Tag Archives: Citizenship

Roundup: The deafening silence around that antisemitic cartoon

Posted on by

As you probably saw, on Wednesday, the Toronto Sun published a political cartoon from an American syndicated source that was both deeply antisemitic and Putin propaganda, and in response to criticism, the Sun initially doubled down before finally withdrawing it hours later and giving an apology with no accountability for what had happened.

Justin Trudeau criticized the cartoon during his media availability in Toronto, but there was pretty deafening silence from Pierre Poilievre, Andrew Scheer, and Michael Chong. The closest it got to condemnation was Melissa Lantsman, who is Jewish, retweeting Brian Lilley calling the apology the “right move,” and later wrote that antisemitism is gross in political cartoons, universities, unions and school boards. Her fellow Jewish Conservative MP Marty Morantz was also completely silent on this. What were Conservatives vocal about? Falling for that Hamas troll-bait video, which they continued to fall all over.

It’s not an accident. They know full well that a segment of their audience here in Canada, not just the US, where the cartoonist is from, believe this propaganda and are on board with the antisemitism, and they pandered to it, much like Poilievre has been trying to skate that line in sending signals to this crowd with his Ukraine votes while paying lip-service to his party’s past support, or trafficking in antisemitic conspiracy theories while denouncing antisemitism—sucking and blowing at the same time. The silence from the Conservatives on this incident was deafening, and it should ring alarm bells for the Jewish community that for all of their constant bluster about being friends of Israel as a signal to the Jewish community that talk is cheap, and their actions (and inaction and silence) have spoken for them.

Programming Note: That’s it for me for 2023. I’m taking the next week or so off to recover, and will be back early in the New Year. Thanks for reading, and wishing all of my readers a happy holiday season.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russia has launched around 7400 missiles and 3700 attack drones against Ukrainian targets over the course of the 22-month invasion. Here is a look at four factors that have stalled the counteroffensive. And Ukraine’s parliament voted to legalise cannabis in the country, citing the stress of the war on the population.

https://twitter.com/kyivindependent/status/1737958416302133568

Continue reading →

Roundup: No resignation from Rota, chaos ensues

Posted on by

The fallout from Friday’s incident in the House of Commons where Speaker Anthony Rota recognised a Ukrainian veteran who had served with a Nazi-affiliated unit was a complete and utter gong show yesterday, as Rota did not offer his resignation as he should have, and the day simply spiralled out of control. Both the NDP and the Bloc have called for Rota to resign, and the Liberals have been doing this weird hinting that he needs to “really think about” whether he can maintain confidence, without just coming right out and saying he can’t, while only the Conservatives have been de facto rushing to his defence by trying to blame Justin Trudeau and the PMO for what happened, in a stunning display of bad faith and mendacity, while also apparently trying to shield an incompetent Speaker whom they want on the job because he’s so lenient with them. The prime minister did make a brief statement about how this was an “embarrassment,” but didn’t call on Rota to resign either.

Much of the bad faith arguing was a deliberate conflation from every single Conservative between security screening and political vetting. The 98-year-old veteran was not a security threat. All security screening was followed. What he was not subject to was political vetting, as the Speaker is not subject to the PMO, and his office submitted their guest list to the Parliamentary Protocol Office who doesn’t share the list with PMO, and which doesn’t to background checks or vetting for political embarrassment, because that’s frankly not their job. The fact that there is a reporting relationship between the Parliamentary Protective Service and the Minister of Public Safety also has nothing to do with political vetting, as it’s not their job, and they don’t (and couldn’t) do background checks on everyone who visits the Hill, because that would be insane. Nor should PMO be doing this, as has been the assertion from a great many people who should know better, which is again utterly ludicrous.

Compounding the mystifying behaviour yesterday was Government House Leader Karina Gould trying to move a motion to strike the mention of said individual from the record, but also to have the audio-visuals scrubbed as well, which is weirdly Stalinist behaviour. While I get the impulse to try and remove the taint of his visit from the record, and that Parliament has done this in committee when Conservative MP read the manifesto of a mass shooter into the record, this was nevertheless fairly gross and disturbing, and the Conservatives objected (which also turned into an absolute gong show as this went down, and Rota was, yet again, out of his depth in the Chair).

So while we await Rota’s resignation, which cannot happen soon enough, we’re seeing Russian propagandists having a field day with this. But should Rota finally do the right thing and resign, the session will need to suspend, possibly for a day or two, so that the election of a new Speaker can take place. The likely two candidates are Conservative Chris D’Entremont and Liberal Alexandra Mendès, currently the deputy and assistant deputy Speakers, and we’ll see how this ends up. But Rota has to resign, immediately.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Russia’s early-morning attack on Odessa Monday has killed four people and caused significant damage to infrastructure at their grain storage facilities. There were early morning attacks today against the grain port at Izmail. Meanwhile, Ukrainian officials say that their attack on Russia’s Black Sea Fleet headquarters in occupied Crimea last week killed 34 officers including the fleet commander.

https://twitter.com/defenceu/status/1706193779940581503

Continue reading →

Roundup: Empty threats to sit into the summer

Posted on by

Because this whole thing is nothing but really bad theatre, Pierre Poilievre went back before the microphones yesterday morning, declared victory from his fauxlibuster that didn’t accomplish a single gods damned thing, and then said that he was prepared to sit through the summer to make sure that the he got his budget demands. But that was another empty threat, because he doesn’t have the votes to block anything.

And lo, after Question Period, the budget bill passed as it was expected to, and is off to the Senate. Poilievre says his senators will try to stall or stop the bill there, but again, they don’t have anywhere near enough votes for that to make a difference, even if they do have a few more procedural opportunities to slow it down a little. Of course, this is a government bill so the Leader of the Government in the Senate can attempt time allocation if he thinks he has the votes to pull it off (and he probably does), so the delays will likely be fairly minimal.

This being said, the Government House Leader also said that he won’t let the House rise for the summer until they pass his motion to make hybrid sittings permanent, which is an abomination that is going to hasten the decline of our already weakened Parliament. (And yes, I have a full column on this coming out later today).

https://twitter.com/EmmMacfarlane/status/1666830949420609537

Ukraine Dispatch:

While evacuations are taking place in Kherson as a result of the flood caused by the breached dam, Russians are shelling the area, including evacuation hotspots, because of course they are. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy visited the area to see the flood devastation first-hand. Russians launched another overnight air attack, killing one person in Uman in the Cherkasy region.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Johnston’s day at committee

Posted on by

As expected, David Johnston’s testimony at the Procedure and House Affairs committee was largely a three-hour exercise in partisan showboating, most especially typified by the fact that Jagmeet Singh decided to make a personal appearance at committee so that he could get clips of himself haranguing Johnston, like he tried to do with Galen Weston (and looking like a fool for the most part considering he made the big song and dance about getting thousands of questions from Canadians and asking none of them). In fact, there were almost no actual questions on foreign interference over those three hours, because of course there weren’t.

Once again, Johnstone disputed the claims that he is biased, or in any number of conflicts of interest, and further made the point that he believes the vote in the House of Commons about him was based on false information. (Also, the House of Commons has been known on several occasions to hold these votes on risible matters, especially if they think they can embarrass the government, while the only votes that really matter are confidence ones, and that’s not going to happen). He said that he didn’t reach out to MP Han Dong before he cleared him in the report, in part because of Dong’s lawsuit and because he read intelligence that countered what had been reported. (I’m also not sure why that would have been necessary if the point of the exercise was to review the intelligence). He also made it clear he didn’t see every single document, because that would be impossible, but that the intelligence services were entirely forthcoming.

One of the things we ultimately need to grapple with in this story, which media outlets are incapable of doing, is that this is a process story. It’s almost entirely a machinery of government issue in terms of intelligence dissemination and consumption, and that’s unsexy and difficult to explain, so instead, the focus remains on Johnston himself, and making details about what the government did and didn’t know as lurid as possible, helped along by the fact that the leaker(s) is shaping the narrative in a particular way, using draft documents that contained items not found in the final documents that were pushed up the chain, and there is almost certainly intention behind that, which again, there has been absolutely no self-reflection around on the part of the media organisations doing the reporting. Instead of stopping to ask if they’ve been played, they rationalise and justify. And because this is a process stories, and mainstream outlets are allergic to those, this whole affair just spins further into both-sidesing the meathead partisanship on display.

Ukraine Dispatch:

With the explosion at the Kakhovka Dam, there is now an evacuation effort underway as the region begins to flood, with 22,000 people in areas in most danger. It could also have repercussions for the Zaporizhzhia nuclear power plant, which uses that water for cooling operations. There is concern that this could forestall any Ukrainian counter-offensive in the region. President Volodymyr Zelenskyy says the dam attack is an “environmental bomb of mass destruction,” and  has already approached the Hague about the incident. Zelenskyy also said that Ukraine is awaiting the final agreement on acquiring F-16 fighter jets. Russian, meanwhile, have been shelling an ammonia pipeline in the Kharkiv region, which has been part of the Black Sea deal around exporting grains and fertilizers.

Continue reading →

Roundup: The leaker comes forward (sort of)

Posted on by

The big Friday bombshell from the Globe and Mail in their continued series of allegations of foreign interference was an op-ed from the primary leaker, who gave a self-serving justification for doing so, insisting that they were tired of the problem of foreign interference going ignored, and that they hoped to  ignite a conversation and that they didn’t intend for things to get this ugly. Erm, seriously? You leaked to Bob Fife, and you didn’t think he would torque the absolute life out of it? That seems dangerously naïve for an intelligence official. Even more to the point, their frustration with the pace of work is not justification for violating their oaths to secrecy (and comparing themselves to Jody Wilson-Raybould seems to be particularly ill-considered). There is an attitude of “I know best,” which former senior intelligence official Artur Wilczynski called “narcissistic,” and I did take that tone from the op-ed.

One of the things I’ve really come to recognise and have been building a series of columns around is that there is a pervasive normalcy bias in our governments at all levels. It’s why provincial governments inadvertently allowed their healthcare systems to collapse. It’s why we are now in a housing crisis nation-wide. It’s why our military was allowed to degrade, and it’s why successive governments of all stripes have not taken foreign interference seriously enough. We disbelieve and downplay threats and warnings because we’ve been sheltered for a century now under the wing of the Americans, and very little bad has happened to us in comparison to most other countries. We got lazy and complacent. That’s hard to shake, but I would say we’ve made more progress in the last five years than we have since the ned of the Cold War. And unfortunately, it’s probably going to take crises to shake us from our complacency (like what is happening in healthcare). Unfortunately, the crisis that this leaker precipitated has likely made the situation worse and not better because it’s now become a partisan battleground.

Speaking of partisan battlegrounds, yesterday we had the prime minister accusing Pierre Poilievre of “ginning up a partisan circus” and trying to take a flamethrower to our institutions in order to win power (not untrue), and Poilievre saying that the intelligence community is in full revolt because of Trudeau (and hey, it turns out it’s largely one narcissistic leaker). Trudeau also defended Johnston against the “horrific” partisan attacks, though Trudeau does deserve a measure of criticism for putting Johnston in this position. Johnston, incidentally, provided a statement saying he was working to finalise the details around his role and the mandate, so it looks like he is going ahead with it, concerns notwithstanding.

Ukraine Dispatch:

Ukrainian forces continue to resist the Russians’ attempt to encircle Bakhmut. While this is happening, the International Criminal Court has issued an arrest warrant for Vladimir Putin, for his war crimes but most especially for his programme of forcibly relocating Ukrainian children and working to re-educate them and place them with Russian families—a hallmark of a genocide. Meanwhile, Slovakia has now pledged their 13 MiG-29 fighters to Ukraine after Poland got the ball rolling.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Liberals being weasels about “open nominations” – again

Posted on by

Remember back before the 2015 election when Justin Trudeau declared that the Liberals would be a party of open nominations? And then how he weaselled out on that after the election in order to protect nominations when they had a majority? And even after that, decided to trigger their “electoral urgency” rules in advance of the 2019 election, even though they knew the timing of it years in advance and could have actually let those nominations happen? Well, they are being weasels again, and just triggered the “electoral urgency” rules once more.

Of course, because there are only three narratives to choose from in most media outlets, this was seen as “more proof” that there’s going to be an election this fall, especially when combined with the fact that MPs agreed to hold a take note debate session on the 15th that will allow MPs who have opted not to run again to give a farewell speech. It’s all proof! Erm, except that this is a hung parliament that will have reached the two-year mark in the fall, making an election far more likely, so it’s a convenient time to hold such a session, given that it certainly wouldn’t happen after a confidence vote to bring down the government. I remain unconvinced that the Liberals are planning to dissolve parliament by the end of summer on a flimsy excuse, but then again, I generally don’t subscribe to the Three Narratives.

This being said, this weaselly behaviour around nominations is unsurprising given the trends in this country, and where the party has been headed. They did it in 2019, and at the end of last year, they did away with open nominations for the two by-elections and simply appointed candidates outright, never mind that there was interest from others in each riding and they could have held competitive races, yes, including in a virtual situation. We’ve seen all parties behave in ways that are undermining the democratic process by gaming nominations – Samara Canada wrote a report on it. (Samara was also credulous about the NDP’s claims about open nominations in 2011, in spite of all of the evidence of paper candidates who never even visited the ridings, never mind having run in an open contest, but that’s neither here nor there). The point is that this kind of behaviour is toxic to the long-term health of our system of government, and it needs to be countered and pushed back against. Unfortunately, because the media is hung up on the “early election” narrative at any opportunity, they never actually hold the parties to account for their undemocratic behaviour, and we’ve allowed it to get to this point. This is a very bad thing, and we should be pushing back and demanding proper, open nominations from all parties, no matter how inconvenient it may be in a hung parliament.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Trying to politicize NSICOP

Posted on by

The fight for documents related to the National Microbiology Lab firings from 2019 has been intensifying in the House of Commons, both in the Conservatives working on a privilege fight over access to unredacted documents, but also in the way they have been treating the National Security and Intelligence Committee of Parliamentarians (NSICOP). While not perfect, NSICOP is at least some level of oversight of the national security apparatuses of this country by parliamentarians (though not an actual parliamentary committee), which is more than existed previously. They have tried to dismiss it as somehow partisan, which it’s not – all parties are represented on the committee (though the Bloc seat is currently vacant), and say that the prime minister’s office controls it (as it’s an executive body and not a parliamentary one). But they have the power to have their members resign in protest if they felt that the PMO was bigfooting them, and they haven’t, which means that these objections are about politics – particularly as they are building a bunch of bullshit conspiracy theories around the two firings in order to score cheap points.

As a reminder, the Conservatives were dismantling some of the national security oversight, neutering the Inspector General at CSIS and making poor appointments to the only other real civilian oversight of national security agencies in the country. This is at least a point in Trudeau’s favour – he overhauled and strengthened the various oversight mechanisms of all of these bodies, including the creation of NSICOP, which does valuable work.

With that in mind, here is Stephanie Carvin with some thoughts on this fight, and check out this thread from Philippe Lagassé for more thoughts as to how NSICOP is currently structured and how it compares internationally.

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1400446108376174594

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1400446110653689856

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1400446112931225601

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1400446115099680773

https://twitter.com/StephanieCarvin/status/1400479339528003594

Continue reading →

Roundup: Quitting over a municipal issue

Posted on by

News came down yesterday that Liberal MP Bob Bratina announced, in a bit of a huff, that he wasn’t going to run again in the next election because the government decided to fund an LRT project in Hamilton – where his riding is, and where he used to be mayor – because he’s personally opposed to the project. A certain Postmedia columnist picked up on this and insisted this was dire news for the Liberals, because they’re not even listening to their own MPs. There are counterpoints to this argument.

https://twitter.com/robert_hiltz/status/1394439822748659719

https://twitter.com/robert_hiltz/status/1394441891937140741

This having been said, yes, we know that sometimes Trudeau and Cabinet can be deaf to caucus concerns, but in this case, Bratina is throwing a tantrum, insisting that they didn’t consult “the Hamilton guy” when the Labour minister’s riding is also in Hamilton, and the infrastructure minister, Catherine McKenna, grew up there. In other words, the voices at the Cabinet table are just as qualified to talk about Hamilton issues than the “Hamilton guy,” especially because he’s personally opposed to a project that is basically what his own party is standing up for right now – mass transit options as part of the oncoming rapid decarbonization we need to engage in if we’re going to get our GHG emissions below catastrophic levels. He should be well aware of this given it’s the party he ran for two elections in a row. If he wants to run for mayor again to oppose the project, he’s within his rights to do so.

As for said the aforementioned columnist’s coded language around “common sense” and “silent majorities,” it’s hard to square that with the current incarnation of the Liberals. In other words, it’s probably pretty safe to consider his dire warning about this as an example of concern trolling, for what it’s worth.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Trudeau cleared, Morneau not

Posted on by

The Conflict of Interest and Ethics Commissioner released his reports on Justin Trudeau and Bill Morneau’s involvement in the WE Imbroglio yesterday, and came to two different results – the prime minister was cleared, but Morneau was found to have breached three sections of the Act, because he was not only personal friends with the Kielburgers (which Trudeau was not), but Morneau gave them a lot of access to his department as a result of that friendship, and offered them very preferential treatment.

On the one hand, this defused a few of the prepared talking points, but it didn’t disarm all of them. The Conservatives insist that even if he wasn’t found to have broken the rules, the system is still “broken” and needs to be made even tougher, which they are going to regret when every interaction becomes a minefield and their own members start getting caught up in impossible situations should they form government, and it misses the mark of what the current problems are. The NDP, predictably, say that this proves the Liberals only care about their “rich friends,” which I’m not sure the Kielburgers really qualify as for obvious reasons.

Of course, as I have written before, the problem is not that the rules are too lax, but rather that the Liberals in their current incarnation have a culture that believes that so long as they mean well, that the ends will justify the means. No amount of tinkering or toughening up the rules can change that because it’s a cultural problem. It also doesn’t help that the definition of “corruption” has become so broad in the Canadian discourse that penny ante bullshit is treated as a capital crime, though very curiously, grift that is out in the open in places like Queen’s Park or the Alberta Legislature are not treated with the same kinds of howling denunciations that the WE Imbroglio has been. I also have to wonder what these same howlers would do if they saw the actual corruption that takes place in other countries, because it’s on a whole other level than anything that has happened here. And on a final note, this report does not mean that WE Charity was “destroyed” for nothing. The charity hasn’t been “destroyed,” and its dubious activities were brought to light by good reporting, not Charlie Angus’ antics at committee, and that’s a good thing. This incident helped to shine that spotlight. Let’s not confuse Trudeau’s exoneration with anything else that has happened to WE in the interim.

Continue reading →

Roundup: Accusing your opponents of encouraging mass deaths

Posted on by

My patience for the current round of blame-shifting in the handling of this pandemic has pretty much reached its breaking point, and Alberta’s justice minister has crossed a line. Recall that a week ago, NDP MP Heather McPherson accused the prime minister of rather watching Alberta burn than help Jason Kenney – a statement that borders on psychotic and ignores the billions of dollars in federal aid that has been extended that Kenney has either sat on or declined. Of course, McPherson, like her leader Jagmeet Singh, seems to think that the federal government should be invoking the Emergencies Act and swooping in to take over the province, which is nothing more than a recipe for a constitutional crisis the likes we have never seen in this country. (Can you imagine the reaction in the province if Trudeau did this?)

Well, yesterday Alberta’s justice minister declared that the provincial NDP opposition, the federal government, and the media, were all cheering on a COVID disaster in the province, which is absolutely boggling. To think that your opponents literally wish death upon Albertans is some brain worm-level thinking, and yet here we are – and no, the minister would not apologise, citing that his opponents were trying to exploit the pandemic for political purposes. This is nothing short of insane, and yet this kind of thinking is clearly rearing its head as the provincial government flails, under attack by all sides, and frankly, reaping the unhinged anger that it has been sowing for years and thinking they were too clever to get caught by.

But in the midst of this, there was a column in Maclean’s yesterday which declared that it was “partisans” that were the cause of this blame-shifting, and then proceeded to pathologically both-sides the issues until my head very nearly exploded. It’s not “partisans” – it’s political actors who are to blame, and trying to pin this solely on people who vote for them is ridiculous. I will say that a chunk of the blame does rest on media, for whom they downplay actual questions of jurisdiction as “squabbling” and “finger-pointing,” thus allowing premiers in particular to get away with the blame-shifting and hand-waving away their responsibilities, and it’s allowed this obsessive fantasy about invoking the Emergencies Act to keep playing itself out – especially because most of these media outlets have been cheerleading such a declaration (so that they can fulfil the goal of comparing this to Trudeau’s father invoking the War Measures Act during the October Crisis). If media did a better job of actually holding the premiers to account rather than encouraging their narratives that everything can be pinned on the federal government (for whom they have some of their own issues they should be better held to account for), there may have been actual pressure on some of them to shape up long before now, and yet that doesn’t happen. Absolutely nobody has covered themselves in glory here, and it’s just making this intolerable situation all that much worse.

https://twitter.com/robert_hiltz/status/1391949740896657410

Continue reading →