Arctic sea ice still too thick for regular shipping route through Northwest Passage

September 29, 2015

But, wait. I thought all the polar ice was vanishing because of warming that hasn’t been happening for 18 years — and counting. I’m so confused! Enlighten me, Al Gore!

Watts Up With That?

From YORK UNIVERSITY and the “paging Dr. Peter Wadhams” department…

Northwest_passage[1] Northwest passage routes. Stock Image: Wikipedia TORONTO, September 29, 2015  – Despite climate change, sea ice in the (NWP) remains too thick and treacherous for it to be a regular commercial Arctic shipping route for many decades, according to new research out of York University.

Prior to this research, there was little information about the thickness of sea ice in the NWP, which meanders through the Canadian Arctic Archipelago. Yet, next to ice coverage and type, sea ice thickness plays the most important role in assessing shipping hazards and predicting ice break-up.

“While everyone only looks at ice extent or area, because it is so easy to do with satellites, we study ice thickness, which is important to assess overall changes of ice volume, and helps to understand why and where the ice is most vulnerable to summer melt,”…

View original post 611 more words


Canada: train jihadists sentenced to life in prison

September 23, 2015

flag_canadian_maple_leaf

Closure on something I wrote about two years ago, then almost forgot: Raed Jaser and Chiheb Esseghaier were convicted of attempting to murder dozens, if not hundreds, in a train derailment plot. For their efforts, they got life in prison:

Raed Jaser and Chiheb Esseghaier, the men convicted earlier this year on terrorism charges for plotting to derail a Via passenger train, were both sentenced to life in prison today in a Toronto courtroom.

In passing sentence, Superior Court of Justice Judge Michael Code said the unusual gravity of terrorism offences means he had to send a strong enough message to deter others considering carrying out similar crimes. He said there was little evidence presented that mitigates the presumptive sentence of life in prison.

“These are the most serious of terrorism offences, designed to result in indiscriminate killings of innocent human beings,” he said.

“I am satisfied that life imprisonment is the appropriate sentence,” the judge added, noting that the men would receive credit for time already spent in custody.

He said both men have not renounced their violent, jihadist ideology and have shown no remorse.

In March, both men were found guilty of conspiring to commit murder for the benefit of, at the direction of or in association with a terrorist group.

I’m afraid Judge Code is naive if he thinks this sentence will deter Muslims dedicated to jihad fi sabil Allah, “war for the sake of Allah.” As Esseghaier said in court:

“The life sentence doesn’t have any meaning for me,” Esseghaier told the judge after his sentence was delivered, adding God was his “master.”

Indeed. What’s life in prison, when you’ve been promised eternal pleasures in Paradise?

Indeed, Allah has purchased from the believers their lives and their properties [in exchange] for that they will have Paradise. They fight in the cause of Allah , so they kill and are killed. [It is] a true promise [binding] upon Him in the Torah and the Gospel and the Qur’an. And who is truer to his covenant than Allah ? So rejoice in your transaction which you have contracted. And it is that which is the great attainment. –Qur’an 9:111

This is a religious war, folks, whether we choose to admit or even understand it.

via Jihad Watch


And may Obama have as much success in Canada as he did in Israel

March 27, 2015
x

In the crosshairs?

Via Kathy Shaidle, it looks like Obama wants to interfere in yet another ally’s elections:

When it comes to Canada, Prime Minister Stephen Harper, like Netanyahu, is a political conservative, considerably to the right of Obama.

Harper’s staunch support of Israel — he has replaced Obama as Israel’s strongest defender and ally in the West — can’t have made Obama happy.

Another significant irritant in Canada-U.S. relations has been Obama’s refusal to approve the Keystone XL pipeline from Alberta’s oilsands to U.S. refineries on the Gulf Coast, which has put Harper and Obama at loggerheads.

Many Americans are perplexed by Obama’s opposition to the pipeline, with both the Washington Post and Wall Street Journal noting recently that Obama’s major arguments against Keystone are simply untrue.

Obama ally and billionaire investor Warren Buffett has said the U.S. should have already approved Keystone, both because it makes economic sense and in recognition of the close relationship between Canada and the U.S.

As for what Obama might be thinking, our media have reported some of his campaign operatives are already working with the Liberals and NDP to help defeat Harper and the Conservatives in October’s election.

(While the Harper Conservatives have used Republican strategists for Canadian elections, that’s obviously not the same as Obama strategists working to help defeat the prime minister of a foreign country.)

The worrisome thing for Harper is that, unlike in Israel, Obama is popular with Canadians.

Yes, we’ve tried to influence elections before, notably in Italy in the 1940s, when it was an urgent necessity to stop the Stalin-aligned Communist Party from coming to power, which would have been a strategic disaster. But, in the case of Israel and Canada, we’re talking about the sitting PMs of allied states whose only offense has been to disagree with Obama on policy.

What am I saying? With Obama, daring to disagree with Him is the greatest sin of all.

Jeez, but this guy is a petty, childish, immature, narcissistic embarrassment.

And those are his good points.


Respect: Canadian MPs fashioned spears to fight off jihadist gunman

October 25, 2014

flag_canadian_maple_leaf

Apparently House of Commons Sergeant at Arms Kevin Vickers wasn’t the only badass on Parliament Hill that day. Conservative MPs taking shelter in a caucus room while a Muslim gunman stalked the halls of parliament were determined to fight for their lives:

After they heard gunfire outside their meeting room door Wednesday, members of Parliament snapped close to 15 flagpoles to make weapons.

Some positioned themselves on risers that flanked doors, ready to attack an assailant.

“There were 15 flags up at caucus and all but two were taken down,” one MP recalled.

“These guys were up there holding these spears ready to impale anyone who came in,” the source said.

“It was that or get mowed down,” the member of Parliament said of the threat posed by a gunman who was ultimately shot dead by Parliament Hill security.

The article also reports that Prime Minister Harper was “whisked” into a closet where he hid for about 15 minutes. But, before anyone thinks harshly of him, remember that he was the most important person in Canada, the head of its government, and his safety was his security detail’s responsibility. Just as President Bush’s safety was a top priority on 9/11, thus forcing a delay in his return to Washington, it would have been gravely irresponsible of him to place himself at risk by joining those manning the barricade, given his responsibilities to the nation.

That said, hats off to the MPs willing to lay their lives on the line. Let no one ever say Canadians are wimps.

via Instapundit

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Canada Shows How to Eliminate the Tax Bias against Saving

October 24, 2014

This will drive lefties who like to point to Canada’s health system as a model for the US crazy, but they’re much more free market-oriented than we are these days in other areas, and they treat savings in a more intelligent fashion. There are some very good ideas in here we should emulate, as well as looking at the Australian and Chilean national pension models as a replacement for the failing Social Security.

International Liberty

Since all economic theories – even Marxism and socialism – recognize that capital formation is a key to long-run growth, higher wages, and improved living standards, it obviously doesn’t make sense to penalize saving and investment.

Yet that’s exactly what happens because of double taxation in the United States, as can be seen by this rather sobering flowchart.

So how can we fix the problem? The best answer, particularly in the long run, is to shrink the burden of government spending so that there’s no pressure for punitive tax policies.

Good reform is also possible in the medium run. Policy makers could implement a big bang version of tax reform, replacing the corrupt internal revenue code with a simple and fair flat tax. That automatically would eliminate the tax bias against saving and investment since one of the key principles of the flat tax is that income…

View original post 1,120 more words


Canada pulls the plug on the U.S. Keystone Pipeline – will send oil to Asia

June 29, 2014

This makes me so mad, I could chew nails. Tens of thousands of good jobs lost, a needed economic boost from cheap oil thrown away. Heckuva job, Greens.

Watts Up With That?

Approves Asia Supply Route, Ignores US Route

H/T Eric Worrall and Breitbart – Obama’s inability to make a decision on Keystone has finally yielded a result – Canada has made the decision for him.

Breitbart reports Canada has just approved the Enbridge Northern Gateway Project – a major pipeline to ship Canadian oil to Asia.

The Canadian oil will still be burnt – in Asia, instead of America.

View original post 140 more words


Canadian train plot: RCMP asserts an al-Qaeda connection

April 23, 2013

I mentioned this in yesterday’s post, but there’s a bit more information on the terrorists and their connection with al-Qaeda:

Canadian police officials have linked the plotting of two Muslim men to destroy a Toronto passenger train to al Qaeda’s network inside Iran. The two suspects, neither of whom are Canadian citizens, were taken into custody yesterday and are facing terrorism charges. One of the suspects had placed an image of al Qaeda’s banner in a social media site. The image has since been removed.

Royal Canadian Mounted Police Assistant Commissioner James Malizia said yesterday that the two suspects, identified as Chiheb Esseghaier, of Montreal, and Raed Jaser, of Toronto, received “support from al Qaeda elements located in Iran,” in the form of “direction and guidance.” The two men’s plot called for the destruction of a train bound from the US to Canada in an effort to sow terror and harm the economies of both countries.

Esseghaier, a doctoral student at the Institut National de la Recherche Scientifique, has a bachelors degree in Industrial Biology and a masters degree in Industrial Biotechnology, according to his Linkedin page. He lists Nanotechnology as one of his “Skills & Expertise.” He attended college in Tunis and is thought to be a Tunisian.

Before the image was taken down sometime last night, Esseghaier’s Linkedin page displayed in image of al Qaeda’s black flag. This flag was first used by al Qaeda in Iraq but has been adopted by other al Qaeda affiliates.

The remainder of the article is a good backgrounder on the Iran-al Qaeda relationship, including at least a couple of “secret agreements” that allow al-Qaeda transit through Iran.

While the above quote doesn’t claim a direct Iranian role in the plot, unlike the statement quoted in the Washington Examiner piece yesterday, I think it’s reasonable to assume the Iranians at some level knew and approved of what the two were planning and the encouragement al-Qaeda gave them.  Al-Qaeda is in the country on their sufferance, and there is no way Tehran is not going to keep tabs on what they’re doing, lest they unexpectedly find themselves the targets of retaliation after, say, another 9/11-style attack. So, while there’s no direct evidence of Iranian foreknowledge, it’s a safe bet they did.

Which should make the next meeting Canada and Iran’s diplomats quite… interesting.

Also, while there’s a coincidence in time, there’s no evidence I’ve seen of a connection between the train plot and the Boston Marathon attacks. What I do think it hints at, however, is just how many jihad plots there are “out there,” waiting to be put into action. Again, if Esseghaier and Jaser were a pair of “lone wolves” encouraged by al-Qaeda, similar to what may be the truth about the Tsarnaevs, how many others are out there?

Comforting thought, no?

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Breaking: Canadians foil Iranian/al Qaeda New York-Toronto train attack

April 22, 2013

They love hitting mass transportation. Breaking in The Washington Examiner:

Canadian security officials announced today that they thwarted a terrorist attack on a passenger train reportedly traveling from New York City to Toronto, planned by two men allegedly tied to al Qaeda.

“I commend our Canadian counterterrorism partners, particularly the Royal Canadian Mounted Police, for their efforts in stopping a major terrorist plot which was intended to cause significant loss of human life including New Yorkers,” Rep. Peter King, R-N.Y., said in a statement today.

The attack had Iranian backing. “They are elements of al Qaeda in Iran,” a Canadian police official told reporters during the press conference while identifying the al Qaeda affiliate that was involved in the attack. “What the investigation has demonstrated is that the support being received was in the form of direction and guidance.”

Emphasis added. Say it after me, folks:

This is war, and they’re still trying to kill us.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Moving from tragedy to farce, the UN condemns the evil that is… Canada

May 17, 2012

Well, at least they’re on the same wavelength as South Park.

No, seriously. The “Special Rapporteur on the right to food” for the UN Human Rights Council (We’ve met them before) has decried the lack of “a national right to food strategy” in one of the wealthiest, best-run democracies on the planet:

“Canada has long been seen as a land of plenty. Yet today one in ten families with a child under six is unable to meet their daily food needs. These rates of food insecurity are unacceptable, and it is time for Canada to adopt a national right to food strategy,” said Olivier De Schutter, the UN Special Rapporteur on the right to food, on the last day of his official visit to the country.*

“What I’ve seen in Canada is a system that presents barriers for the poor to access nutritious diets and that tolerates increased inequalities between rich and poor, and Aboriginal non-Aboriginal peoples. Canada is much admired for its achievements in the area of human rights, which it has championed for many years. But hunger and access to adequate diets, too, are human rights issues — and here much remains to be done.”

The UN human rights expert was nonetheless confident that the country could move towards establishing food systems that deliver adequate and affordable diets for all, and called upon the Canadian government to convene a national food conference that would clarify the allocation of responsibilities between the federal level, the provinces and territories. “All political parties have expressed support for the establishment of a national food policy, and the engagement of citizens through food policy councils across the country is truly impressive. But in order to address them, Canada must first recognize the reality of the challenges it faces,” he stated.

And, at the same time that Canada is heartlessly letting people starve, De Schutter covers all his bases by warning an even great number are obese:

Second, more than one in four Canadian adults are obese, and almost two thirds of the population is overweight or obese, costing at least 5 billion Canadian dollars annually in health care costs and in lost productivity. “This is also a result of poverty: adequate diets have become too expensive for poor Canadians, and it is precisely these people who have to pay the most when they live in food deserts and depend on convenience stores that charge higher prices than the main retailers.”

Over-fed, under-fed, wrongly-fed… Canada just can’t win.

Of course, the UN bureaucrat’s recommendation is… Wait for it… more government intervention in the economy, including (he hints) price regulations and income guarantees for farmers. And, of course, it’s a shame that school meal policies are left to the locals. National planning is the answer.

And it’s not just for access to food. When complaining about the lack of access to nutritious diets, De Schutter subtly suggests a need to control what Canadians eat, too. This guy would be right at home in a North Carolina preschool. Or maybe De Schutter, Mayor Bloomberg, and Michelle Obama could get their own FoodTV show, “Nanny cooks — and you’ll like it!”

Gosh, I don’t know. Call me crazy, but it seems to me that the democratically elected governments of Canada –federal, provincial, and local– can decide for themselves what kind of food policy Canadians need. If Canadians need any at all, since they’re perfectly capable of deciding for themselves what they want to eat and whether they have access to what they need.

Though I’ll grant it’s a bit much to expect a transnationalist statist bureaucrat from the mack-daddy of transnationalist statist organizations to grasp that simple concept, since it means he’d have fewer opportunities for globe-hopping, expenses-paid  trips to hector other people.

Naturally, the Canadian government wasn’t amused, as Reuters reports:

After De Schutter complained in a newspaper interview that no federal cabinet minister had agreed to meet him, Health Minister Leona Aglukkaq, from Canada’s aboriginal Inuit population, met him on Wednesday.

But the meeting did not seem to go well.

“I met with the individual this morning and I found him to be an ill-informed, patronizing academic studying, once again, the aboriginal people, Inuit and Canada’s Arctic from afar,” Aglukkaq told Parliament.

Looks like DeSchutter’s report will get the reception it deserves — a trip to the ash can.

via Nile Gardiner, to whom I give the last observation:

One would think the United Nations would be concerned with real deprivation and hunger, in places like North Korea and Zimbabwe, instead of focusing on one of the richest countries in the world, with among the highest overall living standards on the planet. Even the UN’s own Human Development Index (HDI) ranks Canada sixth in the world out of 187 countries. But then again, De Schutter represents the discredited UN Human Rights Council, which includes in its membership some of the world’s worst human rights abusers, such as China, Cuba, Russia and Saudi Arabia. Its bar has been set so low that even Libya under Colonel Gaddafi was elected to membership. The HRC is a farce, and their latest report on Canada is further proof of it.

Indeed.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Canada stands on principle; Obama goes “meh.”

July 13, 2011

A couple of weeks ago I could barely contain my disgust over the appointment of North Korea as head of the UN Conference on Disarmament. It seems I wasn’t the only one, and it’s great to see a liberal democracy refuse to participate in this disgraceful sham.

Good for you, Canada:

Foreign Affairs Minister John Baird is set to announce Monday that Canada is boycotting the United Nations Conference on Disarmament over North Korea’s involvement, a senior government source told Postmedia News.

So Se Pyong, North Korea’s ambassador, was last week named chair of the Geneva-based group dedicated to promoting global nuclear disarmament.

“North Korea is simply not a credible chair of this UN body as its leaders are working in the exact opposite direction,” the source told Postmedia News on Sunday evening.

“Our government feels this undermines not only the Conference on Disarmament, but the UN itself. And Canada will not be party to that . . . Our government received a strong mandate to advance Canada’s values — freedom, democracy, human rights and the rule of law — on the world stage.”

During North Korea’s term as chair, Canada will not “engage” in the conference, the source said Baird will announce Monday.

Meanwhile for the Obama administration, it’s no “big deal:

The Obama administration will not follow Canada’s lead and boycott a session of the U.N.-linked Conference on Disarmament to protest North Korea’s appointment to the body’s rotating presidency.

“We have chosen not to make a big deal out of this because it’s a relatively low-level, inconsequential event,” State Department spokeswoman Victoria Nuland said Monday.

In one sense, Nuland is right; UN conferences often aren’t “big deals,” serving as little more than occasions to pad a resume, collect a per diem, and shop for things not available in your own country.

On the other hand, if the United States won’t defend the principles on which the commission and the larger UN were founded in the little, easy instances such as this, who should believe we would care in the big instances? By assenting to North Korea’s chairmanship of the conference and lending that act our prestige by our participation, we also say that North Korea’s serial illegal arms-trafficking is “no big deal” and encourage them (and others) to do even more. It’s an example of the broken-windows theory to international relations.

Canada and the Harper cabinet are right in this case, while the Obama administration again shows its casual, amateurish approach to foreign affairs.

via The Jawa Report and Weasel Zippers

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


But… But… But I thought wind power would save the planet!

February 17, 2011

Apparently they don’t do well in harsh winters, which isn’t good for their customers:

A $200-million wind farm in northern New Brunswick is frozen solid, cutting off a supply of renewable energy for NB Power.

The 25-kilometre stretch of wind turbines, 70 kilometres northwest of Bathurst, has been shut down for several weeks due to heavy ice covering the blades. GDF Suez Energy, the company that owns and operates the site, is working to return the windmills to working order, a spokeswoman says.

“We can’t control the weather,” Julie Vitek said from company headquarters in Houston.

No, really?

Let’s see. Wind power has been sold to us by the Green Statists as one of the perfect solutions for a problem that does not exist, anthropogenic global warming. Trouble is, wind turbines are no good when the wind is too slow or too fast. They still require old-fashioned electrical power stations to be online constantly as backups. They are sound neither from an economic nor an engineering standpoint. The need lavish subsidies to turn a profit at all.

And now they can’t keep the heat running when you need it most.

Genius.

via Fausta

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Free speech is fine, unless it might offend

January 16, 2011

Now a music-industry censor is telling radio stations to retroactively edit songs to avoid offending anyone, eh?

Canadian radio station have been warned to censor the 1985 Dire Straits hit “Money for Nothing,” after a complaint that the lyrics of the Grammy Award-winning song were derogatory to gay men.

A St. John’s, Newfoundland, station should have edited the song to remove the word “faggot” because it violates Canada’s human rights standards, according to ruling this week by the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council.

A unnamed listener to OZ FM in the Atlantic Coast province complained to the industry watchdog last year after hearing the song, which features Dire Straits frontman Mark Knopfler and fellow rock star Sting.

The council said it realized Dire Straits uses the word sarcastically, and its use might have been acceptable in 1985 when the best-selling “Brothers in Arms” album was released, but said it was now inappropriate.

“The decision doesn’t really relate to the Dire Straits song at the end of the day, the decision relates to the word in question,” Ron Cohen, the council’s chairman, told the Canadian Broadcasting Corp.

Actually, Mr. Cohen, it relates to the unalienable right to free speech and treating people like adults who can handle hearing a mildly naughty word without having their self-esteem crushed, particularly when meant satirically. (And even if it were meant as a genuine insult.) Tell me, where does it stop? Re-editing TV reruns? Forbidding the performance of Mozart’s Idomeneo? Censoring poetry readings on the air? If it may give offense, shall we then ban The View? (Okay, you might have an argument with that one.)

Really, this kind of paternalism has no place in a liberal democracy, whether done by the government or a non-governmental agency, and Canadians should give the nannies at the CBSC an uncensored piece of their mind.

RELATED: Other posts on Canada and free speech.

(Crossposted at Sister Toldjah)


Canadian Coptic Christians have a target on their backs

January 3, 2011

As part of their war against Arab Christians, Al Qaeda has targeted and threatened more than 100 Canadian Copts:

More than 100 Canadian-Arab Christians are listed on an Al Qaeda-affiliated website, apparently targeted because of their alleged role in attempting to convert Muslims.

Some of those named say concerned Canadian intelligence officials have contacted them.

The Shumukh-al-Islam website, often considered to be Al Qaeda’s mouth piece, listed pictures, addresses and cellphone numbers of Coptic Christians, predominantly Egyptian-Canadians, who have been vocal about their opposition to Islam.

In a forum on the website, one member named Son of a Sharp Sword, says “We are going to return back to Islam and all of the Mujahedeen (holy warriors) will cut off their heads.”

Three pages of the fundamentalist, Arabic-language website titled “Complete information on Coptics” sets to “identify and name all of the Coptics throughout the world who hope to defame Islam,” The website calls the Coptic Christians living abroad “dogs in diaspora,” a derogatory reference in Arabic.

Tell me again this isn’t a religious war.

The persecution and pogroms Christians in the Islamic world has grown so bad, that the Coptic Pope has considered canceling Christmas celebrations.

via DaveedGR on Twitter


Smart Power goes to Canada

March 30, 2010

America wants Canada to keep at least some forces in Afghanistan. Canada, after all, makes an important contribution to the war effort there, and Prime Minister Harper has been under pressure to withdraw. So, in the era of Smart Power(tm), how does Secretary of State Clinton go about doing this?

By first insulting the Canadians at a meeting hosted by Canada:

Clinton rebukes Canada at Arctic meeting

It was supposed to be a meeting of polar pals. But a high-level session on the vast opportunities opening up in the Arctic got off to a chilly start Monday, as Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton criticized Canada for leaving several players off the guest list.

The Canadian government invited foreign ministers from the other four countries with Arctic coastlines — Russia, Norway, Denmark and the United States — to hold talks on developing the region, which is being transformed by climate change.

Within a few years, the Arctic’s ice blanket could melt for at least a few months a year, opening up access to huge oil and gas reserves, as well as a new shipping lane. Under a United Nations treaty, the Arctic countries can claim ownership of natural resources up to 200 miles off their coasts.

Clinton noted that the three other nations in the Arctic region — Sweden, Finland and Iceland — had complained they were not included in the meeting. She said she also was contacted by representatives of indigenous groups in the area that had been left off the list.

“Significant international discussions on Arctic issues should include those who have legitimate interests in the region,” Clinton said, according to a prepared copy of her remarks to the meeting, which was closed to press. “And I hope the Arctic will always showcase our ability to work together, not create new divisions.”

You would think the Secretary of State of the United States would understand the basics of diplomacy, including the idea that issues between two nations rarely stand in isolation and that the status of one may affect the other. Or how about common courtesy, such as not chastising a valued ally in public over minor protocol issues?

Of course, this boorish behavior rests on one of the pillars of Obama Doctrine, that the United States has no real friends or enemies, and that conflict is reduced when we are an impartial arbiter between all. As Seth Cropsey described it in his article “Remedial Diplomacy,”

Barack Obama’s theory is that partisanship is the source of conflict. There should be no more red states or blue states. Every political choice is a false choice, an example of old thinking. Similarly on the international stage. If the United States distanced itself from its allies and drew closer to its adversaries, conflict would be reduced. The United States could then serve as the international mediator rather than as the guarantor of global order and an agent of democratic political change.

But, the real world doesn’t operate that way. Cozening up to North Korea, Russia, China, Iran, and Venezuela, while backhanding Great Britain, Israel, Canada, Poland, and the Czech Republic will only signal to our allies that we’re unreliable while telling our rivals that we’re feckless.

This is what they meant by “smart power?” It’s more like a recipe for a weakened United States and, therefore, a more dangerous world.

(via Hot Air)


A gigantic hypocrite, eh?

March 6, 2010

About a month ago, we reported on Danny Williams, the Premier of Newfoundland and Labrador in Canada who suddenly fled the Canadian single-payer health-care system to seek treatment for a heart ailment in the United States. We wondered at the time was his reason was.

It’s simple, he’s an elitist hypocrite:

An unapologetic Danny Williams says he was aware his trip to the United States for heart surgery earlier this month would spark outcry, but he concluded his personal health trumped any public fallout over the controversial decision.

In an interview with The Canadian Press, Williams said he went to Miami to have a “minimally invasive” surgery for an ailment first detected nearly a year ago, based on the advice of his doctors.

“This was my heart, my choice and my health,” Williams said late Monday from his condominium in Sarasota, Fla.

“I did not sign away my right to get the best possible health care for myself when I entered politics.”

Good for you, Danny. I’m sure your constituents will understand while they have to languish on a wait-list for needed treatment or even participate in a lottery to get an appointment with a doctor, because the Canadian system you vehemently defend rations care for those who can’t jet off to Miami.

But don’t think it’s a reflection on Canadian health care:

Williams said his decision to go to the U.S. did not reflect any lack of faith in his own province’s health care system.

“I have the utmost confidence in our own health care system in Newfoundland and Labrador, but we are just over half a million people,” he said.

“We do whatever we can to provide the best possible health care that we can in Newfoundland and Labrador. The Canadian health care system has a great reputation, but this is a very specialized piece of surgery that had to be done and I went to somebody who’s doing this three or four times a day, five, six days a week.”

Danny, buddy. Do you notice something off here? If your system didn’t ration care, you wouldn’t have had to flee across the border! Don’t you think it somewhat telling that the free-market system to the south had just the guy you needed available right away?

Wouldn’t it be nice if all Canadians could enjoy that level of service?

I guess Newfie pols are more important than Average Joe Canuck.

Oh, folks, lest I forget: Danny plans to get the Canadian health service to pay for his medical vacation in Miami:

Williams also said he paid for the treatment, but added he would seek any refunds he would be eligible for in Canada.

“If I’m entitled to any reimbursement from any Canadian health care system or any provincial health care system, then obviously I will apply for that as anybody else would,” he said.

Jerk.  Waiting

(via International Liberty)

LINKS: More at Sister Toldjah.


Private health care me, not for thee

February 3, 2010

From the Department of Hypocrisy: the Premier of Canada’s Newfoundland and Labrador province, Danny Williams, has run screaming from Canada’s vaunted universal health-care system to seek treatment in the US:

Newfoundland Premier Danny Williams will undergo heart surgery later this week in the United States.

Deputy premier Kathy Dunderdale confirmed the treatment at a news conference Tuesday, but would not reveal the location of the operation or how it would be paid for.

“He has gone to a renowned expert in the procedure that he needs to have done,” said Ms. Dunderdale, who will become acting premier while Mr. Williams is away for three to 12 weeks.

“In consultation with his own doctors, he’s decided to go that route.”

Mr. Williams’ decision to leave Canada for the surgery has raised eyebrows over his apparent shunning of Canada’s health-care system.

I’ll say. So, the single-payer wonder that is Canada’s health-care system couldn’t provide the needed specialist, whereas the free-market system in the US could? Or was it that the rationing that is inevitable in such systems wouldn’t allow him access fast enough? That would perhaps be ironic, and certainly hypocritical, since Williams has been a fervid defender of Canada’s system.

These are interesting questions, and the answers may well be relevant to the health-care debate here in the United States. We want to wish Premier Williams well with his surgery and hope he has a speedy recovery (and, if this is heart trouble, perhaps he should lay off the poutine?); we’ll be very interested in what he has to say on his return.

LINKS: More from Neo-neocon, The Jawa Report, Big Government, and Fausta.


Our future under ObamaCare

December 5, 2009

Journalist John Stossel explores the differences between a medical system run by the government, in this case, Canada’s, and ours, which is run on a for-profit basis.

The comparison isn’t inspiring:

Is this what you want to go through? Really?

(via The Jawa Report)

UPDATE: The video has since been removed from YouTube, but you can watch this other Stossel piece from ABC.


Death panels in Ontario?

October 5, 2009

As in, the Canadian province:

Choosing health

Opponents of U.S. President Barack Obama’s proposed health care reforms have just been handed a powerful talking point by Ontario’s government.

Democrats cobbling together the U.S. plan want to include a “public option” — a taxpayer-funded health-care alternative that would enable Americans to choose between private medical insurance plans or a government-backed system similar to Canada’s. Opponents of the public option maintain that Canadian-style health care would entail rationing, caps on care, bureaucratic interference in medical decision-making and even “death panels” deciding when the ill become too expensive to save.

Most Canadians believe this is a gross exaggeration of reality. But then how to characterize Ontario’s decision to cut off funding for colorectal cancer patients taking a life-prolonging drug, in order to save $9-million a year?

Say it after me: the only way government can control medical costs in a system that covers everyone is by rationing care.

Looks like she was right, again.


Three ObamaCare videos you should see

August 22, 2009

The first is from ABC’s John Stossel, who shreds the Obama administration’s so-called health care “reform” plan. William Jacobson calls this scary. I agree.

Next, a US Marine carpet bombs his congressman over ObamaCare:

And yes, the media has already started attacking this Marine. More at Hot Air.

Finally, via Zombywolf we have video of the ever-bombastic Bill O’Reilly interviewing the former head of the Canadian Medical Association about what he thinks of the proposed US reforms:


Smoot-Hawley-Obama

May 15, 2009

President Obama has already ignited a trade war with Mexico, but you ain’t seen nothing yet:

Ordered by Congress to "buy American" when spending money from the $787 billion stimulus package, the town of Peru, Ind., stunned its Canadian supplier by rejecting sewage pumps made outside of Toronto. After a Navy official spotted Canadian pipe fittings in a construction project at Camp Pendleton, Calif., they were hauled out of the ground and replaced with American versions. In recent weeks, other Canadian manufacturers doing business with U.S. state and local governments say they have been besieged with requests to sign affidavits pledging that they will only supply materials made in the USA.

Outrage spread in Canada, with the Toronto Star last week bemoaning "a plague of protectionist measures in the U.S." and Canadian companies openly fretting about having to shift jobs to the United States to meet made-in-the-USA requirements. This week, the Canadians fired back. A number of Ontario towns, with a collective population of nearly 500,000, retaliated with measures effectively barring U.S. companies from their municipal contracts — the first shot in a larger campaign that could shut U.S. companies out of billions of dollars worth of Canadian projects.

This is not your father’s trade war, a tit-for-tat over champagne or cheese. With countries worldwide desperately trying to keep and create jobs in the midst of a global recession, the spat between the United States and its normally friendly northern neighbor underscores what is emerging as the biggest threat to open commerce during the economic crisis.

Rather than merely raising taxes on imported goods — acts that are subject to international treaties — nations including the United States are finding creative ways to engage in protectionism through domestic policy decisions that are largely not governed by international law. Unlike a classic trade war, there is little chance of containment through, for example, arbitration at the World Trade Organization in Geneva. Additionally, such moves are more likely to have unintended consequences or even backfire on the stated desire to create domestic jobs.

This is a disaster in the making. The passage of the protectionist Smoot-Hawley tariffs under Herbert Hoover took the severe recession of 1929 and turned it into a full-blown global depression by choking off international trade. The last thing you want to do in a recession is put barriers in the way of people making money, which is just what Smoot-Hawley did – and now the Democrats and the President want to repeat the Republicans’ mistake? The last three decades have seen a massive expansion of globalized, interlocked capitalism, in which jobs in Ohio might be dependent on sales in India of products made with parts from Canada. Obama’s boneheaded move takes a giant ax to that structure and threatens to chop it to pieces — along with any hope of real recovery, which depends on trade.

I just don’t get it. You would think a Columbia and Harvard-educated lawyer, whose campaign and supporters told us time and again that we should vote for him for his thoughtfulness and superior judgment, would remember what he should have learned in basic economics: trade generates wealth. But then this is another example of Barack Obama’s disturbing ignorance of History, not just Economics.

I can’t believe he’s this stupid; no one gets to the Presidency who’s that dumb (no matter what ever so tolerant liberals say about conservatives). Is it just the naive arrogance of one who assumes he (and we) will suffer no consequences for his actions, as Dan Riehl suspects? Or is it, as Jim Geraghty argues, all about the taking, expanding, and retention of power?

You tell me. I dont know

(hat tip: Tigerhawk)

 

RELATED: Instapundit gives a graphic example of how Obama preaches one thing and then does exactly the opposite. Maybe he thinks we’re the stupid ones?