoney employees on the payroll at the ad firm Groupaction.
Brault said there was $1 million in kickbacks to the Liberal Party of Canada.

His reward, he claims, was $172 million in government business for his firm.
It was always the same story, he told the commission: The Liberal Party needed money. If you wanted the business, you had to pay.

Brault says most of the kickbacks were cash; that's the way his Liberal handlers wanted it, he said, so it couldn't be traced.

On one occasion, Brault says he handed $25,000 in cash to Joseph Morselli, a top organizer for former public works minister Alfonso Gagliano.

Brault wanted the bidding for some ad contracts with the Justice Department delayed. He says Morselli told him the delay would cost $100,000.

The first payment was $25,000, dropped off at a fundraiser for Gagliano, at a restaurant in Montreal's east end.

Brault claims he also put at least five Liberal party workers on Groupaction's payroll. They were paid with sponsorship money to do work for the party.

Other Liberals allegedly got cheques too, disguised as consulting fees, for doing nothing. One of them was former prime minister Jean Chretien's brother, Gaby.

Brault claims Chretien handed $4,000 to a Liberal candidate. Brault says Liberal fundraiser Alain Renaud got $63,000, also for doing nothing. It was clearly, Brault says, a donation to the Liberal Party.

And then, there's Jacques Corriveau, a confidant of Chretien. Brault paid Corriveau's firm nearly $500,000, for no work at all. He says Corriveau wanted the money for the Liberal Party.

We'll pause for a minute to allow readers to grab your spittoons and barf bags.


The question is whether we the people have now had enough of this corrupt corpse of a governing political party or whether we will head to the polls in the next general election like George Orwell's fictional sheep bleating, "Four legs good, two legs bad."

If the allegations are true, and these allegations have the ring of truth, it is apparent that the Liberal Party of Canada is led by greedy, unscrupulous, unethical, sons of bitches whose criminal behaviour now endangers the very future of the country. The Bloc Quebecois stands to gain every seat in that province in the next election. Liberals have handed the separatists a golden club with which to smash our federation.

And the Liberals in Question Period in our House of Commons have the temerity to portray themselves as the victims and to smear outraged Conservative MPs with being unpatriotic. This is beyond shame.

Canadians! Arise from your stupor! You need you to pay attention. This scandal is central to the governance of your country and lies at the heart of that part in our national anthem where we repeatedly sing, "We stand on guard for thee."

Do you not see. The Liberals must go, lest our nation perish.

Wednesday, April 06, 2005

Doug Saunders Does the Vatican Beat

If I want to maintain my equilibrium in the morning I may have to stop reading my copy of The Globe and Mail until the new pope is elected. Take this little gem from Doug Saunders:
In his life, he brought magic and miracles back to the church, granting legitimacy to the sort of weeping statues, faith-healing saints and mystical sects that had almost disappeared from the Roman Catholic Church.

But the death of Pope John Paul II has been stripped of many such fripperies. The Vatican, which perfected its high-tech marketing skills under his leadership, has organized a funeral and succession relatively free of mystic traditions, some of which are being abandoned after centuries of use.
Miracles and faith healing, you see, are mere magic and fripperies, which are to be mocked by the chattering classes. To what weeping statues did John Paul grant legitimacy? Saunders doesn't say. What mystical sects? We aren't told (though you can be sure that Opus Dei was the target).

Tuesday, April 05, 2005

Attorney General Considers Launching Witchhunt

Tue, April 5, 2005
Feds bid to plug Gomery leaks
By Stephanie Rubec
Toronto Sun Press

CANADA'S attorney general is probing possible breaches of a publication ban set up to protect explosive testimony at the AdScam inquiry. Justice spokesman Patrick Charette said federal lawyers are looking into the Internet sites reproducing excerpts of Montreal ad exec Jean Brault's testimony and providing a link to a U.S. blog featuring more extensive coverage of the hearing.

"We have to decide what the best course of action is," Charette said, adding federal lawyers could charge Canadian bloggers and website owners with contempt of court or suggest AdScam Justice John Gomery issue warning letters.
Note that the Sun story say that, "CANADA'S attorney general is probing possible breaches ... "

Canada's Attorney General is the chief law officer of the Crown. He is better known as the Minister of Justice, the Honourable Irwin Cotler, PC, MP, Member of Parliament for Mount Royal. He is also a leading Liberal member of parliament. That political party has called in the police in a desperate attempt to spin itself as the victim in the sponsorship scandal. From CTV.

Earlier Monday, Liberal party lawyer Doug Mitchell told reporters that he has asked the RCMP to investigate the possibility his party was a victim of fraud in the sponsorship scandal.

"I have been directed by my clients to contact the RCMP to ask that they investigate the possibility that the party itself may have been the target of fraud or other harmful acts by certain individuals,'' Mitchell said.

"Using inappropriate means to gain undeserved benefit ... is, if proven to be true, criminal action, plain and simple.''
As such, Irwin Cotler is in a clear conflict of interest respecting this case. He has no business instructing Justice Department lawyers on matters pertaining to the publication ban. I hope the Sun has it wrong and that any investigation is being conducted by the Deputy Attorney General, who is a civil servant (although, given the corruption of the federal civil service by the Grits, it gives me cold confort to know a civil servant may have charge of instructing Justice Department lawyers.)

I had a link to the offending US web site featured on the CBC yesterday. In the CBC clip you could see the sailing ships on the site's masthead. Last night I removed the link even though I frequently visited that site before the Gomery testimony appeared on it. Given the threat of criminal prosecution, Canadians will have to find the U.S. blogsite on their own with no help from me.

Didn't dissident intellectuals in the old Soviet Union days make use of forbidden texts called Samizdat that they passed surreptitiously from hand to hand to avoid arrest by their political masters?

Monday, April 04, 2005

Judge Gomery and the Amazing Explosive Testimonials

With the news of Pope John Paul's death on Saturday, mere domestic political happenings have been receiving scant attention from the public in general, or from me in particular. While this is understandable, there are other matters that matter and the Gomery Commission is foremost among them.

They say that the Canadian dream was the 19th century political decision to construct a railway to the Pacific coast. It appears that our national nightmare is the contemporary decision to construct a political gravy train to the Liberal Party of Canada.

In the Globe and Mail on Saturday we find this astonishing story.

Saturday, April 2, 2005 Updated at 1:47 AM EST
From Saturday's Globe and Mail

Explosive new testimony at the Gomery commission has created a buzz in Ottawa that the opposition could force a quick election on a Liberal government damaged by the sponsorship scandal.

That testimony cannot be revealed because of a publication ban imposed by Mr. Justice John Gomery to ensure a fair trial for those facing charges related to the scandal. But reports from observers sent by political parties have stepped up speculation on all sides that the Liberals' minority government could fall sooner than expected.

Even insiders say it is too soon to grasp whether there will be a quick move to the hustings, a question made murkier by legal actions launched yesterday.
I can't be the only one that feels like we have been thrust through the looking glass into a bizarre proto-Canada. We now live in a place where scandalous political developments that are central to the governance of the nation cannot be revealed to the electorate. Why? A judge commissioned to hold a public inquiry into wrongdoing of the Liberal government has ordered a publication ban on the testimony before his commission.

Now I don't question the motives of Jude Gomery, as I know he does not want to prejudice criminal trials of characters who are intimately connected to the substance of issues before his inquiry. In this case, however, I do not believe that a publication ban can be realistically enforceable. As Machiavelli noted, a wise prince does not give an order he knows his troops will not obey.

Nor can it conceivably be in the public interest. Parliament and the main stream media is abuzz with talk and contingency planning for a national election which may be called as a result of this (unknown to the Canadian public) "explosive testimony." The elites are well aware of what is going on, but you, dear friend, are being denied information crucial to the functioning of this democracy. We, the people, are reduced to reading about the goings on from kindly American bloggers who are free to circumvent the publication ban and post the highlights of the Gomery testimony. Another reason to Thank the Yank, I say.

Now I don't recommend you go to an American source to find out the latest testimony respecting egregious transgressions of Canada's natural governing political party. Apparently, recommending such an action could land me in judicial hell and reading the latest details of the Gomery commission will certainly ruin your digestion.

I fully expect you, therefore, to act your given part in this sordid national drama and play the compliant serf. The Family Compact that runs the national gravy train will have it no other way. Just remember that when they drive by in their citizen provided limousines you are to be good serfs, lower your gazes and tug on your forelocks.

Whatever you do, don't demand your rights as citizens. That is not for such as we.

Saturday, April 02, 2005

John Paul the Great

My son Liam, who is the goalie for his hockey team, was sadly eliminated from the playoffs this afternoon. On the way home we heard on the radio sadder news that His Holiness John Paul II has entered into our Father's kingdom, where it is reported in scripture that there are many rooms. I'm sure that if these rooms are allocated on the basis of merit, then Karol Wojtyla has a very nice room with a great view.

There is little doubt, in my view, that we are witnessing the passing of one of the truly great popes of the past two millennia; a pope who will go down in history as Pope John Paul the Great. "Great" hardly does him justice.

John Paul kept the Church together when lesser spiritual lights were doing their level best to transform it into a cheerleader for what has become the modern culture of death. He was, like the first Bishop of Rome the Apostle Peter, the rock upon which Christ continues to build his Church.

He was a man of integrity, in the truest sense of that word. All the complex aspects of his personality, spirituality and education fit together into one dynamic whole. He emanated a sense of mission, which had its source in his absolute faith that Jesus of Nazareth was the Messiah, the Son of the living God. Everything he did was the fruit of this belief. His belief in the dignity of every human being was predicated in the beautiful understanding that God not only made human beings in His image and likeness, but that He became one of us, and dwelt among us and loves us.

John Paul's God was and is the God of the Catholic Church, loving, merciful and just, in equal and divine measure. The pope's capacity to connect with youth, even in his old age, surprised many who could not fathom how he could be so accepted so easily by the young. It never surprised me, for young people are drawn to authentic spirituality as honeybees are drawn to the nectar of flowers. So are we all, for the most part.

John Paul understood that people are fundamentally good, even as he knew that we all possess the capacity to turn our faces from the good to embrace the bad. He invited us to enter into an intimate dialogue with God knowing that once experienced, the Holy Spirit is not easily forgotten, or spurned. Indeed, as pointed out by The Anchoress, his last words were about the young people gathered in St. Peter's square below his apartment where he lay dying:
"I have looked for you, now, you come to me." (John Paul II, April 2, 2005 in extremis)
As he reached out to the youth, so this Polish pope, who as a youth lived through the Nazi occupation, made a great effort to reconcile the Church with the chosen people of God, the Jews. He acknowledged the painful truth that the Catholic Church has contributed greatly to anti-Semitism and has made grave moral errors in its treatment of the Jewish people. He extended a hand of friendship to those of that faith without whom there would be no Messiah and no Church. We must continue in this path for it is the path of reconciliation and justice.

Beyond question it was this pope that engineered the circumstances that were the proximate cause of the collapse of the Soviet Union. In my view, the inherent contradictions in Marxist-Leninism would have ultimately ensured its demise, but there is no question that he was central to the historical events which precipitated the sudden demise of that ghastly, immoral, and atheistic system of oppression and mass murder.

John Paul the Great was a thorn in the side of "progressives" and a tower of strength to the faithful. He was a man who served God faithfully, forcefully and fruitfully.

There is so much more that can be said. Let me just say for now that I loved him, admired him and and will miss him greatly.

From the bottom of my heart thank you, O true and faithful servant.


(From Psalm 91)

"Because he has set his love on me, therefore I will deliver him.
I will set him on high, because he has known my name.
He will call on me, and I will answer him.
I will be with him in trouble.
I will deliver him, and honor him.
I will satisfy him with long life, and show him my salvation."

Friday, April 01, 2005

Reports that John Paul II Has Died

It is being reported (unconfiirmed) by the media that His Holiness Pope John Paul II has died.

(The report was premature by one day.)

The Case of Zahra Kazemi

The Globe and Mail
By Michael Den Tandt and Maria Jiminez
April 1, 2005

The Conservative and New Democratic parties joined forces yesterday to demand Ottawa dramatically ratchet up diplomatic pressure on Iran after revelations that Canadian photojournalist Zahra Kazemi was brutally raped and tortured while in Iranian custody in 2003.

"We want the government to do what they should have done almost two years ago, which is to drop the failed approach of soft-peddling and soft diplomacy, and make tough demands," Tory foreign affairs critic Stockwell Day said.

Both Mr. Day and his NDP counterpart, Alexa McDonough, said Canada should withdraw its ambassador to Iran if Ottawa doesn't immediately get satisfaction from Tehran on key issues, such as the return of Ms. Kazemi's remains to her family in Canada and a new criminal investigation subject to international monitors.

At a press conference in Toronto yesterday, Foreign Affairs Minister Pierre Pettigrew brushed aside the calls for a new approach, saying Canada is already doing all it can to seek justice for Ms. Kazemi.

I know that I am not the only one that finds the reaction of the Liberal Government to her abuse and murder to be reprehensible. certainly, the Last Amazon has posted eloquently on this matter.

Mr. Pettigrew said the new testimony in the Kazemi case, which comes from the emergency-room physician who examined her before she died, "certainly demonstrates gruesome details that make it extremely troubling, most disturbing. But it does not change the nature of the dossier."

Economic sanctions by one country alone don't work, Mr. Pettigrew said. And he dismissed the notion of recalling Canada's ambassador. "We need an ambassador there to promote our case," he said.

Mr. Pettigrew added that Canada has known from the outset that Ms. Kazemi was murdered. "We do not accept the Iranian government's allegations that this was an accident. We never have."
Let's see now. What exactly happened?

In Ottawa yesterday, Dr. Shahram Azam - a former physician with the Iranian security police who last month received asylum in Canada - spoke in great detail about the gruesome injuries to which Ms. Kazemi eventually succumbed in July of 2003.

She had a badly broken nose, a smashed eardrum, broken fingers, a crushed toe, missing fingernails and toenails, a severe head injury, signs of flogging, and deep bruising all over her body, he said.

An examination by an emergency-room nurse revealed "brutal" damage to Ms. Kazemi's genital area, which the nurse said could only have been the result of violent rape. "Those injuries, extensive and severe as they were, could only have been sustained during torture, Dr. Azam said. "It was the first time I saw someone who was tortured," he said in Farsi, speaking softly but confidently. "It was shocking for me."

Dr. Azam's testimony is the first account by a medical witness that categorically contradicts the official Iranian explanation for Ms. Kazemi's death, which is that she died after fainting and hitting her head.
So this Liberal government thinks it acceptable to do .... what was that again? Ah yes, ... "promote our case." The Honourable Pierre Pettigrew PC MP, Defender of Canadians Abroad, Case Promoter Extraordinaire! .... Bullshitter of the First Rank!