NDP Wrong By Doing Right Thing

The NDP has been consistent and absolutely right regarding the mission in Afghanistan from the very beginning. We should not have gone in and we should get out as fast as we can. The latest today from the Globe and Mail has dozens of Afghan prisoners claiming they were treated very well by Canadian soldiers, but were tortured as soon as they were turned over to Afghan authorities. This may be a war crime and is just another reason we should end this colonial nightmare. Now I'm not trying to start yet another debate about Afghanistan. I can talk about sovereignty, war lords, and Russians. Or Pushtuns, corruption, opium, and oil pipelines. I can talk about American hegemony, questionable elections, and puppet ex-patriots, but I'm unlikely to change many minds. If you are for this mission, you can talk about nation building, girls in schools, the tyranny of the Taliban, or how the sacrifice of brave Canadian soldiers cannot be for not. You can talk about Canada punching above its weight, the war on "terror", and American leadership until you are blue-liberal in the face and you're not going to change my mind. This is about convincing the NDP that they must support tomorrow's motion to pull the troops out by 2009. The NDP say they will not vote for this motion because they believe and have always believed that our troops should be pulled out yesterday. This is a very principled position, however it may end up keeping troops in Afghanistan for years to come. If this motion fails and the wheels are not set in motion for a 2009 withdrawal, Harper may get his majority and commit our troops for ever and ever, amen. That is certainly not what the NDP wants! Also, if this motion passes, Harper could not allow it, Bush wouldn't let him. He would have to fight an election on the issue. An election fought on the war in Afghanistan could be very good for the NDP.

So Long Peter McKay

Stephane Dion stole my idea. I Swear to God I've been procrastinating since Tuesday on a post that was to be entitled "Liberals, NDP should back May in Central Nova". What do I read in the paper this morning? Dion will not run a Liberal candidate in Central Nova. This is awesome news. Last election the voting went down like so, Con-17134, NDP-13861, Libs-10349, Greens-671. May would still have to pick up much of the NDP support to win but this stealthy move puts her much closer to victory. Jack Layton do the right thing and pull the Dipper in the riding too. I know this arrangement will not sit well with fierce partisans from any of the progressive parties but we all need to keep our eye on the ball here. This is the potential end of Conservative cabinet minister and Condaleeza lover Peter McKay. The man who sold out David Orchard, the PC's and the whole country by going back on his word and merging with the Alliance there bye spawning the evil, twisted and sitting in fucking government CPC. All three progressive parties, hell even the Bloc should look at other riding's where a little co-operation might bring down a fascist. Dont worry Peter you'll still have your dog.

Softwood Lumber already?

Oh, oh get out the K-Y jelly the Americans are unhappy with the softwood lumber agreement again. International Trade Minister, party jumper and chief bender over for the Canadian govt David Emerson announced late Friday that "The United States has requested that we consult on federal and provincial government forestry programs and the interpretation of the surge mechanism." In other words the Americans have a problem with assistance programs offered by the Ontario and Quebec governments to the Canadian lumber industry saying it amounts to subsidies. (That old chestnut.) They also object to federal grants, loans, loan guarantees, and tax credits awarded to Canadian lumber producers. Lastly, (for now) they have a problem with our interpretation of the surge mechanism which is essentially a taxation and duty scheme that ties the tax rates paid on Canadian lumber exports to US lumber consumption. They don't have a leg to stand on on any of the above counts but when has that stopped them before? Why would it? Emerson seems quite ready to bend over already saying, "This is a good opportunity for Canada and the United States to once again work closely and to work through our disagreements in a constructive manner." Translation, thank you sir may I have another? The Softwood Lumber deal, made law less then six months ago was already hugely one-sided and essentially rewarded the Americans for breaking the rules of NAFTA. Emerson pretty much admitted as much at that time saying that the deal wasn't ideal but that is was a better alternative to costly litigation and that it would bring "stability to the industry." What stability? Less then six months and the Americans are complaining. These, "consultations" are the second step in the grievance process and amount to nothing more then a shake down. Canada will either capitulate, (don't put it past Emerson) or the next step will be guess what, litigation. We'll be right back where we started from accept with less of a legal leg to stand on. In the Softwood lumber Agreement we negotiated away our rights to use all legal rulings in our favour in the past in any future legal proceeding. More great negotiating. Conservatives shouldn't be allowed to make deals with Americans. They love them so much and want to be them so bad that they essentially give away the farm every time they meet. Each time David Emerson or Micheal Wilson make a deal with the US my bum feels sore. Jesus I think these guys were the negotiating team for the Manhattan Indians. One billion dollars bought us less then six months of lumber peace . It is exactly what critics of the deal said would happen and it would be funny if it wasn't so sad.