Desi In Toronto

Here is a page that everyone needs to bookmark!!

http://www.thedailyshow.com/video/index.jhtml

The Thorne Speech last night

(http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20071017.wthrone17/BNSto
ry/National/home)

It is a push by Harper to model Canada into a USA.

1) Tougher crime bill (just like in the US)
2) Discarding Kyoto (just like US did)
3) Establish permanent stations in Arctic regions (thereby posturing against
Russia and Denmark which something US does against allies all the time)
4) Put a figure on cut on greenhouse gases (50 to 70%) by the year 2050 with
no clue on how to begin (exactly like US)

Why Harper is so enamoured with US?

The funniest thing I saw this morning……

…….I was walking out of the Union Station and saw a man dressed in Santa
outfit a little further away. As I got closer I saw he was a homeless guy
who had a donation box with a sign on it that made me like everyone around
me fish out change from my pocket…..Sleigh Broke Down. Need Help!!

This is what geographical world map look s like…….

The more I think of it, the more I like the MMP system.

What is the MMP system? I won’t go into the details of the system as there are thousands of sites that could explain (just google MMP Ontario) more lucidly than I can. All I will say is that MMP allows you to have two votes. One for your local MPP and one for your choice of a party. E.g. I could vote for my local representative (say Bob Delaney) and vote for the Green party because I rather like their policies. If the Green party gets a total of 3% of the total popular vote, they can nominate one of their listed representatives (whom I have voted for) to the legislature. This means thatthat the 3% of the people who voted for the Green party with their “second”
vote will get some sort of representation.

Now that’s what I call democracy!! Each vote will be weighted to give it some sort of say in the legislature.

So far the proposal is to have 90 ridings (reduced from the present 107) in Ontario through the current system of First Past The Post system (i.e. the person who gets the most votes) and 39 representative seats as part of the MMP.

Now here is a list of contentions against MMP that I picked from the comments section at Globe And Mail and my replies to it :

–> The MMP system only allows the citizens to vote in 90 ridings, and political parties pick the remaining 39. You know the remaining 39 will be for buddies and good pals.

This argument is a common theme against MMP. Oooh…..political hacks will be appointed……someone’s best friend in corporate circles is going to come to power and that will be the END OF THE WORLD!!! Just one question, Mr. Doubter…..who nominated your current MPP? Did he suddenly cry out in the middle of the crowd “VOTE FOR ME” and you did? Hogwash. Your current MPP, and all the other MPPs in Ontario, are nominated by the party and I mean each and every one of them. It is only the independent candidates who are the genuine politicians who seek votes on their own merits. All the others are buddies, chums, relatives, friend-of-a-friend-of-a-friend of someone in the political party which means 100% of the candidates you see on the ballot list were chosen by the party WITHOUT any oversight from anyone. If MMP comes into the picture, at least there will be more of an intense focus on the 39 representatives. And maybe, this will force the party to nominate genuine politicians instead of people with nothing better to do (Wajid Khan from Mississauga, anyone?)

–> MMP will create one big chaotic mess. MMP creates more special interest parties and because Canada is so regionalist, governments will come and go like rainwater.

I have no idea why some people have this fixation with a “majority” government. Never mind that the current federal government and the previous one have been minority governments and seem to be functioning quite well (even though I don’t like the policies of the current government at all). Never mind that minority governance keeps everyone in check. Yes, there are backroom dealings and guess what, they will never, ever go away. Those are part and parcel of democracy. There will always be backroom dealings. Would you not want someone from the “little” parties in those same dealings to keep a check on things for us? Moreover, with current polling data, liberals are only marginally ahead of conservatives in Ontario. So we are looking at
a minority governm nt. Does that mean we will have elections again in a month? No, there will be a lot of back dealing with NDP and the liberals will come to power. So how exactly is this different from your doomsday scenario? At least under MMP, the minority parties will have more leverage to make sure that the outcome is fair to all.

–> MMP is a socialist’s wet dream. can’t get power any other way. If a party such as the Greens, after all these years, can still only attract 5-10% of the vote, maybe they should rethink their policies, or go away.

And there you have it. This is exactly why MMP is needed. 5 – 10 % of the vote in Ontario translates to 200,000 to 400,000 people. That’s how many people want Greens to have a say in the legislature. Should we allow the will of 200,000 peoples be swept under the carpet? Maybe their policies seem so appealing to such a large number of people that they should at least be discussed in the legislature. I mean if I have to have another idiotic policy thrust on me by the liberals whom I never voted for and never will, why can’t I have the policies of the party of my choice have a say in the legislature?

–> MMP more democratic? More like more bureaucratic! Since the number of MMPs will be increased, we will have to pay more tax dollars to pay these additional salaries, not to mention all the staff that goes with these new members. I already pay enough tax, thank you very much!

Really? So we would have a problem paying 39 MPPs and their staff even though we were paying for 130 MPPs until 1996 before Mike Harris introduced the Fewer Politicians Act? BTW, I wonder how many people opposed that act? I am sure it must be a huge number and yet precisely because of the current system it was implemented without a referendum or public debate.

–> The 2nd (argument against MMP) is somewhat more troubling in that the system may see the rise of an infinite number “minority” parties, be they based on political line “communist”, environmental “green” ethnic – Sikh, or religious. Israel today is plagued with that very problem

Yeah? And what exactly is wrong with that. If I form a party that believes in the spaghetti monster as the divine being and attract more than 3% of the population, why should that be termed as a problem? It just means that there are people out there who see other parties as detrimental to their ideas and want to back up a party that agrees with them. That’s called democracy.

And here is another reason why MMP is a good idea. This is a comment left by “Canadian Patriot” at the Globe and Mail comment section

1. Hey bub, I’m happy to have my minority government working to kick the liberals out for good – rather than paying for the Liberals monkey fuck us and rob us blind.

However, I think the referendum will fail. The main reason is education. The public at large had no idea that this referendum was coming. There has been no discussions or debates about it until 3 weeks ago. If the pubic was not informed about the referendum, the powers that be must have kept it quiet long enough to make sure that it never gathers traction. I was never going
to vote for Bob Delaney (my representative at Mississauga Streetsville) and since I found out that he totally opposes MMP, there is no way I am going to vote for him. And I can guarantee you that he will win by 35 – 45% majority……in other words 55 to 65% of the Mississauga-Streetsville population opposes him but will have to endure his policies for the next 4 years.

Everyone in the right-wing arena (blogs, mainstream, talk show etc.) is up
in arms over the comments made by the Iranian president Mahmood Ahmadinejad
when he visited the US. He said that "there are no gays in Iran" which
everyone knows is a blatant lie.

Now the right wingers are rightly (excuse the pun) mocking this stupid
statement. But what's ironic is that the mocking is being done mostly by the
same people who virulently oppose pro-gay policies in the US!! Of course the
lives of gay people in US cannot be compared to gay people in, say, Saudi
Arabia, but since US is the one of the best "moral and peace loving"
society, it's funny that it's policies are the most anti-gay policies among
the western world.

The world of crapotopia of the right wing is truly a wonderful place!!

Severe lack of blogging can be squarely blamed on facebook. Anyone curious of what I am up to, can go here <link>.

They Came.

They Sat.

They Said Exactly What Everyone With 2 Grey cells Said They Would Say.

They Left.

And Iraqis and young boys and girls from US continue to die in Iraq and Afghanistan.

Dick And George Must Be So Proud.

Now we have Stephen Harper jumping on the idiots’ bandwagon comprising, among others, Charest and Dion. The headlines, in bold, is MUSLIM WOMEN DO NOT NEED TO SHOW THEIR FACES WHEN VOTING. As soon as this headline is in on the paper, the comments section at www.globeandmail.com are deluged with letters from the ignoramuses of Canada confirming what their leaders say, Muslim women have to show their faces when voting. Everyone has become a voice for “Canadian Values” and how Muslims should assimilate instead of trying to change even though leading Muslim groups are trashing this press release.

How did this controversy start?

This started from an a press release from the Chief Electoral Officer, Marc Mayrand that got huge xenophobic press attention. MUSLIMS DO NOT NEED TO UNCOVER THEIR FACES TO VOTE. I swear Alice’s wonderland was probably not this goofy. Here is how this whole scenario was played out :

On September 6th, a press release by Elections Canada stated that for an elector wearing face covering veils are allowed to vote under the following conditions (from www.elections.ca):

The elector may choose to unveil, OR

The elector can produce a second original piece of identification from the Chief Electoral Officer of Canada’s authorized list of identification as proof of the individual’s identity, OR

Another elector registered in the same polling division who is able to produce satisfactory identification establishing his or her own identity and residential address could vouch for the elector. Both the voucher and vouchee would be required to make a sworn statement under oath. An elector can vouch only for one elector.

Holy cow!!! Elections Canada is a snivelling, pandering liberal institute. The Chief should be hanged!!! What is he trying to do? Is he trying to put his own agenda into the laws of the land? Is he…….oh wait. It already IS a law? Here’s the actual facts. You will be able to see how a mountain is made out of a mole hill?

Until the bill C-31 was passed on 20th February 2007 by the policy makers of Canada (including parties presided by Harper, Dion and Charest), anyone could vote without really having to remove the veil. Our esteemed politicians were the ones to plug that hole. This is what the actual bill says

21. Sections 143 to 145 of the Act are replaced by the following:

Elector to declare name, etc.

143.

(1) Each elector, on arriving at the polling station, shall give his or her name and address to the deputy returning officer and the poll clerk, and, on request, to a candidate or his or her representative. Proof of identity and residence

(2) If the poll clerk determines that the elector’s name and address appear on the list of electors or that the elector is allowed to vote under section 146, 147, 148 or 149, then, subject to subsection

(3), the elector shall provide to the deputy returning officer and the poll clerk the following proof of his or her identity and residence:

(a) one piece of identification issued by a Canadian government, whether federal, provincial or local, or an agency of that government, that contains a photograph of the elector and his or her name and address; or

(b) two pieces of identification authorized by the Chief Electoral Officer each of which establish the elector’s name and at least one of which establishes the elector’s address.

Oath

(3) An elector may instead prove his or her identity and residence by taking the prescribed oath if he or she is accompanied by an elector whose name appears on the list of electors for the same polling division and who

(a) provides to the deputy returning officer and the poll clerk the piece or pieces of identification referred to in paragraph (2)(a) or (b), respectively; and

(b) vouches for him or her on oath in the prescribed form.

Voting

(4) If the deputy returning officer is satisfied that an elector’s identity and residence have been proven in accordance with subsection (2) or (3), the elector’s name shall be crossed off the list and, subject to section 144, the elector shall be immediately allowed to vote.

It says clearly on the bill passed by the same idiots now trying to score cheap political points that any person who does not want to show his or her face. Note it does not say because of religious reasons, in other words, I may have a gash on my face and am heavily bandaged and, therefore, cannot prove my identity through a photo ID, I will have to show two ID cards OR have another voter vouch for me.

The only reason I can discern for Elections Canada to put this press release is that they must have received calls regarding veiled women. So, they clarified the situation through a press release and, committed the cardinal sin of putting the words VEILED WOMEN in the release. By doing so they called forth the closet racists and bigots who don’t make the simple effort of actually looking at the Bill’s wording. If they had they would have realised that our pathetic politicians are the ones who allowed such a situation to arise in the first place.

IMHO, this clause is completely justifiable. As I explained, there could be instances where one’s identity cannot be proved just by looking at the photo ID. You need some back up plan. Until we cannot have our DNA coded on the fly, I think this law will suffice quite fine. And if veiled women want to take advantage of the law, they are welcome to do so.

The most obvious headline of the year.

U.S. should lower profile in Iraq, let Iraqi army take over daily combat: study

The new weapon launched by the amazing Indian Bureaucrats……

Indian border guards are photographing cows in villages in the eastern state of West Bengal and issuing them with identity cards, officials say.

Border Security Force (BSF) spokesman GK Sharma said the move was meant to stop smuggling of cattle from India to neighbouring Bangladesh.

.

Thousands of villagers in the state’s Murshidabad district bordering Bangladesh are queuing up outside photo studios to have their cows photographed for the identity cards.

Some cattle identity cards have already been issued in the district’s border villages.

Of course, the idea that maybe there is a potential market here is a big no-no to religion soaked minds.

India prohibits cattle exports, as beef consumption is frowned upon by the country’s majority Hindu population.

Dear Rhea,

You turned 4 years old on the 16th August 2007.

You were born at 8:58am on 16th August, 2003. I remember It was a Saturday
morning. The day before was the famous Black Out of 2003. Google it and you
will find out that there was no electricity for 2 days. Your mom was
scratchy all over and the heat did not help at all. We were at a friend's
place watching the movie Hungama (a hilarious Hindi movie) and while
watching it, your mother's water broke. We waited until around 2 am and then
left for the hospital. And 9 hours later you came into our lives.

I will never forget that moment when I first saw you. Your head popped out
and you were not crying at all. The doctors quickly pulled you and there was
another team that immediately started to revive you. It took them a few
seconds and then I heard that Waaaah!! The doctors cleaned you up and
wrapped you in some blankets and passed you to me.

The feelings that washed through me at that point are quite difficult to
describe. There you were….weighing at 6 pounds and 48 ounces at no more
than 52 inches tall. But more than that was the feeling that this little
baby was going to call me her father. It was not a burden but a sudden
realisation that my life made complete sense. I was born to make sure that
you were born. Of course, logically, it's a lot more complicated than that
but that's how I felt at that point.

Since then you have enriched my life in more ways than I can list. Your
laughter lights up my gloomy mood. When you say "Papa, I love you". I feel
like I soaring the sky. When you sing your favourite song from The Little
Mermaid (called Part Of Your World – I have a clip of you singing it, remind
me to show it to you) it brings a huge smile to my face. And when you do
your bum dance in the shower I am on the floor with laughter.

Of course, you drive me crazy too. I hope that by the time you read this,
your eating habits would have improved. That's the only time when you and I
don't get along at all. You are convinced after 2 bites that you have had
your lunch and then you and I get into an argument which, if I may add, you
win most of the times. Because, there is one thing I cannot bear to see. And
that is to see you cry. When you start crying all my anger and all my
annoyance simply melts away. Something tells me that you are going to take
advantage of this fact later on in your life. I do pretend to still be angry
with you to get the point across but my anger, by this time, is usually
dissipated.

Nothing in world means more to me than you do. My love for you grows day by
day. When I look at you as you sleep I feel so blessed and lucky to have you
as my daughter.

Love,
Your papa.

There was quite a salvo fired across Canada today which ruffled a few feathers here.

Prime Minister Stephen Harper vowed to defend his country’s sovereignty over its northernmost territories yesterday after Moscow sent two submarines deep under the North Pole ice to plant a flag on the ocean floor.

So a country like Denmark laid a claim to a godforsaken island (Hans Island, 2005) publicly and all the government of Canada could do was talk and talk and talk. And then came the Harper government with a mighty swagger and proceeded to elucidate their stand in the matter by talking back to the US (yes THE US!!) when the government harshly objected to US submarines
patrolling the Arctic ocean (just inside the Canadian territory). And then the government proceeded to promise ice breakers (Canadian made, oooooooh) that will patrol the Arctic ocean against ANYONE trying to lay a claim to Canadian territory. And then the “new” government…..ummm….did nothing about it.

In true tradition of Canadian we talk rather then impose (A school of thought I subscribe to, by the way). The Danish and Canadian government are discussing the issue and they will probably end up sharing the revenues which is what we are supposed to do in the first place.

Which is why I was rather surprised to hear the rhetoric pour out of our esteemed foreign minister Peter MacKay. I mean, for the love of god, Russia is just posturing. If they are going to drop a flag here and there, they know very well, that is does not mean that they will actually claim the land. This is a PR exercise and nothing more. The next step is to talk (just like we are doing with Denmark) and resolve the situation. Would it lead to a resolution? Who knows. One thing it will not lead up to is a very serious diplomatic situation which I am fairly certain that neither Canada nor Russia is in any position to undertake. But if you are at the table, no one is spending millions n millions of dollars and, possibly the lives of their soldiers, to lay claim to a piece of land that no country has a right to, to begin with.

However, the Harper government has jumped to a chance to give their base some excellent talking points……

* “There is no question over Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic,”

* “We’ve established a long time ago that these are Canadian waters and this is Canadian property. You can’t go around the world these days dropping a flag somewhere. This isn’t the 14th or 15th century.”

* “This government has put a real emphasis on northern and Arctic sovereignty and we will continue to do so and we will move quickly in that regard.”

* “The question of Arctic sovereignty is not a question. It’s clear. It’s our country. It’s our water. … It’s the “True North strong and free” and they are fooling themselves if they think dropping a flag on the ocean floor is going to change anything.”

And their friends down south have joined them too…..

* “I’m not sure of whether they’ve put a metal flag, a rubber flag or a bedsheet on the ocean floor,” State Department spokesman Tom Casey (of the United States Of America) said. “Either way, it doesn’t have any legal standing or effect on this claim,” he said.

Rhetoric and BS posturing. That’s all this is.

<Link>

A grave injustice of today’s world is that lifesaving drugs are widely available, but priced out of reach of so many of the people who need them the most. In the late 1990s, we were confronted with a stark representation of that reality: Most people infected with HIV in wealthy countries were leading healthy and productive lives, thanks to antiretroviral drugs, or ARVs; but in poor countries, HIV meant a rapid decline and certain death.

In 2001, the Doha Declaration on the Trade-Related Aspects of Intellectual Property Rights (TRIPS) Agreement and Public Health established that intellectual property rights should not prevent countries from taking measures to protect public health. Indian generic drugs producers marketed ARVs at a fraction of earlier prices. Some pharmaceutical companies lowered their prices significantly in low- and middle-income countries. As a result, the number of people on ARVs soared: 10 times more people in developing countries were on ARVs in 2006 than in 2001. This has kept parents with children longer, helped societies stay productive and improved the overall quality of life for millions.

A lawsuit now underway in India could reverse this progress.

…….the Swiss pharmaceutical company Novartis filed two lawsuits against the government of India.

The quality and affordability of its generic drugs have made India a virtual “pharmacy to the world.” Nearly 70 percent of generic drugs manufactured in India are exported to other developing countries. The expansion of AIDS treatment over the past few years has been driven by the accessibility and affordability of generic ARVs from India. For example, Lesotho buys nearly 95 percent of all its ARVs from India; 90 percent of the ARVs used in Zimbabwe’s AIDS treatment program come from India.

If Novartis wins its Section 3(d) case, and other pharmaceutical companies follow in Novartis’ footsteps, minor modifications of existing drugs would be eligible for patents in India. That would prevent generic competition. If fewer generic drugs could be produced in India, fewer poor people around the world would have access to essential drugs for a range of illnesses. In particular, AIDS and TB treatment programs all over the world are likely to suffer.

Yes you have spent millions doing R & D. But is it also not true that you have made a successful ROI (Return On Investment)? Why do you want to see thousands upon thousands of people suffer? Let the generic manufaturing continue.

Cheney in charge, temporarily

Now this is what I call educated pupils…..

Nigerian schoolchildren who received laptops from a U.S. aid organisation have used them to explore pornographic sites on the Internet, the official News Agency of Nigeria (NAN) reported on Thursday.

NAN said its reporter had seen pornographic images stored on several of the children’s laptops.

“Efforts to promote learning with laptops in a primary school in Abuja have gone awry as the pupils freely browse adult sites with explicit sexual materials,” NAN said.

Men….we are born with this innate ability to sniff out porn from all corners of the world….even the digital world.

Reading The National Post can give any right thinking human being a heartburn.

The National Post’s best use is a replacement for toilet paper.

The National Post’s editors sole qualification seems to be “must hate liberals and progressive at all cost”.

The National Post’s readers do not need to have an IQ more than 50.

For those who did not get the gist, I HATE The National Post. Whenever I have been brain dead (hangovers, sleepless nights etc.) I always read The National Post. Reading the editorials and the letters to the editors always wakes me from my stupor. I mean any newspaper giving Ann Coulter (United States’ hate machine) column space on their pages is in my books the most
pathetic excuse for a newspaper. This paper is exclusive for the low brow and Nationalist Canadians (and there are quite a few).

This paper was started by the (in-)famous Conard Black and right from the word go, the editorial and letters section of the paper were notoriously anti-French, anti-Immigrant, anti-Non-White and violently Homophobe. The paper espouses all the anti Canadian values that we all so cherish and take for granted which begs the question why does it sell at all at a national
level? I will not go into that in this post as I want to discuss an article I saw in today’s newspaper and demonstrate to you why I think this paper is trash.

“Foreign Aid Swipe At US Belies reality” by Steven Edwards.

I have never read any article by Edwards before but after going through it (the article) I realise that I have not really missed much. The tripe that he calls “analysis” was enough to make me tear of the section and polish my shoes with it (so there is some use for the paper after all!!)

In a nutshell Edwards says that the UN’s complaint that US and other rich countries are defaulting on their promise to spend 0.7% of their Gross National Income (GNI) on foreign aid is foolish as to the 0.22% of GNI that US government gives to the US, private contributions from the US is around 0.76% of GNI. Hence, the combined 0.98% is more than the stated target.
Similarly in Canada, 0.34% is the government contribution and 0.66% is the private contribution, hitting 1% well above the target.

Now, the moment I read the article I immediately saw the flaw in his argument. If a doofus like me can see it, I hope every thinking person out there saw it too.

Mr. Edwards, did you read your own article carefully or do you spit out garbage and collect the cheque and run?

He starts off by describing the situation where the governments of the rich countries pledged 0.7% of their GNI as foreign aid at a UN forum. The key words here are PLEDGED BY THE GOVERNMENTS. By the elected officials who have gone on to make promises on a world forum. They promised to put in 0.7% which comes from the taxes that the government collects from the denizens of the state. So if 0.7% was pledged, why the hell isn’t it allocated? DO NOT LOOK AT THE CITIZENS MAKING PRIVATE CONTRIBUTIONS. If the individual thinks that she wants to contribute more than what was already deducted from her taxes, it is her right to do so. The government or any other body (he sites the Hudson Institute of Washington as the source of this argument which is a hard core Right Wing body that has a nuclear scientist (who wrote papers on “how to win nuclear wars”) for a head) has no right to pad their figures
with a private contribution made between the individual and her choice of charity/family in another country or whatever way or method by which she chooses to disperse her wealth. This is like saying that the private contribution made by a citizen to The Sick Kids’ Hospital at Toronto is half of what the government funds, hence The Sick Kids’ Hospital is fully funded
by the government.

Why in the world would someone make such an atrociously stupid argument and still be allowed to command 1/3rd of the page on a national newspaper is beyond me. This clearly shows Edwards is a lackey of the right wing machine; He’s another wingnut who wants to seem to be “important” while he is putting in his article and saying not too subtly that UN is just a whiny world forum and has no clout. Of course, this is also the view of Hudson Institute which was a major backer of John Bolton, the Bush lackey who had to resign from his post as the UN ambassador from the US when the democrats refused to reconfirm his position. I think Edwards was, basically, called and told what to say and he did.

And that’s kind of journalism/opinion that really irks me. A “mighty” think tank body tells the journalist to write some crap on a national paper, and the journalist bends over backwards to do it. This is not journalism but diction at it’s best.

I once made the mistake of subscribing to The National Post (when I had just arrived in the country) thinking that the deal I was given was quite good from a national newspaper. In a week I found out why. Who in their right mind would read day after day the editorial and letters section that was racist and close minded. I cancelled it. I remember calling to cancel and
was asked by the person why I was cancelling. I said that the paper was absolutely crap and I disagreed with everything that the editors wrote. And the person said “I know what you mean”. When your employees think you are crap, then trust me, you are crap.

Don`t you hate addictive games

<Link>

Here’s to the person who invented beer. Just spent the last two hours at the Bier Market sampling a couple of beers and good food with great company. Sometimes, life is simple & good.