The CMAJ agrees. . .

Even a recent editorial in the Canadian Medical Association Journal agrees; Stephen Harper hates Canada.

Listeriosis is the least of it

Stephen Harper's hatred of Canada has, up to now, been manifested in small ways - his appeals to patriotism to fund a war that is against the country's interests, his gutting of arts funding, his studied avoidance of health care issues, his Bush Playbook political strategies, etc, etc. The changes in public health policy are an anomaly, in that they make Canada even less civilized than the United States, even though mostly, he has been going for par.

The listeriosis epidemic is a timely reminder that the Harper government has reversed much of the progress that previous governments made on governing for public health. Following the 2003 SARS epidemic and subsequent recommendations of the National Advisory Committee on SARS and Public Health,⁷ the Public Health Agency of Canada (PHAC) was created and given its own minister in government — a direct line to the prime minister. But in 2006, among Prime Minister Stephen Harper's first acts was to eliminate the PHAC minister and public health's seat at the Cabinet table. His government also left the chief medical officer of health within the ranks of the civil service, working under the minister of health. In so doing, it left our country without a national independent voice to speak out on public health issues, including providing visible leadership during this crisis.

I don't think that Harper has the power to undo all the virtues of this country. If, however, he gets back into office - even with a minority - he will have an opportunity to do far more damage than he already has.

For all you strategic voters out there

This site gives riding-by-riding information on how to beat your local ReformaTory candidate.

http://www.voteforenvironment.ca/

I tend to vote with my heart, but if you are worried enough about a Konservative majority, given that STEPHEN HARPER HATES CANADA, it's very valuable information.

As I've said before, high voter turnout is not necessarily a good thing. If you haven't been following the election, and aren't aware of the histories of the parties or their current platforms, please, don't vote.

What I like to hear!

The NDP are taking my advice. (Ok, it's improbable that Jack Layton has has dismissed his consultants and is perusing this site for his election strategy, but how do you know he isn't?)

On to the awesomeness:



And in French, it's double the awesomeness:



Polished, unapologetic, knows who its audience is (and more importantly, is not), and strongly suggests that Stephen Harper Hates Canada (TM).

If only they'd start saying it all in English.

Shorter David Warren

Article: Bailout Blues

The current US Financial crisis is happening because black people were encouraged by the government to own homes.

It's thanks to Conrad Black and the Aspers that this tripe is published in Canada. Excellent 3-line rebuttal here.

Settling for crocodile tears

These are the last ten days of Ramadan, and are given special importance by Muslims. The significance of the month is thought of in many ways: it is "the month of the Qur'an," it is a time when Satan is chained and the Muslims must only contend with themselves, it is a time to pull back from the material and devote oneself to the spiritual, and a time to suppress all of the bad habits and attitudes that creep into our hearts during the rest of the year.

The ritual of fasting is likewise construed in many ways, just one of which is an act of solidarity with those who are impoverished. By making ourselves unable to eat or drink, the reasoning goes, we gain an understanding of what it means to be physically deprived, and develop sympathy for those who have no choice but to be.

Reading this piece from Al-Jazeera English today, I was reminded of the huge gap between the symbolism of Ramadan for Muslims the world over, and the action that is needed from them.

Said a Daoud Hari, a refugee from Darfur:

I think that [US President George] Bush has done a really good job with Darfur.

Before Nicolas Sarkozy, the French president, and Gordon Brown, the new prime minister in the UK came in, he was acting alone.

No world leaders talked about the genocide or the crisis in Darfur.

Now Bush is leaving office and we want the next president to do more to help Darfur.

Both [Barack] Obama and [John] McCain have to take action and end any negotiations with the government of Sudan.

The next president of the United States has to make this the most important issue for them, as this the most serious humanitarian crisis on the planet.

They could use sanctions, but they also have to take action to pressure China not to support dicatatorships in Africa and to help stop the genocide there."

Does he realize that Bush has no actual interest in Darfur? Does he realize that for all parties in the Western world, Darfur is little more than a matter of political convenience? For the Republicans, talking about it is a way to shore up their claim that they are interested in humanitarianism, a convenient cover for their opposite behaviour in the rest of the world. For "liberals", it's a way of proving the opposite; "if they were so interested in democracy and human rights," the Dems say, "They would have done something about Darfur." For the Zionist lobby, it's a way to deflect criticism of Israel, "why the fuss over a few thousand Palestinians when millions are being killed in Sudan!" they protest.

Maybe he does realize that. The problem is, though, that the people whose first responsibility it would be to help his people have failed to do so, starting with their awkward defense of Omar El-Bashir. Neither Africans, nor Arabs, nor Muslims, writ large, have done anything about that monster despite the havoc he has caused in order to enrich his regime. Their own failure to confront the problems close to home is part of their failure to resist the challenges from outside.

A local imam near where I live always includes Darfur in his supplications after a sermon. It's a start, but it's hardly enough. Until the Muslims act sincerely for Darfur, the people there will have to settle for crocodile tears.

Shorter Robert Sibley

Article: Recalling another 9/11 Attack

George Bush's glorious "Coalition of the Willing" in Iraq is just like the European army that triumphed over the Ottoman hordes at Vienna in 1683, which is really the main reason why Muslims are angry at the West today.

Tariq Ramadan flattens Philippe de Villiers

Here's an entertaining exchange between Muslim academic Tariq Ramadan and conservative French politician Philippe de Villiers, on the French current events show Ripostes.



de Villiers believes that France's Muslim minority represents a threat to the Republic, and does not consider them to be truly "French." He goes from condescending and disingenuous to desperate and scatterbrained, ending the debate by grasping at ad hominem attacks against Ramadan.

De Villiers' arguments are prototypical of the "The Mozlems are Coming!" hysteria that seems to have gripped the much of the internet and the Western world, relying on isolated anecdotes, confusing Islam with the behaviour of certain Muslims, and holding them to a moral standard which he refuses to apply to anyone else - himself included.

It's in French, so if you don't understand the language, you should learn.

I know that it's bad
That's it's the kind that they can't operate on
And I know, it's real slow, honey
Painful, and real slow.

Styrofoam coffee cups
And bad drugs that never work enough
And I know, it's real slow, honey
Painful, and real slow.

I get it all the time
Bright eyes, to bat and hide behind
But I know they're just for show, honey
Painful and just for show

Black rooms, to babysit,
White halls, to pace and wait for it
But I know it's too slow, honey
Painful and too slow

- Matthew Good, "99% of Us is Failure."