Archive for category world
No. Of course I wouldn’t be a good president/prime minister. I’d be an awful choice.
Sure I have lots of ideas, and suggestions about what to do to change the country for the better. Or at least ideas that I think are good. And how hard can it be to stand in front of the camera and look good an say a few words in a commanding and political way?
The thing about being president/prime minister is that everyone thinks they will be good at it. We all have these ideas of things we want to do and things we want to change. But what about all the other things you have to do. Being president is more than just saying “let’s do this” and smiling for the camera.
But we all know that all we would do is screw up the country even more. There are people who are professionals for that. Let’s leave it to them.
Well Toronto has made it through the G8/G20 without too much trouble. Except for the riots. And the over 900 arrests of course. I was lucky enough to be able to stay at home and didn’t get involved in any of this.
I must say that as the media have been talking to prisoners who have been released after being detained during “protests” (not really protests any more are they) there have been some very amusing excuses for them being arrested. My favourite so far is a mother whose son was arrested and she was confused as to why he as arrested because “he wasn’t even in Toronto on Saturday!!!” (lots of exclamation points. She was really panicking). So how, may I ask, did he end up in a Toronto prison if he wasn’t even in the city? I’d like to be around to hear that explanation.
Another man said that he was only there because he was curious and wanted to see what was going on. That’s a great way to think. He couldn’t just turn on his TV. Oh no. He decides to go and see a riot first hand instead of staying at home and watching in safety. What he’s done is say to himself “I’m going to go somewhere where I might get seriously hurt and possibly arrested because I’m CURIOUS”. That’s like going to afghanistan or Iraq because you were curious about what’s going on. If you ask me he deserved to be arrested for being an idiot.
Now I don’t doubt that some “innocent” bystanders got caught up in the mobs of people being arrested but attending something like this comes with the risk of being arrested so you really shouldn’t complain that much. If I’d been there, the second I saw the protest getting out of hand I would have got the hell out of there.
All these arrests have got the civil rights groups complaining that the police had no right to arrest all these people because they were not “disturbing the peace”. “disturbing the peace” could really mean anything couldn’t it? Yelling in the streets could be disturbing peace. If these people didn’t want the chance of being arrested then they should have stayed at home. Maybe now they’ve learned their lesson.
And one last thing to all those people who are giving advice to the police on how to handle the situation. It’s easy to be an armchair quarterback, if you were in charge you wouldn’t have a clue about what to do. I’m not saying I agree with everything the police did but they did their best and I support how they dealt with the events of the last few days.
If there’s one thing that annoys me it’s the reason for protesters getting violent at the G8/G20. I have figured out that the main reason for it is because, and I quote (paraphrase really) “no one notices us unless we make a scene”. Now this may be true but in case you haven’t noticed people are already inconvenienced enough by the huge fence that is closing off the core of the city and all the extra police officers everywhere. All that violent protests accomplish is that people get more agitated. Not at what the people are protesting but at the protesters themselves.
A good example of this is the Tamil protests last summer(? or whenever). People didn’t mind when the protests were peaceful (they were. If only for a short while) but when they started standing on highways with their children (I’m sure you were as shocked as i was) and causing chaos in downtown Toronto and elsewhere, people were less inclined to support their cause and getting more angry with the protesters. I know I was.
Actually for this G8/G20 in Toronto I’m slightly hoping for a bit of violent protesting (DISCLAIMER: I AM IN NO WAY ENCOURAGING VIOLENCE) simply because the government has already spent a Billion dollars on the G8/G20, and as a taxpayer (yeah, thats right) I don’t want it to have been a waste.
Before I start I would like to say that I am all for the right to protest and free speech etc. etc. But only within reason.
Today during a news conference outside the convention center a group of protestors showed up protesting the fence being erected around part of the downtown core for the G20 summit.
Here’s the thing. I can understand people protesting during G20. I mean the government has already spent a billion dollars so I expect them to get their money’s worth. These people are protesting the fence and security provisions. Saying stuff like “it’s capitalist oppression” and crap like that. Don’t these people have jobs or something? How can they constantly show up to protest mundane things like fences? I could understand if they said that the were protesting G20 or something like that but a FENCE?!? just when you thought it couldn’t get any stupider…
Yesterday I was watching the news. I won’t say which one (It was Global News) and a man being interviewed about what he thought about the G20 security features said “I think the government is spending more money on showing off their power than actually trying to prevent trouble”. I haven’t put that in proper quotes because I’m not 100% sure about the exact words.
This man is completely crazy. Of course the police are going to show off their power. That is the first step to preventing trouble during the G20. Quite a few people will decide not to go to protests or riots because they are thinking “Oh no. They have a sound cannon and thousands of police officers to arrest me.” This is first step to deterrents. Intimidation. Police officers intimidate the public all the time. Thats why they carry a gun. I’m sure many people don’t commit crimes because they are afraid of being shot by a police officer. This goes even deeper than someone carrying a gun. Why do police officers wear blue or black. Blue is supposed to subconsciously convince you the person is truthful and trustworthy (a good thing in a police officer) and black is… well… black. It would look kind of odd if police officers wore pink or purple. Protestors would turn up just to laugh at the police. I know I would. they would have to change the name from “the thin blue line” to the “thin magenta line”. I can just imagine the news reports “… and then a wave of magenta attacked the protestors…” The news reader would have such a hard time trying not to laugh.
So to this man I say “shut up!”. Sure the government has spent a billion dollars on security and they are spending a bit of money to show off their tools and weapons but it’s all helping PREVENT or DETER protestors. It’s not a complete waste of money.
Ah, it’s time for the G8 and G20. A time when the leaders of the top 8 nations (and 20 nations) in the world come together and incite some giant riots in whatever city they happen to be meeting in. This time they are meeting in Canada. The G8 is going to be in Huntsville and the G20 is going to be in downtown Toronto. This means that there will be MASSIVE riots in Huntsville for the couple of days that the G8 are meeting and even bigger riots in Toronto for G20 and about a week before because half of the protestors don’t know where Huntsville is. Obviously many people haven’t heard of Google maps of asking for directions.
It seems like the Canadian government hasn’t thought this through enough yet. They have already spent a billion dollars on the G8 and G20 which is apparently the most any nation has ever spent on these meetings (something like 30 times more) and so far all anyone has seen is a fence surrounding the resort in Huntsville and now the removal of many items in downtown Toronto such as Mailboxes and Benches. All items deemed a “threat” to the meetings. You know, all those times you’ve been attacked by a newspaper. All that seems to be happening is things are disappearing.
Now they tell us that thousands of protesters are going to be showing up and that all the damage done by them will not be paid for by the government. Wait. Didn’t they just spend a BILLION dollars to prevent damage? Oh no, that’s right, they only spent the money to prevent harm to the leaders. Isn’t it bad enough that we have to pay an outrageous amount of money for the security of others? Now we also have to pay to fix the damage that has been all but created because of them?
Now there is the problem in Gaza with the aid ship that was stopped by Israeli ships who ended up killing some activists who were on the boat. Now they are all protesting in downtown Toronto also. The fun just doesn’t stop. Fingers crossed that they stay peaceful until at least G8/20 or maybe they could just go protest somewhere else. I see this ending up a lot like the Tamil protests last year.
So, let the chaos begin. It’s a political bloggers dream. I personally will be observing the whole thing from the safety of my house with my TV and gas mask on.
Where does Stephen Harper find them? I think this might just encourage people to push for allowing Canadian senators to be elected instead of appointed by the Prime Minister. Senator Nancy Ruth has been heard to have said “Shut the F–k up” to an aid group asking about abortion
“We’ve got five weeks or whatever left until G-8 starts. Shut the f— up on this issue,” Conservative Senator Nancy Ruth told a group of international-development advocates who gathered on Parliament Hill on Monday to sound the alarm about Canada’s hard-right stand against abortion in foreign aid.
“If you push it, there will be more backlash,” said Ruth, who fears that outrage will push her boss, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, to take further measures against abortion and family planning – abroad, or maybe even in Canada. “This is now a political football. This is not about women’s health in this country.”
Ruth’s remarks, intended more as friendly advice than a warning, were met with gasps of disbelief and even anger among the approximately 80 aid representatives who converged on Parliament Hill to condemn what they see as a gathering storm against women’s rights in Canadian aid policy.
Ruth explained that she attends Conservative caucus, understands the current political dynamics and is sympathetic to the cause of women upset by the anti-abortion announcement – “I just want them to be quiet for five weeks,” she told reporters. But few of the advocates appeared inclined to take her counsel.
The response to these remarks went something like this
“We have shut the f— up. That’ s the issue here,” said Joanna Kerr, the newly named chief executive of Action Aid International, based in South Africa.
“I don’t remember any women’s rights ever gained by staying silent,” she said.
I completely agree with these women. The whole reason things get passed over in the House of Commons is because people don’t push them forward and keep them in public view. If people “Shut the F–k up” then its like taking a rest in a marathon. You have to keep going because if you stop then you might not get started again.
Nancy Ruth has given her reasons for making the comment,
Ruth is convinced that the final communiqué of the G8 meeting in Canada in June will include a mention of this country’s support for family planning, but fears that ongoing furor over abortion could harden the Conservative government’s stand even more. And just as her Conservative colleagues have warned repeatedly, she said that Canada does not need a reopened abortion debate.
“I hope I’m not proven wrong but I have every confidence that it (the communiqué) will include family planning,” Ruth said. “Canada is still a country with free and accessible abortion. Leave it there. Don’t make it into an election issue.”
Basically she means that G8 is going to swoop in and fix everything.
Now you must ask why have aid groups been slightly more outraged than usual. Well it all leads back to our Prime Minister Stephen Harper.
Harper’s announced ban on abortion in foreign-aid programs is an echo of a similar ban that former president George W. Bush also enacted during his eight years in office.
Fantastic. Now we’re taking ideas from George W. Bush. It just gets better and better.
Finally, Anita Neville, who was in the house when the comment was made, explained what was really meant in language that most of us can understand. She said,
“I think women have been told too often to be quiet, be good and then you’ll get what you want. I think that she was saying don’t push the issue or you’ll get the Prime Minister’s back up even further and you won’t get what you want,”
I think this just makes sense now. Why on earth didn’t the senator just say that? Maybe then there wouldn’t be all this trouble. After this comment, abortion is going to be a big topic up to G8. Completely the opposite effect that the senator wanted.