Keep your eye on the pea...

Says the grifter.

I have an idea. Let's charge the hilarious Mr. Baird with treason. He seems to believe, along with his hillbilly superior, that the only way for anything is the American way and our parliamentary democracy is a mere trifle to be gamed. That's an affront to Canadian sovereignty and Baird promotes it.

Any problem with that John... you fucking loudmouthed asshole?

Baird Droppings . . .

Wear it well, Baird. Someone just knocked over a domino

From the Maclean's:

Rising for his second question, Mr. Ignatieff offered the obvious follow. “Field notes by Canadian soldiers make it clear that a detainee was beaten in Afghan custody after being transferred by Canadian troops, way back in June 2006. Our soldiers saw it firsthand. They took photographs. They did the right thing. They rescued the man. They reported it up the chain of command. However, the government did nothing,” he ventured. “What kind of Canadian government refuses to act on firsthand accounts by its own troops, credible accounts, of detainee abuse in Afghan jails?”

Well... a Harper government styled on their US southern Republican brethren. That's who. But, according to John Baird, who pulled the foreskin off his neck long enough to say... (emphasis mine, even though Baird was screaming)

“Mr. Speaker, let us be very clear. Let us talk about the facts,” he boldly declared. “The then-Vice Chief of the Defence Staff, General Walter Natynczyk, a decorated war hero, someone who has served our country in uniform for decades, stated very clearly more than two and a half years ago that the Afghan in question was not detained, was not captured by Canadian Forces, and he repeated that statement yesterday. I say to the Leader of the Opposition, why can he not trust General Walter Natynczyk?”

War hero??! Tout ce qui brille n'est pas or. Perhaps Baird should have simply pointed out that Natynczyk is a pretty good general in his own right and not have gone down that "war hero" path. In any case, Baird, typical of his ilk ranted that which might be fraught with hidden bombs.

With his third try, Mr. Ignatieff attempted to sidestep this entirely. “Mr. Speaker, the issue is much simpler than this,” he reckoned. “It is an issue about what happens when Canadian soldiers report credible accounts of detainee abuse. Those accounts are not in question. They take photographs of the abuse, they report it up the chain of command and, for a year, the government does nothing about it. That is the issue.”

Sidestep. But as Ignatieff points out, there were pictures and reports.

Then, "Airshow" Mackay gets in on the act. Blathering on he gets to this...

Mr. MacKay stood to various off-the-record requests from the Liberal side to support the troops.

“Simply put, Mr. Speaker, we are not,” he said to Foote’s question. “We are applauding them.” In the next breath, he repeated Gen. Natynczyk’s contradiction of said soldiers.

Judy Foote:

“Mr. Speaker, either they believe the eyewitness accounts of our soldiers on the ground or they do not. It is as simple as that,” she ventured. “In 2007-08, two senior Canadian officers further corroborated the accounts of the soldier and the medic under oath in court. Detailed notes show the name of the Canadian platoon that captured the Afghan before he was handed over and beaten. There are even photos. The Conservatives not only refuse to release this information, but they deny it exists. Why will they not come clean? Why will they not believe our soldiers?”

Oy. There's enough there to give a Chief of Defence Staff the willies. Natynczyk wasn't personally present at the alleged event. Best check this out further. But before that happens, Mackay dispenses more of his traditional wisdom...

“Mr. Speaker, last time I checked, the chief of the defence staff is not only a soldier but the top soldier,” the Defence Minister replied. “I will take his word.”

Top serviceman is more accurate. But the awkward thing about this is that Mackay has not done the requisite ministerial inquiry to get his own facts. If he has, then he has ignored the results. I don't think Natynczyk is a liar in any respect. But I also don't believe he had the whole story. That means Mackay was dancing though a minefield, attempting to deflect responsibility.

Then... uh oh.

Gen. Walter Natynczyk, Canada's top military commander, is now saying a suspected Taliban fighter abused by Afghan police in June 2006 had been detained by Canadian troops, contrary to comments he made Tuesday.

[...]

Natynczyk read from a report on the incident by the section commander, who said they had the suspect get down on his stomach before they conducted a detailed search, which included emptying the Afghan's pockets, cataloging all the items and photographing him.

"I did not have this information in May of 2007 nor yesterday when I made my statement," Natynczyk said. "But I am responsible for the information provided by the Canadian Forces and I am accountable for it today."

Section commander. An NCO, on scene, provided a written occurrence report. And, given all the bits of fur that have been flying around on this incident in particular, it just now manages to find its way to the desk of the CDS?

There will be loud and unpleasant noises coming out of 101 Colonel By Drive tonight.

They would give you another Walkerton

Via Steve V, Stephane Dion leveled one very clear charge against the Conservatives and their plan to let the Canadian food industry inspect themselves. And he linked the one watershed disaster, Walkerton, with those who slashed government services in Ontario which helped precipitate that event. (Emphasis mine)

A leaked government proposal to give the food industry a greater role in the inspection process is backed by the same Conservative politicians responsible for Ontario's Walkerton water tragedy, Liberal Leader Stéphane Dion charged Thursday. [...]

"These are the same people – Mr. Flaherty, Mr. Baird, Mr. Clement – who are responsible [for] what happened in Walkerton, who privatized [Ontario's] propane inspection, and they want to do something equivalent about food inspections, which is at the core of what the government should do," he said.

"This very conservative government does not understand what is at the core of the responsibility of a government in a society."

No they don't. And as the voters of Ontario learned during the Harris years, big tax cuts translate into big cuts in essential services.

More at Impolitical

Blogging Bali and Baird's ballyhoo

Local eco-activist Tzeporah Berman blogs the Bali conference and spars with Minister Baird over a beer. Some quick quotes :

"Shall we hold off having democratic elections until China does as well?"

"Tomorrow we'll be doing a press conference and panel discussion on Canada's forests here at Bali. There is a lot of discussion here about tropical forests but few people know that Canada's forests store more carbon than any other terrestrial ecosystem or that our logging contributes as much greenhouse gas emissions as all the cars on the road."

"It turns out that there is one thing to admire about Baird. His chutzpa. With full recognition of how disgusted some of the most committed and informed people from around the world are at him, he waltzed into the non-governmental groups' reception and had a beer. Obviously I couldn't pass up the moment. After debating the issues with him for half an hour I can safely say that the chutzpa is all I found to admire and unfortunately that alone is not enough to make a great leader. We live in a time that calls for courageous and thoughtful leadership. Talking to Minister Baird tonight was a little like debating Bill O'Reilly. You have to be quick and he is clever but he doesn't listen for a second and he is more interested in scoring points than actually leading."

Continue reading at Berman's blog or The Tyee

Cross-posted at Creekside

harperco: Learning From the Best . . . .

From McClatchy Newspapers today:

'Ya gotta give stevie, john baird and company credit.

Their stance in Bali comes naturally as they follow in bushco's dirty footsteps:

Democrats accuse White House of cooking climate-change testimony

By Erika Bolstad and Lesley Clark | McClatchy Newspapers



WASHINGTON — The White House censored climate scientists and edited their testimony on global warming before Congress, Democrats charged Monday after a 16-month investigation into allegations of political interference with scientific inquiries.

The Bush administration was "particularly active in stifling discussions" of a potential link between climate change and the intensity of hurricanes, according to the findings in a draft report issued Monday by Democrats on the House of Representatives Oversight and Government Reform Committee.

_______________


The report also charges that the administration has engaged in a "systematic effort to manipulate climate change science and mislead policymakers and the public about the dangers of global warning."

White House spokeswoman Dana Perino called the report "rehashed rhetoric" and said that the Bush administration understands the "urgent challenge that is posed by climate change," a term the White House prefers to "global warming" because it doesn't suggest that human activity is responsible.

Perino said she was unaware of any attempts to downplay any scientific information that conflicted with the White House's politics.

_______________


The report also singles out an e-mail sent by a Commerce committee staffer for Sen. Ted Stevens, R-Alaska, who oversaw NOAA's climate research when he chaired the committee.

The e-mail came from Tom Jones, who worked on the Disaster Prediction and Prevention subcommittee, then chaired by Sen. Jim DeMint, R-S.C.

In an e-mail to Noel Turner, a NOAA staffer who was writing a statement for former National Hurricane Center director Max Mayfield's upcoming committee testimony, Jones suggested that the hearing be used to discredit any link between hurricanes and global warming.

"We're going to work on smacking the s(ASTERISK)(ASTERISK)(ASTERISK) out of this issue," he wrote.

In his e-mail, Jones urged NOAA staffers to write phrases for Mayfield such as, "The individuals who are implying that Katrina has something to do with global warming are just plain wrong. They don't understand the science, and they're shamelessly trying to make political hay out of a national tragedy."

_______________

Well, who would have thought it?

bushco does have a legacy after all . . . .

(Cross-posted from Moving to Vancouver)

Baird on the world stage with his head firmly up his ass.

Steve V puts the only label applicable to Canadian Environment Minister John Baird's latest little announcement. Damage Control.

Canada's environment minister has announced money to help communities deal with the effects of climate change.

Environment Minister John Baird has used a U-N climate-change conference as the backdrop for his announcement of 85.9 (m) million dollars over four years.

That would be the sideshow of Harper's so-called world stage, where he has incurred the wrath of the world for an intransigent act of denial of the facts.

What's even worse is that these guys seem to think Canadians have no memory beyond the last time the beer bottles were recycled.

The plan replaces one the Conservatives killed after they took office.

[...]

He brushed off the criticism and said he didn't come to Bali to play politics.

Which is unmitigated bullshit. First is the fact that, after watching polls, Baird realized Canadians aren't terribly happy with the international reputation the Conservatives are building for Canada and regurgitated a program they trashed. Add the fact that this announcement has no international interest whatsoever but was made from an international conference says one thing: Baird is playing politics.

And he's not even good at it.

Baird appeared caught off-guard when asked how the program will differ from the one his government killed.

He said he'd check the details.

I have a better idea for Baird. Don't bother. We can do that for you and not have to listen to the lies.

As if that wasn't bad enough, Baird, who broke a long standing tradition of allowing opposition critics to accompany ministers to international conferences, has decided to fly the true colours of the Conservative Party. I know that Baird is an asshole, but this is little more than him thumbing his nose at Canadians.

After banishing environmentalists and opposition MPs from Canada's delegation to the Bali climate conference, Ottawa has decided to allow an oil company and several business executives to join the official delegation.

Two companies from Ottawa, where Environment Minister John Baird is an MP, have been allowed to join Canada's official delegation to the climate-change conference, according to documents obtained by The Globe and Mail.

A major oil and gas producer, EnCana Corp. of Calgary, was also permitted to join the delegation.

Isn't that special. They're not even trying to hide it anymore.

Among those included on the Canadian delegation are four executives of Iogen Corp., a biotechnology company that produces cellulose ethanol, and PlascoEnergy Group Inc., a waste conversion company.

Both are based in Ottawa, and both have received substantial federal money. Iogen was given $7.7-million by the federal government last February, while Plasco has received $6.5-million from the federal government.

So, the way this little enterprize works is that you set up a company, get Conservative corporate welfare, and...

By joining the official Canadian delegation, the companies will gain a series of privileges, including access to government briefings and closed-door sessions at the Bali conference.

A nice cozy little arrangement fit only for Conservative Party supporters.

Something to keep an eye on: Who paid to have these corporations accompany Baird to an international conference he clearly intended to de-rail?

Baird should take a look down for a moment. That world stage he's standing on is made of rotting planks.

Required reading:

Far and Wide

Big City Lib

Scott's Diatribes (particularly the footnote)

Win the Nobel and lose your funding!

And as Scruffy Dan points out, the Canadian IPCC scientists are clearly pissed about it :

"Nobel Prize-winning scientists from Canada say the Harper government is failing to protect the country from the dangers of global warming because it has shut down a federal climate change research network and blocked new studies on the impact of rising greenhouse gas emissions in the atmosphere."

Andrew Weaver of UVic uses words like "vindictive" and "stupidity"

"Harper stands up and waffles on about trying to call for 50% emissions reductions. Where on earth is he getting those numbers from?" Weaver asked. "They're certainly not coming from Canadian scientists."

The government said that it closed the Canadian Climate Impacts and Adaptation Research Network because it had completed its federal mandate. The network and the independent Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Science both sponsored peer-reviewed research that contributed to the award-winning IPCC report that is now being used by governments as a basis for international climate change negotiations.
It was in fact that very IPCC report which apparently caused Harper to adopt, um, a better appreciation of the dangers of AGW and climate change. I guess we know all we need to know about it now.

Environment Minister John Baird said suggestions that his department was cutting research spending were "totally unfounded," since the government was spending a "record amount" on climate research in various departments such as Natural Resources and Industry Canada.

Industry Canada? Please. According to their website, the Industry Canada mandate is : "a fair, efficient and competitive marketplace; an innovative economy; and competitive industry and sustainable communities."
I know - they also have sciencey links. I started to read the "Related links : Science and Technology" and got as far as

"The Strategy is focused on creating a more competitive and sustainable Canadian economy with the help of science and technology. The end result of a new and more strategic government focus on science and technology is a better life for Canadian families and communities."

when I got distracted by "BizPals" on the sidebar. John, I'm not exactly seeing Nobel here.

Back to Baird : "I can appreciate that some people would rather (have) more (spending) on this or on that, but it's a record amount and it's informed by some of the expert officials that we have in science in the public service," he said. "We don't need the politicization of science. That's for sure."

Damn straight, John. Can't have that.

CP : Audit slaps wrist of Natural Resources for lobbyist conflict-of-interest
Apparently Natural Resources Canada spent a cool million bucks last year buying its employees expensive memberships in groups that lobby the government. Conflict of Interest? The list of lobbyists isn't available but the CP story does provide us with this reminder :

"Natural Resources is primarily responsible for the $1.5-billion ecoEnergy program, announced in January by Prime Minister Stephen Harper to promote renewable energy."

As it turns out, promoting renewable energy is the precisely the business of the agri-biz astroturf group Canadian Renewable Fuels Association - you know, the guys who promote ethanol, the practice of feeding corn to cars to produce a 1% reduction in GHG. They used to run a banner along the bottom of their site : Thank you, Stephen Harper.
CRFA was headed by registered federal lobbyist Kory Teneycke up till Nov1 this year when he returned to the Harper fold as Director of the Conservative Resource Group. I say 'returned' because prior to his stint as head of CRFA, Teneycke was a Reform Party activist and campaign strategist for Preston Manning.

Baird is right. We don't need politicization of environmental science because we already have lots and lots and lots of it.

Dr. Gordon McBean, a review editor of the 2007 IPCC report and the volunteer chairperson of the Canadian Foundation for Climate and Atmospheric Science, said : "Canada likes to think of itself as a G8 country, and we should act like one occasionally."

Cross-posted at Creekside

Baird demonstrates a willingness to listen. Then plugs his ears.

Well, this isn't surprizing.

Environment Minister John Baird says the Conservative government won't dismiss a newly passed law requiring Canada to respect its emissions-cutting commitments under the Kyoto Protocol.

But he says he's not putting forward a new environment plan either. Baird says the time for studying and developing new plans is over, and that the government is already moving on a "realistic" plan to tackle climate change.

Studying and developing?!

He says the government will follow through with the "technical letter" of the bill, but won't waste another six months studying the issue and commissioning more reports.

Six months? Is he trying to tell us the Conservative plan took six months? What happened? Did the package they opened at cabinet come without a green crayon?

Prime Minister Stephen Harper has said his government's climate plan will curb greenhouse gases by 20 per cent by 2020, although three studies have debunked the plan since Baird released it in April.

But if Steve says it's so, then it must be so... right?

That's what I thought