Explicatory Revelations
Ah, so! I was a trifle hasty to come to judgement. Pardon, please do. And continue on as you were, Mr. Prime Minister; you're doing just fine. And about time; no, not about time that you led the nation responsibly and with the ardour for justice that it deserves - about time that one of our leaders did just that. Taking my cue from the acute observations of Don Martin, I rushed to judgement.
But look here, there's additional information coming to light, thanks to Jonathan Kay who may just have delved a little deeper into the matter than Mr. Martin. Why do I allow myself to be led/misled so readily? Here's hoping that other Canadians keep a sharp eye and ready ear, an open mind and the ability to read between the lines, since much depends on it.
Just as much depends on the vote taking place this very day on the issue of the extension of the two provisions in question in the 2001 Anti-Terrorism Act; one of them the very provision which will permit officials to compel witnesses to appear for questioning before the Air India investigation. The Air India tragedy stands out as the most deadly act of terrorism committed against Canadians.
Yet here we have the militantly combative Stephane Dion warning his dissident Liberal caucaus that they stand to lose the support of the Liberal party when they inevitably seek re-election should they dare to oppose his edict that the party vote as a block against renewal of the key sunset provisions.
Yes, it was a stretch of the imagination, far-fetched in the extreme to even begin to think that the Liberal party sought to kill the extensions in an effort to circumvent incriminating evidence which would be brought into the open were the Air India investigation to proceed. Evidence which might taint the reputation of a sitting Member of Parliament whose father-in-law was a spokesman for a now-outlawed Sikh terror group.
How low might politicians stoop, after all? To surrender justice to the greater good of their chances to once again take up the leadership of the country? Might that be even remotely possible? Why did the House erupt into a tsunami of violent objection during question period when Stephen Harper introduced a story just published in the Vancouver Sun?
Well, Jonathan Kay paints a truly tawdry picture of opportunistic politics, one which any reader of the news with any memory of past Liberal activities will recognize and recall, all fitting neatly into the Liberal party's penchant for wooing ethnic votes, for representing themselves as the parliamentary champions of immigrants, the purportedly self-perceived underdogs in Canadian society.
Tarek Fatah of the Muslim CanadianCongress, himself a critic of ethno-politics, reported that the president of the Canadian Arab Federation circulated an email to Muslim delegates warning them that Bob Rae's wife is a member of a Jewish advocacy group and is therefore undeserving of being elected as "a leader who supports apartheid". MP Omar Alghabra, a former CAF president, stood by mutely.
And ethnic groups have certainly learned much in the process; that they can pressure and lobby and present their single-issue ethnic concerns in exchange for block voting. What does that say about the democratic principle we all love to distraction? What does it say for the prospect of national security when an ethnic group implicated in terrorist activity seeks to silence an enquiry in exchange for votes?
What does it say for a party celebrating its principled stand on any and every issue of importance to Canadians but which yet sees fit to encourage and embrace the ethnic vote, no matter the cost to integrity, honesty, fairness and the rule of law? After all, Caesar's wife must be seen to be above suspicion. Why is it that the Liberals are so bloody-mindedly determined to oppose national security legislation?
At the Liberal leadership convention which anointed Stephane Dion as leader, Tamil delegates shunned Bob Rae after he informed their Tamil Tiger apologist leader that he had no intention of reversing Stephen Harper's listing of the Tamil Tigers on Canada's banned terrorist groups. And because Bob Rae's official recommendation in favour of an Air India investigation angered Sikhs, they were informed that a vote for him at the convention would be "bad for Sikhs".
Bob Rae, along with Anne McLellan, John Manley, Irwin Cotler, Keith Martin and other principled Liberals oppose Stephane Dion's determination to kill the anti-terror extensions. Are they conceivably lone principled Liberals?
But look here, there's additional information coming to light, thanks to Jonathan Kay who may just have delved a little deeper into the matter than Mr. Martin. Why do I allow myself to be led/misled so readily? Here's hoping that other Canadians keep a sharp eye and ready ear, an open mind and the ability to read between the lines, since much depends on it.
Just as much depends on the vote taking place this very day on the issue of the extension of the two provisions in question in the 2001 Anti-Terrorism Act; one of them the very provision which will permit officials to compel witnesses to appear for questioning before the Air India investigation. The Air India tragedy stands out as the most deadly act of terrorism committed against Canadians.
Yet here we have the militantly combative Stephane Dion warning his dissident Liberal caucaus that they stand to lose the support of the Liberal party when they inevitably seek re-election should they dare to oppose his edict that the party vote as a block against renewal of the key sunset provisions.
Yes, it was a stretch of the imagination, far-fetched in the extreme to even begin to think that the Liberal party sought to kill the extensions in an effort to circumvent incriminating evidence which would be brought into the open were the Air India investigation to proceed. Evidence which might taint the reputation of a sitting Member of Parliament whose father-in-law was a spokesman for a now-outlawed Sikh terror group.
How low might politicians stoop, after all? To surrender justice to the greater good of their chances to once again take up the leadership of the country? Might that be even remotely possible? Why did the House erupt into a tsunami of violent objection during question period when Stephen Harper introduced a story just published in the Vancouver Sun?
Well, Jonathan Kay paints a truly tawdry picture of opportunistic politics, one which any reader of the news with any memory of past Liberal activities will recognize and recall, all fitting neatly into the Liberal party's penchant for wooing ethnic votes, for representing themselves as the parliamentary champions of immigrants, the purportedly self-perceived underdogs in Canadian society.
Tarek Fatah of the Muslim CanadianCongress, himself a critic of ethno-politics, reported that the president of the Canadian Arab Federation circulated an email to Muslim delegates warning them that Bob Rae's wife is a member of a Jewish advocacy group and is therefore undeserving of being elected as "a leader who supports apartheid". MP Omar Alghabra, a former CAF president, stood by mutely.
And ethnic groups have certainly learned much in the process; that they can pressure and lobby and present their single-issue ethnic concerns in exchange for block voting. What does that say about the democratic principle we all love to distraction? What does it say for the prospect of national security when an ethnic group implicated in terrorist activity seeks to silence an enquiry in exchange for votes?
What does it say for a party celebrating its principled stand on any and every issue of importance to Canadians but which yet sees fit to encourage and embrace the ethnic vote, no matter the cost to integrity, honesty, fairness and the rule of law? After all, Caesar's wife must be seen to be above suspicion. Why is it that the Liberals are so bloody-mindedly determined to oppose national security legislation?
At the Liberal leadership convention which anointed Stephane Dion as leader, Tamil delegates shunned Bob Rae after he informed their Tamil Tiger apologist leader that he had no intention of reversing Stephen Harper's listing of the Tamil Tigers on Canada's banned terrorist groups. And because Bob Rae's official recommendation in favour of an Air India investigation angered Sikhs, they were informed that a vote for him at the convention would be "bad for Sikhs".
Bob Rae, along with Anne McLellan, John Manley, Irwin Cotler, Keith Martin and other principled Liberals oppose Stephane Dion's determination to kill the anti-terror extensions. Are they conceivably lone principled Liberals?
Labels: Inconvenient Politics
posted by Pieface | 12:04 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home