Why I don't want Jack Layton and the NDP anywhere near to power in the Government of Canada

They have a tyrannical approach to politics. When they organize political rallies, they call on the unions who use funds taxed from all the workers at union workplaces, and then bar non-conformists from  participating, making sure that only the official line is to be heard and that standard (union-funded) signage predominates. As Downtown Eastside Enquirer reports:

A union member showed up at the Vancouver rally organized by the ‘Yes Coalition’ on Thursday evening carrying a sign that said all the wrong things. He was denied entry to the ballroom where a rally was being held in support of a non-confidence vote planned for Canada’s parliament in January to oust Stephen Harper as Prime Minister. Unlike the roughly 1,000 people who jammed the ballroom in Canada Place, the dissident did not support the coalition between the NDP, the Liberals, and the Bloc Quebecois which would replace the Harper government.

The dissident stood in the lobby as people filed past him into the ballroom. He was incensed that he was being prevented from entering, explaining to members of the crowd that he is a member of the Public Service Alliance of B.C. which he said was an organizer of the rally.
[...]
Did I mention that restricting democracy was what Stephen Harper was being accused of at the rally inside the ballroom?

Inside the ballroom one speaker after another accused Prime Minister Stephen Harper of undermining democracy. Peter Julian, MP for Burnaby-New Westminster, said in a forceful speech: “Stephen Harper has usurped democracy. He has padlocked our Parliament.”

The obviously scripted line about locking the doors of parliament turned up repeatedly in speeches criticizing Stephen Harper for avoiding a non-confidence vote on Monday
[...]
the most striking symbolism was when the videotaped speech from Liberal leader Stephane Dion to this NDP-laden crowd malfunctioned. “Ohhhhh,” I could hear people seated around me saying in low tones. “It’s not cued up,” said the chair. When the video did come on a few minutes later, we could see Dion’s face but the sound didn’t initially work.

Dion said we are facing the worst economic crisis “since the great depression”. That left me wondering if he was telling the truth.
[...]
Even Santa, who was walking around the Canada Place lobby greeting people, wasn’t finding it so easy to get laughs. When two men who appeared to be rally organizers spotted a couple of young children sitting behind a pillar with their mother, they walked Santa over to greet them. “Ho, ho, ho!” Santa asked in a jolly tone, “So do you support the Coalition?” The young mother responded in a less than festive tone, “No.” Santa responded, “Neither do I.” Oh, Oh, Oh. Santa instantly moved on and the children, like most Canadians, were left asking questions about what exactly was going on.

Downtown Eastside Enquirer: Union Member Opposing Coalition Denied Access to Pro-Coalition Rally Organized by Unions

Well, if that doesn't settle it - Santa's love and wisdom - I don't know what will.

I had the pleasure of attending today's pro-Harper, pro-democracy, pro-Canada rally at Vancouver's Library Square, in the company of "Reliable Sources" the author of the above excellent report. RS promised to have some photos up on The Downtown Eastside Enquirer later.


One thing to look for: unlike the union-funded signage of the pro-coalition rallies, the anti-coalition people use their own time and resources to make their own signs.

UPDATE:

Here are some of RS' photos of today's event which featured a number of MPs and citizens giving speeches to a crowd of maybe 300 severely normal people who, among other things, joined in singing O'Canada, in marking the anniversary of the Montreal massacre, remembering our fallen troops in Afghanistan, cheering for democracy, offering up chants of "Harper, Harper", and generally denouncing the rank arrogance and cancerous opportunism of Jack Layton, Stephane Dion, and Bob Rae. It was a chilly, rainy day in Vancouver, but people generally were in good spirits.

See also report by Robert Jago.

A few thoughts on Prime Minister Harper's speech tonight

This is a comment in response to a comment by "CH" in the previous post, but I thought it might be worthwhile putting up something on tonight's speech by the Prime Minister, though I found it disappointing. I don't have time right now to write anything much else, so here's my comment in the previous post if anyone wants to join a new thread.
-------------

CH,

There is a further point that occurs to me after watching Harper's speech tonight, which I thought was inadequate. He really had nothing to say, giving us no serious sense of how he is going to deal with this crisis, what he thinks is the right thing for him to do, what he would offer to negotiate with the other parties or parts thereof. It strikes me that he must either have some very good reason for being cagey that I can't think of, or he just doesn't have a lot of ideas about how to re-present Canada's national interest in ways that can point towards new pacts that can lead us out of this crisis. Stephane Dion also had little creative to say, besides repeating his election campaign rhetoric.

So, I see this as signs of a bigger crisis in the field of representations, a lack of representations that could set in flow a new and freer political exchange in this country, thus deferring the present impasse in our political culture.

This kind of crisis no doubt has many proximate causes but a lot of them are to do with too much top-down politics and not enough room in the political arenas for creative interactions among ordinary Canadians. We need more space for political entrepreneurs. What I saw tonight from Harper and Dion were men who look as if they are frozen in ice. And ultimately, that is somewhat related to how our political parties are run and financed. The CPC may be more skilled at grassroots organizing and fundraising than the others, though the NDP uses the unions to put together pretty impressive electoral machines in certain ridings, but Harper himself is clearly too much of an autocrat who is just too insecure about others' power plays to negotiate effectively in a minority government. Canada is a huge problem, and it is not surprising that we don't have many skilled at representing a common national interest. But that is what we have to work towards, or give up. And making parties more dependent on grass roots would be part of that.

Silly season: election Carnival and the inversion of Society

Perhaps it's just my innate silliness, but I can't associate "Flavelle" and "Liberal" without thinking of righteous pork barrels, not to mention Hogtown snobbery.

I have no idea, beyond the provided biographical note, who the writer Christopher Flavelle is, or from whence he comes. Still, fwiw, silly is what I think of What's the matter with Canada? - By Christopher Flavelle - Slate Magazine which portrays Stephen Harper as some kind of radical evil who is, among other things, only a step away from outlawing abortion, and socialized medicine, and outrageously lowering taxes to the point of threatening budgetary surpluses!

Well, some folks can dream...

The article is not to debate seriously, but I link it because I think it is a worthwhile illustration of the trouble left-liberal politics is having in finding a grand narrative to make sense of our times: I am surely not the only one who sees an increasing reliance on demonization and apocalyptic scare mongering that is out of touch with much of our banal reality.

Perhaps the reason for this loss of touch is because many retain a desire for grand narratives, even when the age of mythical thinking should be ever shrinking and we should no longer be seeking a singular "story of our times" but rather living well in an age of many narratives devoted to protecting and building our shared modernity (the irrational threat to which, from the left-Islamist alliance, helps constitute the only big narrative left, but even then we will eventually win this round against anti-market, anti-freedom forces by destroying their One Big Narrative with more individual freedom for all, even Muslims...).

The desire to understand politics and parties in terms of one big cause for the future (even in Liberal parties that are actually about doing a lot of pork barreling and representing a social and technocratic elite), needs to give way to a greater openness to a truly open-ended modernity that recognizes that the one big cause we all desire, the source of our unity and common humanity, is really something in our past, at the origin of humanity, perhaps only to be known fully again in a heavenly kingdom to come, or maybe not.

Sure, this unity continues to leave its mark on us and on every new instance of our growing intra-cultural diversity; as something forever being built upon, we come to see, and to encourage, its latest twists and turns in good part through engagement in politics. Yet perhaps what well defines a conservative is the belief that our human unity is not what politics should be ultimately about, as some kind of end goal. Our unity is more properly the concern of religion and anthropology. But for many people who don't have a satisfactory religion or anthropology, left-liberal "politics" becomes their religion substitute (as they bravely keep at bay the cynical, if realistic, thought that the "I have a dream of Unity" politicians usually end up with few concrete ideas, beyond pork barreling).

Politics should be about the road to a greater freedom, shared by all. And, as such, is not the desire for a political party with a central grand narrative for our times an anachronism? If so, can today's Liberal Party of Canada re-define itself? Can it become a true big tent coalition that embraces various causes of freedom in ways usefully different from the Conservatives, without recourse to apocalyptic demonization? Isn't talk of Harper's "secret agenda" getting really stale?

I doubt the Liberals are yet close to any such transformation. The mistake of many of them in thinking Stephane Dion was some new era Trudeau (as if that would be a good thing) exemplifies their "national unity" box, so desired and so containing. Our national unity is the precondition for our politics and shared freedom, not its earthly end.

In this light, the lack of piety that Stephen Harper displays for certain Liberal shibboleths is a good thing. And we become silly in our narratives if we take this to mean Harper is at war with all that is sacred and human.

Harper to call election on Sunday; but do we have the freedom to call the NDP and Liberals Islamist-loving fascists?

For those looking for hope that they might find some motivation to fight for the Conservatives under Harper, the man who has had nothing public to say about the "human rights" commission scandal, at least not since he became Prime Minister (he once called the commissions "totalitarian" but now he lives with them), Deborah G. lights a candle:Deborah Gyapong: YES on QUESTION 10 !!!!!!!

Meanwhile, the NDP is running Islamists, which is exactly what their behaviour and supporters of the last few years have led us to expect.

Of course, I have still to hear Stephane Dion publicly denounce those who helped elect him Liberal Party leader with the "Bob Rae's wife is a Jew" slogan.

Don't miss Kathy Shaidle on Appeasing Canada's Islamists.

Prime Minister Harper congratulates Israel on its 60th anniversary

Prime Minister Harper today issued the following statement on the occasion of the 60th anniversary of the State of Israel:

“On behalf of the Government of Canada, I wish to congratulate the people of Israel on the 60th anniversary of their country’s founding. Israel is a symbol of the triumph of hope and faith.

Founded three years after the Holocaust, it is one of the great miracles of modern history. Over the past six decades, Israel has blossomed into a land of ingenuity and enterprise, an oasis of agricultural genius, a wellspring of fine art and high culture, a model of democracy.

“We count ourselves among Israel’s staunchest friends. Canada has supported Israel and its right to live in peace and security with its neighbours since its creation in 1948.

“Canada warmly welcomes the strong partnership that has developed between our two countries — a partnership we look forward to strengthening, including in important areas such as security, trade and investment.

“At the heart of relations between Canada and Israel is the dynamism of our shared communities. We look forward to the next 60 years and beyond.”

At Covenant Zone we stand with Israel. I once created a small video tribute to express the same sentiments as Prime Minister Harper does so ably in his own personal tribute today; we both admire Israel for what the nation teaches us about the strength that can come with faith.

Thank You, Israel. Studying your history, learning from your faith, has helped me to persevere through my own struggles to become closer to God in living a life of meaning.

Canadian politics: increasingly polarized by antisemitism

Charles sent me this link yesterday: CCD applauds Harper government for withdrawal of support for UN 'anti-racism' conference

For Immediate Release
Wednesday, 23 January, 2008

Ottawa, Canada - The Stephen Harper government has withdrawn its support for a UN anti-racism conference scheduled to take place next year in South Africa, according to a media release today from the Department of Foreign Affairs and International Trade.

Jason Kenney, secretary of state for multiculturalism and Canadian identity, said today that the conference, like its predecessor in 2001, "has gone completely off the rails... Canada is interested in combating racism, not promoting it. We'll attend any conference that is opposed to racism and intolerance, not those that actually promote racism and intolerance".

"Canadians are shocked when they hear the clear and simple expression of reality by their leaders," said Alastair Gordon, president of the Canadian Coalition for Democracies (CCD). "We are used to hearing double-speak from our politicians -- fantasies that are at odds with the reality that most Canadians see and the values that they hold."

The last UN anti-racism conference held in Durban in 2001 degenerated into a hate-fest of anti-Jewish and anti-Israel vitriol, while the most egregious human rights violators escaped criticism. The Toronto Star today reported that "all of the non-governmental organizations invited to the first conference have been invited back to the second, including those that were at the 'forefront of the hatred', some of which posted pro-Hitler posters at the 2001 gathering."

The United Nations Human Rights Council (UNHRC) is in charge of planning for the conference, an entity that has directed 93% of its resolutions on human rights violations at just one nation - Israel. Iran is a member of the organizing committee, despite its government's open call to wipe the Jewish homeland off the face of the earth.

"The Stephen Harper government has again demonstrated that Canada can project power as a moral leader in international affairs," added Gordon. "A nation does not need a massive military to provide the moral leadership and clarity that denies legitimacy to Orwellian UN agencies that hijack the language of human rights to promote Jew-hatred.

"Stephen Harper has signaled that Canada will act on principle, regardless of UN consensus. This is the stuff of global leadership."

This news drew a reply from Khaled Mouammar, Canadian Arab Federation National President, as noted by Kate at Small Dead Animals. Mouammar states:

Canada's outright rejection of the [UN anti-racism] conference sends a clear message to the Canadian public that the current government is disinterested in promoting human rights and anti-racism. The very fact that Israel was "attacked" at the previous conference indicates that the international community and human rights organizations are in agreement that the occupation of Arab lands, the mistreatment and killing of Palestinians, and the denial of the right of Palestinian refugees to return is in violation of international law and will be condemned and no longer accepted.

[...]

"We would also like to remind Jason Kenney that he is a Minister of the Canadian government, not the racist Israeli government; still, CAF is not surprised with Minister Kenney's position given his outright contempt for the Arab and Muslim communities in Canada and his condoning of Islamophobia. This is the same man who attacked a Muslim organization for lodging a complaint with the Ontario Human Rights Commission against Maclean's Magazine for publishing an inflammatory and bigoted article, and who slandered Canadian NGO's at an OSCE Conference in front of the international community"

Kate then goes on to note that Mouammar gained notoriety by circulating a flyer at the last leadership convention of the Liberal Party of Canada, denouncing leading leadership candidate, Bob Rae, for his Jewish connections. As we reported, there was apparently a campaign of slander at the convention, directed at the fact that Bob Rae's wife is Jewish and an official with the Canadian Jewish Congress; and this campaign seems to have led to support for the successful candidacy of the current Liberal leader, Stephane Dion, who, according to Kate, has yet to comment on, or to denounce, this convention vileness.

Anyway, I recently saw the name Khaled Mouammar attached to a comment on the Globe and Mail online article by the four law students taking Mark Steyn and Maclean's to the "human rights" tribunals:

Khaled Mouammar from Richmond Hill, Canada writes: Jewish American writer, Isidore Feinstein Stone, stated that 'Every war, every outburst of genocide, is prepared by propaganda which paints the vicitm, the Other, as less than human. This is the ultimate lesson of Auschwitz, he who treats his brother as less than human prepares the path to the furnace.' Mark Steyn's article in Maclean's Magazine, intentionally or unintentionally, appears to be spreading racism against Muslims by insinuating that the rising number of Muslims in Western societies is sinister and threatens to destroy western societies.

The presentation of the Muslim as a menace, a terrorist, a shadowy figure who operates outside of the accepted value system and is therfore to be feared and mistrusted has gone on for too long and is undermining the multicultural and tolerant fabric of Canada. This racist image of the Muslim is nothing more than the result of the tranference of the popular anti-Semitic animosity from a Jewish to a Muslim target.

There was then a thoughtful reply to this Mouammar from one George Brown - probably someone taking the name of the Globe's founding publisher, the pre-Confederation politician from Canada West.

' Khaled Mouammar from Richmond Hill, Canada writes: Jewish American writer, Isidore Feinstein Stone, stated that 'Every war, every outburst of genocide, is prepared by propaganda which paints the vicitm, the Other, as less than human.... This racist image of the Muslim is nothing more than the result of the tranference of the popular anti-Semitic animosity from a Jewish to a Muslim target.'

I hear this argument often now. It's not true. Judeophobia (strictly speaking there is no 'Semitic' race or religion) is a reaction to the people who claim to be first in covenant with the One God, those who don't give God a name (to be compared with other names in contests over the Greatest God) but who start a new historical era by defining God: 'I am what I am'.

Islamophobia is a reaction to the people who come relatively late to the world of monotheism and who base their claims, not to having the New New Testament, but to having the Koran, the eternal uncreated word of God, that the Jews and Christians who came before never knew entirely or have somehow forgotten or corrupted.

Racism is not racism is not racism. Jews are a race and a religion, Muslims are not. Jews, when hated, are hated for being 'first', for being religious discoverers, which in the hater's mind becomes something conspiratorial. It is an attack on the successful, something still widely allowed in commentary on Israel. Muslims, when hated, are hated for being outsiders with a righteous claim to overcome those who previously left them marginal.

I see no evidence Canadians are laying the ground for a Holocaust of Muslims. I, for one, want to defend your individual freedom to be whoever you want to be; and that means contesting certain group resentments and their claims on the state. A free society can only be based on individual rights, not group claims.

I'm stretching the metaphor, but Stephane Dion needs to take a lead from his great liberal party antecedent, "George Brown", not to mention from Stephen Harper, a man who consistently stands for what he knows is right, with regard to Israel and antisemitism, notwithstanding the political consequences it will have. In contrast, Dion seems willing to reap the rewards. Let's just hope Harper can find the support among Canadians for a majority government so that he can more actively oppose the untruths made in the name of "human rights" in this country.

Powered by ScribeFire.

Prime Minister criticizes the culture!

I've been reading various reports and criticisms (see 1, 2, 3, 4)
of Prime Minister Stephen Harper's new "anti-drug strategy" - his announcement of a modest increase in spending to combat illegal narcotic use. The critics, it seems, are either up in arms because Harper has not come up with the key to reducing drug addiction, while pretending he can do something about it, or because he proposes to give a third of his new $64 million to enforcement of laws and not all of the money to prevention/treatment/"harm reduction" programs of the kind administered by the various experts the MSM interviews. Filling our jails with drug pushers/users will just create the same mess they have in America, we are told (see link 4), but will not stop actual drug use. For example, Harper, while trying to draw a line between drug users and dealers, says nothing about how his government will treat with the reality that many people are both:

(link 3) Speaking in Winnipeg, Harper promised to be compassionate toward people hooked on illegal drugs, while expressing skepticism about Vancouver's controversial supervised-injection site.

In particular, the prime minister said he is concerned about rising drug use among youth. He also noted that drug use takes an expensive toll on the health care system and fuels crime.

Harper said the government's response will be two-pronged, focusing on drug addicts on one hand and on drug producers and dealers on the other.

"Drugs are dangerous and destructive. If drugs do get hold of you, there will be help to get you off them," Harper promised. "But if you sell or produce drugs, you will pay with prison time."

"Our two-track approach will be tough on the dealers and producers of drugs and compassionate for their victims."

It may be right that Harper is avoiding difficult questions. But I still think you've got to like the man. Drug addiction is a problem to which no one has an obvious solution. But if there is one it surely must start with ordinary people making it clear to everyone they know that drug abuse is not cool or desirable. It has to start with a culture shift, a new national covenant, a new spirituality for many lost souls, and we can't expect Harper to do much more than encourage the rest of us to start shifting. And, in face of an impending election campaign, Harper has the nerve to say this to a nation in which it is clear that many people (especially here in Vancouver) think drug use is acceptable and cool:

(link2) Canada has become too drug-friendly and it's time for a culture change, Prime Minister Stephen Harper said yesterday as he laid out his government's get-tough strategy for reducing the use of illegal substances.

Police and others fighting the battle against drug abuse are up against a culture that "since the 1960s" has done little to discourage drug abuse and "often romanticized it - romanticized it or made it cool, made it acceptable," Mr. Harper said.

"As a father I don't say all these things blamelessly. My son is listening to my Beatles records and asking me what all these lyrics mean. It's just there, it's out there. I love these records and I'm not putting them away. But, that said, there has been a culture that has not fought drug use and that's what we're all up against."

Whatever you think of his policy, one might have a kind thought for a politician who says what he thinks, without all kinds of hemming and hawing to come up with saccharine formulae aimed at pleasing the greatest possible number of voters. I do think, however, that Harper needs to tell his son more about the Gnostic fantasies of the Beatles. One might start with literary scholar Matthew Schneider:

it was to the busy pop-art of Sgt. Pepper, supposedly the first album completed after Paul's death, that Beatle fanatics turned for the lion's share of clues [on Paul McCartney's supposedly hidden death]. On the back cover, for instance, George Harrison stands with his right index finger inexplicably outstretched. Closer examination shows that it points to a line from the song "She's Leaving Home": "Wednesday morning at five o'clock as the day begins." Moving to the column immediately to the left, the corresponding line, from "Lucy in the Sky with Diamonds," is "Somebody calls you, you answer quite slowly." The column to the right reads "life goes on within you and without you," and the next column yields "And you're on your own you're in the street." Adherents of the "Paul is Dead" theory assembled these juxtaposed lines into an account of an accident in the early morning, a mortally injured Paul lying alone in the street unable to speak, and the Beatles going on without their fallen friend.

Also on the back cover, the three Beatles other than Paul face forward; Paul stands with his back to the camera, supposedly to indicate his non-presence. On the inside of the sleeve is a large photograph of the four smiling Beatles in their brightly colored Sgt. Pepper band uniforms. On Paul's left sleeve, where on a military uniform one might find a rank insignia, is a patch that reads "O.P.D." "Paul is Dead" theoreticians argue that this patch is an abbreviation for "Officially Pronounced Dead," the British equivalent of the American phrase "dead on arrival." And in the song "A Day in the Life," the theoreticians contend, John Lennon tells of the auto accident that took his bandmate's life:

He blew his mind out in a car
He didn't notice that the lights had changed.
A crowd of people stood and stared.
They'd seen his face before.
Nobody was really sure if he was from the House of Lords.

This combination of sortilege and close reading--typical of "Paul is dead" evidentiary reasoning--illustrates my point with particular clarity. Conspiracy theorizing is a mode of Gnosticism that can be counted on to arise spontaneously in the presence of any spatially or chronologically linked sequence of events lacking a self-evident originator and purpose. As it did on the originary scene [the originary scene, in Generative Anthropology, is the hypothetical first scene of human language where symbolic representation first "magically" emerged], the mind abhors the cognitive vacuum of [symbolic and spiritual] effects without causes; and where those causes are not glaringly apparent (and sometimes even where they are), a story will be concocted to account for them. To John Lennon (who ought to know) Hugh Schonfield was the unacknowledged master theorist of Beatlemania, for this shy and retiring Oxford don quite unintentionally, but accurately, pointed to the mythopoetic potentialities lurking in contemporary celebrity worship. Sadly, Lennon little suspected, as he sprinkled his songs and album covers with tantalizing details, that he would someday be the subject of his own son's hazy conspiracy theory, which emerges as the nightmarish incarnation of the myths woven in this media-saturated age around our celebrities. The deluge of information that both creates and is created by the mechanisms of contemporary celebrity falls sequentially into the ubiquitous scene of public representation. The jumble of evanescent images, publicity, rumor, anecdote, and conflicting eyewitness testimony that surrounds celebrities cries out to be arranged into a story that makes sense, a narrative. The more information that accumulates, the more conspiratorial or paranoid the narrative, as all the details need to be accounted for. But this is nothing new. René Girard has taught us that all myths are, to a degree, conspiratorial: by making the surrogate victim [e.g. a politician everyone blames] both the cause and the solution of the sacrificial crisis, myths mingle naïve faith with paranoid suspicion. I couldn't ask for a better illustration of the essential similarity between contemporary conspiracy theorizing and ancient myth than the last few sentences of the quotation from Sean Lennon with which I began this essay. Both conspiracy theory and myth say that "the system," in the final analysis, both does and doesn't achieve its nefarious ends: "It was in the best interests of the United States to have my dad killed, definitely. And, you know, that worked against them, to be honest, because once he died his powers grew. So, I mean, fuck them. They didn't get what they wanted."

Similarly, there are in today's newspapers all kinds of experts pronouncing on cause and effect in respect the mysteries of drug addiction. There are all kinds of people scapegoating Stephen Harper (like many politicians before) for adding to the problem as part of a loosely-hidden agenda to win votes by voicing the appealing rhetoric of getting tough on crime. But there are some problems on which a sober mind will resist easy finger pointing. It seems to me that the best one can say about things like the addictive personality is that the mystery of cause and effect lies with questions of good and bad faith.

Long story short, do we as a culture have the faith that we can tell young people that the myths that drug use is a form of cool opposition to, or useful coping with, the oppressive system is a bad myth - the myth that you will never be more ecstatic than when on Ecstasy? and can we replace it with a truth that sets people free by allowing them to put their faith in the system, given all the pressures and demands that the modern free market economy and bureaucratic state really do make on people? If we pursue the question I think we will see that our system can only renew itself, and not allow so many of its young people to ruin their lives with drugs, if it recognizes that faith in the system has to involve spiritual commitments and covenants that are not themselves reducible to the instrumental logic of the economy and bureaucracies of our land. If Harper offers little it is because big things can only start with humble leaps of faith. And we need more leaders who will say as much without just throwing money at "scientific" experts and solutions. And then it is up to the rest of us, it is the job of our civil society - and not at root the government - to help our family, friends, acquaintances, to find a faith in the future without drugs. Since no one or no family, and certainly no bureaucracy, can do much alone, it is a question for civil society and culture at large. Can we share a commitment to renewing the covenant? Or are we going to forever bitch that the latest government policy has no hope of seriously addressing the problem? Because no government policy alone is ever conceivably going to solve the drug addiction problem. It can only start with us.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper on September 11

Prime Minister Stephen Harper is visiting "down under", in Australia. He has addressed the Australian Parliament, and has this to say on islam's war on the West:

...
September 11, 2001, was truly a day that shook the world.
Six years on, the horrific images from that morning still evoke anger, sorrow and – as intended – terror.
The buildings may have been American, but the targets were every one of us: every country and every person who chooses tolerance over hatred, pluralism over extremism, democracy over tyranny.
We have been struck again and again in London, Madrid, India and many other places, including, of course, Bali.
Canadians mourned your losses, and we redoubled our resolve to stand with you, because two dozen of our citizens died in New York on 9-11. And seventy Canadian soldiers and one of our diplomats have fallen in Afghanistan – as well as a Canadian carpenter, murdered by the Taliban after he built a school for the children of a remote Afghan village.
So both our countries have been bloodied by terror.
And both of us are doing our part to confront and defeat it.
In Afghanistan and elsewhere, both our countries are committed to working together, As Prime Minister Howard said in his address to our Parliament last year “not only for the betterment of Australia and Canada, but for the betterment of all the peoples of the world.”
This cause is noble and necessary. Because, as 9-11 showed, if we abandon our fellow human beings to lives of poverty, brutality and ignorance, in today’s global village their misery will eventually and inevitably become our own.
...

Canadian Forces Day

May God Bless the members of our Canadian Armed Forces, and their families, on this, the 6th annual Canadian Forces Day.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper issued the following statement:

“Sunday, June 3, 2007 marks a day where Canadians from all walks of life have the opportunity to pay tribute to the outstanding men and women of the Canadian Forces.

This special day is an opportunity to thank and recognize not only military personnel but also their families and loved ones for their tremendous contributions and sacrifices. Appropriately, this year’s theme, “The Canadian Forces Family – Celebrating those supporting us!” acknowledges the extraordinary contributions of Canada’s military families who provide vital support to our sailors, soldiers, airmen and airwomen uniform, sustaining them while they carry out their duties.

Both at home and around the world, our Canadian Forces play a vital role in protecting Canadians and spreading the values of freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law.

By helping to address instability and conflict at their source, the Canadian Forces contribute to the safety and security of Canadians, this is especially true of our brave men and women serving in Afghanistan.

During my recent trip to Afghanistan, I had the honour of once again addressing our troops. I thanked them for their courage and fortitude, often at considerable cost to themselves and their families. To be apart from a loved one who is serving far from home is never easy.

But due to the work of these brave men and women, the people of Afghanistan have seen the institution of democratic elections, the stirring of human rights and freedoms for women, the construction of schools, healthcare facilities, and infrastructure. Progress is being made.

In the words of President Karzai of Afghanistan, "If the greatness of a life is measured in deeds done for others, then Canada's sons and daughters who have made the ultimate sacrifice in Afghanistan, stand among the greatest of their generation."

Our men and women serving in Afghanistan are Canada's sons and daughters and we owe them a debt of gratitude and our unwavering support.

On behalf of the Government of Canada and all Canadians, I want to express my appreciation for the dedication, skill and professionalism that all Canadian Forces members demonstrate everyday, and also to military families for their commitment.

Stephen Harper on anti-semitism

I'm not used to praising politicians, and feel a little awkward doing so, since I consider myself far more partisan to ideas rather than to parties. Yet I continue to be impressed with Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper, to the point where I can actually imagine myself carrying a sign with his name on it, in support of his ongoing leadership... an unprecedented gesture, for me, for any politician, from any party.

Sunday he demonstrated what for me was an impressive moral consistency, through a powerful speech delivered at the annual Canadian Holocaust Remembrance Day ceremony, Yom Hashoah, on Parliament Hill.
How many times in recent Canadian history has any politician, let alone a Prime Minister, been so clear in their stand for Israel, and the Good that should be associated with that nation and its people?

Here is Prime Minister Harper's full speech, from yesterday:

It has been said that lies become truth if they are repeated often enough.
That’s why truth is so precious. That’s why the truth must be repeated, over and over and over, to protect us from lies.
So let us plainly state the awful, incontrovertible truth that brings us here today: millions, including six million Jewish men, women, and children, were murdered by the Nazis during the Holocaust.
This genocide was so premeditated and grotesque in design, so monstrous and barbaric in scale, and so systematic and efficient in execution, that it stands alone in the annals of human evil.
To this day, the holocaust terrifies and mystifies. We cannot really understand the evil that consumed one the great nations of Europe. We cannot fully fathom why it was embraced by an ideology rooted in hatred. And we cannot truly comprehend the suffering of the people who perished in the madness. But we do understand that the attempted extermination of the Jewish people was a crime against all of humanity.
Culturally.
Intellectually.
Economically.
Socially.
Our world is immeasurably poorer because of the Holocaust.
We will never know how many more Einstein’s, how many more Gershwin’s, Golda Meir’s, Leonard Cohen’s, or Mordecai Richler’s, might have enriched our world.
But we do know it must never, ever, happen again.
Unfortunately, in some countries, hatred of the Jews is still preached from religious pulpits and still proclaimed from political podiums.
There are still people who would perpetrate another holocaust if they could.
That’s why we must resist the error of viewing the Holocaust as a strictly historical event.
It’s not good enough for politicians to stand before you and say they remember and mourn what happened over six decades ago.
They must stand up to those who advocate the destruction of Israel and its people today.
And they must be unequivocal in their condemnation of anti-Semitic despots, terrorists and fanatics.
That is the only real way to honour the memory of those who were consumed by the Holocaust.
And the only way to ensure it never happens again.
Thank you.
Shalom.

~~~~~~

[Sunday's] ceremony and moment of silence on Parliament Hill were organized by the Canadian Society for Yad Vashem. The commemoration concluded with a march to the Ottawa Congress Centre.