I know, I know, what's new and we've already heard today about Michael Ignatieff's problems with Quebec, notably fine coverage by my colleague Susan Delacourt. Still, I'll add my two cents.
An indication various wings of the federal party aren't talking to each other came for me a few weeks ago in the course of research for a Parliament returning story. After interviewing House Leader Ralph Goodale, we talked about who else was plugged into what I wanted to know and he quickly said Denis Coderre, who yesterday resigned as Quebec lieutenant. This rarely happens on a story but Goodale said to pass on to Coderre he had suggested I phone, gave me his numbers and said he hoped Coderre would make time. Coderre didn't return several messages, which is surprising when the message comes with a personal note from the house leader. It was quickly apparent within a few days of the Goodale phonecall he (Goodale) wasn't in Ignatieff's loop in terms of plans for an immediate (if possible) non-confidence vote - or even on Iggy's view of the workings of the Employment Insurance committee. I figured Coderre didn't give a fiddler's fart and, since then, we've seen the splintering within caucus goes much deeper. Shades of Turner and Dion.
I've been lucky enough to have been on a panel at the Toronto Star's tent at the Word on the Street festival before, however yesterday was something special. The crowd was bigger and questions were great. No soft peddling. The audience told us what we're not covering adequately. That readers want more issue journalism during election campaigns came through loud and clear to my group: Ian Urquhart, editorial page editor, National Editor Tim Harper and me. Our session, gracefully moderated by the Star's Geoff Pevere, delved into Canada-U.S. relations and the differences/similarities between the two systems. Readers (and I assume we had a lot of Star readers, if not, please subscribe because you're my kind of reader) commented on the genesis of 9/11 (The massive 9/11 Commission Report provides some interesting reading) conservative talk show radio including Rush Limbaugh and, of course, medical care north and south of the border, or lack thereof. And those topics were for starters.
I carried my little Sureshot so I could take photographs for PoliticalDecoder but, became so lost in the discussion, I left it in my pocket. Smart. Next time.
It's often hard for journalists to judge how readers respond to our work because so much of it is done online these days with anonymous commentary. I'm not against that, although I think an opinion worth having deserves a name, but I'm frustrated with the breakdown of a comment feature that seems increasingly dominated by (mainly) Conservative and Liberal war room/cap-P-Partisans to whom the individual story means nothing. They sit in basements growing their toenails and twiddling their little typing fingers ready to hit the keyboards for the party line. (I'm kidding, the war rooms aren't underground.) Then, there's a smaller percentage of people who aren't Partisans but have their minds made up on an issue beforehad and use the story to get their views across. Now that's fine, although they too often attribute statements or facts to the story that aren't there. We invite comment and I applaud readers with opinions who take the time to write to us. (I'd still like names.) But my favorite comments come from readers who clearly have read the story involved and react - negatively or positively - to the actual contents. These readers appear to compose a very small percentage of the online commentators and you can pick out their offerings, just as you can the Liberal or Conservative professionals. When I have time to read comments on mine and other stories, theirs are most interesting because I know the story has added something to the debate. Whether they agree or not is secondary.
My hearty thanks to all the people who came to our panel (I could describe some of the crowd, but next time I'll bring my camera) and assure them we took their comments and suggestions seriously. The only thing I regret yesterday was Tim didn't get a chance to talk more about covering the Obama presidential election campaign. Last year, he wrote about one meaty piece about being on the road with Obama - "too much bad coffee and an unhealthy dependence on MapQuest" - that had me on the floor laughing. I've walked in Tim's shoes as Washington bureau chief and it was the best piece I've ever read. Terrific, so take the time to read it now if you can. I could have brought it up yesterday on the panel but then all the questions would have gone to Tim, leaving nothing for Ian amnd me. I know, I'm such a noble soul. Again, just kidding. Sorta.
From what I hear, our other panels were a hit as well.
* * *
Bright Star, Dark Hole: In the I'm-no-critic-but I saw Bright Star on the weekend, on the recommendation of Star movie critic Peter Howell, who has evolved into one of the best critics anywhere. (Peter, I like you even more than Anthony Lane.) Yesterday, as he finished his Word on the Street panel I hustled over to him to insist he owes me a Saturday night movie of my choice. Peter was dead right when he said Campion strived for "everydayness" in his Howell review, but then went on to give the flick 3 stars. Well, she got her everydayness, and the next and the next . . . Bleeeccccccchhhhhhhhh.
It was awful. I rate Campion's The Piano among my favorite films of all time, so I had high expectations. Bad script, dull, dull acting, great cinematography. I should have been forewarned last week by her comment to Howell and another piece iby Rick Groen - The Power ofher Restraint - in which she talked about having to strip her actors down to the basics.
“For example, we didn't rehearse this in the normal way. I didn't like the idea of doing a big period-piece bio, so we were already working against the fact that we had costumes on. It was quite a challenge for some members of the cast to feel that they didn't have to present a character, but just to slip into that quiet space. It was uncomfortable for them. They were getting grumpy. I'd see them doing stuff, I could see the gears turning, and I'd look at it and think, ‘I'm so not interested in what you're doing. Can you stop? Can you just stop ?' They were scared at times, but it was weirdly inside me that I just couldn't react to anything fake. ‘When you stop acting,' I said, ‘I'll look.' It's such a relief when screen actors don't act.”
Thought, I'll wager the stuff they were doing was thinking. Without it, the characters came across as dumb as spoons.
The relationship between Fannie Brawne and John Keats had to be passionate and compelling for their immortal love affair to carry the movie.
I should note the animal who played the Brawne family cat was terrific. When he/she played with the pages of a slim book of poetry, you totally forgot this was an actor cat. Kudos there, and let's keep it in mind at award time.
Even though there were loud yawns throughout, people sat at the end and listened to the dull Keats character read a very long poem as the credits rolled. I don't remember the name because my mind was screaming to get out but I was too polite to push my way down the row. (I know my friend would have died of embarrassment.) But it was like being in church as a child; somebody farts, keeps farting even, and everybody smells it but sits respectfully, without expression, as if nothing has happened, waiting for to be dismissed at the end of the service. Thast's how the crowd reacted Saturday night, as if walking out would have shown them to have been incapable of understanding the genius of Keats. They sat as if nobody had farted.
But read Peter's review to make up your mind. As I said: I'm no critic.
* * *
You can never be too careful. The Stephen Harper government has given the Dalai Lama a wide berth during his trip to Canada this week. Even the Governor-General cancelled a meeting with the Tibetan spiritual leader upon whom Harper bestowed honorary Canadian citizenship a few years ago.
Thoughts are contagious. Anybody that calm obviously must have something up his sleeve, other than freedom for Tibet. Could the Dalai Lama have something to do with that 2 minute 17 (or so) second blackout on FlashForward?
I know, China would frown. But jeez. What's next? Book-burning? I've heard approved book lists will be ready for circulation in Canada next spring. Joke.
Well, except maybe Megan Fox's dress size. I've been meaning to give a plug to the LRC (Canadian Literary Review) since I began reading it a year ago. It's nothing fancy in terms of production, but it brims with great reads on politics, the economy, history, music, literary reviews and pop culture (well, maybe you will get that dress size after all) and it's worth a look. The current issue has a fascinating lead story by John Ralston Saul about how southern solutions don't work in the North (I'd like to give you the title, but can't seem to find the most recent issue online and don't have my copy in the office) and the September issue is highlighted by Joseph Heath's, "Did the Banks Go Crazy?"
It's edited by esteemed arts journalist Bronwyn Drainie, and I promise I have no financial stake in the publication (as if I could afford it). I can't say, though, you won't ever see my name as contributor, (I feel like Kristin Chenoweth at the Emmys accepting for the cancelled Pushing Daisies. "I'd like to be on Mad Men. I also like The Office and 24."
* * *
LIke millions of other viewers I tuned into ABC's FlashForward last night because I love the surreal and sci fi (a big Fringe fan) but one line was a real clunker. A guy is drowning in the LA surf (actually hundreds are drowning) and a man on a pier quite a distance away yells down something like: "Hang on. I'll be right there. I'm a doctor." Now I know the fact he's a doctor is a plot development but who would take the time to verify his profession? Oh, did I mention it stars Joseph Fiennes from Shakespeare in Love?
While we're on the general topic, I always get a kick out of TV listings that write, The National (N) or Global News (N). Me, I prefer the old stuff.
Deposed Honduran President Michel Zelaya is back in the country, however under the most extreme circumstances - holed up in the Brazilian embassy with pseudo-president Roberto Micheletti's troops having a field day with protestors.
Amnesty International Canada has reported beatings, arrests and suppression over past days in this volatile situation. There is potential for massive loss of life. Just look at what happened with the shootings a few months ago when Zelaya put a toe across the border for an afternoon in El Paraiso.
I'm surprised Zelaya is back - certainly an act of courage - but it's difficult to believe the democratically-elected president will be allowed to resume his duties. He has not been supported - except with rhetoric and empty acts - by the OAS, or its most powerful members, including Canada and the U.S. since he was kicked out in June. Setting up a task force under Costa Rican president Oscar Arias has appeared to be meaningless; Arias has asked Zelaya to be patient while the clock ticks down to elections still scheduled for November. The negotiations - marked by the unfortunate absence of Arias from the scene because of swine flu this summer - have been fruitless. The military-supported government insists it intends to arrest Zelaya.
Although the U.S. and Canada don't recognize the de facto government, gestures of disapproval have been limp. In my experience as correspondent in Latin American and the Caribbean, coups don't happen without at least a nudge-nudge, wink-wink between U.S. intelligence forces and the local military. Remember, the U.S. has a large regional military base in Honduras and it's a stretch to believe the coup happened in an intelligence vacuum. (That doesn't mean in multifaceted Washington, senior levels of government signed off, or even that more than a few "need-to-know" people were involved. That, we'll know in 30 years.)
However, this situation is extremely dangerous, beyond the precarious position of Hondurans who have placed themselves in the sights of army guns. A deep left-right hemispheric split - arguably the first since Haiti - has developed over Zelaya, with Venezuelan president Hugo Chavez and Brazil's Luiz Ignacio "Lula" de Silva, among others, calling for his return and offering support. Chavez at first threatened military action, which appears extremely unlikely. But these leaders can't be seen to be backing down. If one democratic president is allowed to be removed by coup leaders in the middle of the night and put on a plane to Costa Rica under trumped-up charges, every president is at risk - and the days of the coup in Latin America are not over. U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton was enthusiastic about the Arias mission - but the little else. The OAS has currently sent a mediator to the Honduran capital of Tegucigalpa.
The lack of real support for a president who moved left after his election was evident from the beginning. Latin America has, sadly, largely fallen off the political landscape in northern countries wracked by their own economic turmoil. But, as Canadian filmmaker Peter Raymont pointed out his award-winning documentary about Nicararagua, The World is Watching, events do not go completely unobserved. Raymont later made another documentary, The World Stopped Watching, about Nicaragua's fall from international appeal. But every time democracy is seen to be ignored in the region, it affects opinion in other countires, including Mexico to the north. There, massive social resistance is barely kept suppressed and the massive assault to cross the U.S. frontier remains constant. The leaders of tomorrow's Latin America are watching, forming their opinions about whether Canada and the U.S. are serious about democracy for their countries, or prefer the paper version. So are their disillusioned citizens. Whether Zelaya is reinstated as president will shape their views.
Despite the hype on the Conservative government's website framing Canada's performance going into this week's G-20 meetings in Pittsburgh, Prime Minister Stephen Harper isn't arriving with impressive "societal" indicators. The indicators, which show how Canadians are actually living, are not pretty when it comes to levels of poverty among children, seniors and working-age Canadians. The Conference Board of Canada last week issued its ranking of Canada internationally on a number of such indicators. While Canada ranked 9th out of 17 developed countries overall, it receives poor grades on critical indicators -"all troubling for a wealthy society." Canada receives a "D" grade on the poverty-rate for working-age people and "C" grades on child poverty, income inequality and gender equality. Says Anne Golden, Conference Board president and CEO:
"Considering how wealthy this country is, these rates of poverty are unacceptable. Not only are we not making progress; we are losing ground."
She notes poverty rates among chidren and and working-age people are rising and the rate doubled among seniors between 1995 and 2005. Readers will see more indicators and commentary at the linked sites above, but one statistic leaps out: More than one in seven Canadian children lives in poverty.
Worse, this is not a new phenomenon.
Paul Forster, associate philosophy professor at the University of Ottawa, drew these reports to my attention. He also sent along a link for Dignity for All: The Campaign for a Poverty-free Canada, a campaign to help secure stronger leadership from the federal government in upholding economic and social rights.
As Golden notes for the Conference Board: "Canadians should care about social outcomes. In addition to caring about social justice, a strong social fabric ultimately contributes to sustainable economic prosperity."
The fiasco of the federal health ministry shipping body bags for use by Manitoba First Nations communities to deal with potential H1N1 fatalities has made headlines. The bags - about 200 in total - were neither requested, nor accepted by First Nation chiefs. Manitoba NDP MP Judy Wasylycia-Leis called for an investigation, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff demanded an apology and Health Minister Susan Aglukkaq says as health minister and an aboriginal she is appalled. "It's like someone had taken a knife and run it into my heart," she said.
The story is surreal, stranger than fiction. It was bad enough when health department officials delayed shipping hand sanitizers to Manitoba reserves last spring because the product contains alcohol.
Make a substitution in your mind when you hear reports about the body bags for Manitoba reserves. Imagine, they had been shipped to municipal officials in Thornhill or Coquitlam, Red Deer or Wawa. Do you think the public reaction would have been different? A little stronger, perhaps?
I've been wracking my brain for almost a week now trying to figure out Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff's rationale last week when he said: "I could have been standing here as prime minister of Canada, but I turned it down."
What was it exactly he was turning down? What did I miss?
Ignatieff was responding to Conservative warnings, notably their recent ad campaign, he would support a coalition government. (Oh no, not the dreaded coalition!) Not so, said Ignatieff; he could have supported a coalition to defeat the Conservative budget last January but didn't. If he had, he said, he "could have been standing here as prime minister of Canada. . . "
It's likely the government would have fallen on its budget last January if Ignatieff had continued to support the coalition. But it's a stretch to assume he would have automatically become PM as head of a coalition government. Instead, there might have been another election. Under those circumstances, it's a good bet the Liberals would have formed the government - but not necessarily.
Opinions differ on whether an election would have been the outcome had the government fallen in January. One eminent group of scholars suggests there might not have been. During the bizarre period last January after the House had been prorogued, they discussed constitutional options for the Governor-General - including Gov.-Gen. Michaëlle Jean - in an opinion piece that ran in the Toronto Star. They said:
"When a minority government loses the confidence of the House, the governor general is no longer bound by the advice of the prime minister. The governor general must then exercise what is known as her "personal prerogatives." She may dissolve Parliament and call for a new election or, if the elections have been held relatively recently (opinions range between six and nine months), she may invite the leader of another party to attempt to form a government that would enjoy the confidence of the House."
Given there'd been an election in October, Jean may well have invited Ignatieff to form a government after the budget's defeat. The Liberal leader certainly thinks so. But that's speculation, and Canadian politics have been more than weird lately.
The much missed Don Newman (CBC Newsworld's Politics with Don Newman) wrote an interesting commentary on changing the rules in a Canada where minority governments have become the norm. So far, however, nothing has been changed.
What Michael Ignatieff should have said last week is: "There's a chance I might have been standing here as prime minister of Canada, but I turned it down."
Doesn't sound as good.
* * *
And another thing: Ignatieff was smart enough as new leader to know a coalition, while a short-term solution, might have meant eventual doom. In truth, he wisely turned down a poison pill.
Arguably, the most amusing line in Minister of State for Foreign Affairs Peter Kent's recent admonishment on Honduras is his call to action in seizing the moment for mediation. You'll remember Honduran President Roberto Zelaya was ousted in a military coup in the middle of the night in late June, and hustled onto a plane in his pajamas and flown to nearby Costa Rica. Kent praised the mediation efforts (tabled on July 22) by Oscar Arias, president of Costa Rica and said he'd asked both the deposed president and coup-installed president Roberto Micheletti to "seize this unique opportunity to arrive at a peaceful solution that is in the best interest of all Hondurans." Seize, of course, but not too fast. In fact, Kent reiterated to Zelaya he should "not return to Honduras until such a settlement has been reached."
This much remains clear: Zelaya will not be returning to Honduras as president.
What's not so clear is Canada's position. It's more on the, ah, murky side. The federal government condemned the coup and doesn't recognize Micheletti's government. At the same time, Canada maintains its embassy in Honduras ( as does Honduras in Ottawa) and aid programs are full-steam ahead, as would appear in the press release above and this one from Foreign Affairs - though the wording is pretty tricky.
Today, Canada sent best wishes to Honduras on the occasion of its 188th anniversary of independence. To use a media term for empty flattery, Zelaya can expect prestige sandwiches from Canada, and not much more.
All federal parties offer their share of surprises but our subject today is the federal Liberal caucus and leader Michael Ignatieff's recent pledge in Sudbury he's ready to bring down the government because, among other things, he's so unhappy with Conservative inaction on Employment Insurance. You'll remember a special committee to study EI and come up with solutions over the summer was part of the compromise struck with Prime Minister Stephen Harper during that raucous last week of Parliament before summer break. A few days before Ignatieff threw down the gauntlet in Sudbury, Liberal heavyweights Sen. David Smith, campaign co-chair, and House leader Ralph Goodale told reporters they were unlikely to use their first opportunity in September to introduce a non-confidence motion, with Goodale specifically citing progress on the EI committee. In an interview with Joan Bryden from Canadian Press, Smith called it "irresponsible" to push the election button every time there's an opportunity," adding any election wouldn't be on EI.
In an interview with the Toronto Star, Goodale went further to suggest there was reason for "cautious optimism" at the all-party committee on EI. He said the Conservatives on the committee were listening to Liberal concepts "instead of dismissing them out of hand." That was, he thought, progress, adding he thought it important to judge the returning government's "demeanour . . . and personality" in the House, as well as their proposals on, among other issues, deficit-reduction and infrastructure spending.
"We said we were prepared to work with Stephen Harper to fix Employment Insurance—to make it fair for all Canadians, no matter where they live, for as long as the crisis lasts. Not one single proposal came from the other side—only spin and deceit."
Spin and deceipt are not quite the same as cautious optimism and listening.
EI isn't the only issue for Ignatieff's discontent but it is odd his position would be so different from that of his house leader so soon after Goodale's public comments. It could just mean Messieurs Goodale and Smith were spinning, as politicians are wont to do with the press. Maybe. But it would have been easy for them to tell the media to wait for the Sudbury caucus. What's more likely is Ignatieff was on the high wire in those last few days without a lot of input from party veterans like Goodale and Smith.
For those who like to pore over party innards, that could be significant. Or not.
I've become obsessed by spiders recently after one wove an amazing (to me) web from the Morning Glory vines that grow up my small verandah. It's hardly a new phenomenon for a human being to be overwhelmed by the magnificence of a spider's web but consider me now among the absolutely besotted. My prior fascination was largely confined to watching Daddy Long Legs as a kid on summer days. I don't know what kind of spider this is, although the web is definitely a spiral orb web that glitters in the sun, and my spider's favorite position is at the very centre of her creation. I'm now spending my evenings examing photos of spiders, finding out how long they live, when they lay eggs, etc. etc. Is the weaving all left to females? I hope my buddy won't leave anytime soon and has a plan for survival once the frost hits. If I can get a decent photo over the next few days, I'll post it for arachnophiles out there so you can tell me what it is. (So far, I'm only getting a hazy blob, so don't hold your breath.)
I'm knocked out by what appears to be the No. 1 concern among people who research spiders on the web:
Do they lay eggs in the human body?
Whaaa-aaa-aaa????!!!? Of all the things I worry about in life, that fear somehow has eluded my list. But if I start now, I bet I could imagine all kinds of gruesome scenarios. It's not too late.
It will be two years ago Sunday (Sept. 13, 2007) the UN endorsed a wide-ranging Declaration on the Rights of Indigenous Peoples without Canada - despite critical input from Canadian representatives in the drafting. Canada remains isolated as a non-signatory with the U.S. and New Zealand, and both countries are reviewing their positions. Moreover, a report by Montreal international rights lawyer Paul Joffe, an international rights expert, shows national courts, UN agencies and governments around the world are increasingly turning to the Declaration for guidance in implementing measures to protect Indigenous rights. Alex Neve, secretary general for Amnesty International Canada argues "these major advances highlight the unreasonableness of Canada's position."
* * *
Mark your calendar for another event this weekend: beginning rounds in the National Bible Spelling Bee in the States, with over $200,000 in prize money. There's a bundle of cash that should go to charity! A bible spelling bee is not my idea of a fun weekend, but it looks like a popular (see link) tool for memorizing bible verses among children and youth 7 to 18. In the interest of freedom of religion, Political Decoder searched for news of similar contests on, say, the Koran or Torah, but came up empty. Perhaps the prize money just wasn't there.
Too bad AJ Jacobs is to old to enter. He's the self-described agnostic Jew who wrote the bestseller, My Year of Living Biblically. He'd probably ace the contest, at least Old Testament questions. Take a look at the video to see how much fun he had writing the book.
Now that was a sad gathering this afternoon on the Hill this afternoon when about 200 people - notably Inuit organizations - met to mark World Suicide Prevention Day. The World Health Organization designated the day in 2003 but this is the third straight year Inuit groups have staged a gathering to publicize the suicide problem in Canada's North.
According to Mary Simon, president of the Inuit Tapiriit Kanatami (in an interview with the Canadian Press), the suicide rate among Inuit people is 11 times higher than the national figures, with 83 precent of the suicides people under 30. It's a horrible subject for the little boy (in the Canadian Press photo above) to have to beat his drum about on a sunny September afternoon. Simon urged the federal government to develop a national suicide prevention program and pay for an Inuit action plan on mental wellness. The National Aboriginal Youth Suicide Program is scheduled to end early next year - unfortunate when rates are still so high. Simon told Canadian Press:
"People don't talk about (mental illness) for fear of being ridiculed. When I'm out there today on the lawn of Parliament Hill, I want to shatter the stigma on mental illness and make sure everybody knows it's OK to talk about it, to get help and to embrace life."
We're heading into another federal election, it would appear. Wouldn't it be refreshing to have real debate among all parties about ways to work with aboriginal organizations to actually improve the situation - to revamp or even junk the ministry of Indian Affairs and Northern Development - instead of the usual empty rhetoric? This is a bona fide national emergency.
Major-General C.S. (Duff) Sullivan has been put in an uneviable position with his apppointment to investigate last week's NATO air strikes in Kunduz in which approximately 70 civilians died, according to human rights groups. The German commander who ordered the air strikes on two Taliban-hijacked fuel trucks has been criticized for calling in the strike without proper aerial surveillance. A U.S. general who visited the site of the bombing said German commanders watching images from U.S. aircraft could see civilians gathered around the fuel trucks apparently stuck in the mud.
Sullivan is air war director and deputy director for the International Security Assistance Force. His team will include a U.S. air force officer, a German air force officer and a legal adviser and will co-ordinate with a team reporting to Afghan President Hamid Karzai. (Here's a description of how NATO is involved in Afghanistan through the ISAF.) Sullivan's C.V. look impeccable.
The problem here - regardless of the integrity of Sullivan, a former fighter pilot - is that you've got the military investigating the military. We're told consistently the mission of NATO forces in Afghanistan is to win the hearts and minds of the Afghan people, as well as attempt to secure the country from Taliban insurgents. Justice must be seen to be done. Surely, what appears to be an in-house investigation into civilian deaths isn't the way to do that.
* * *
It's routine for civilian casualities in Afghanistan to be blamed on the Taliban, and there's no doubt the Taliban uses civilians as human shields. However, human rights organizations, including Amnesty International, have urged NATO forces to provide more accountability for civilian deaths. A report earlier this noted 2008 was the most violent year for civilians . . . and "Afghans are increasingly resentful about civilian casualties caused by international forces."
Such critical assessments are nothing new and include a report from Human Rights Watch in 2008. The report talks about the Taliban use of human shields. Nevertheless it insists it's incumbent upon NATO forces to be more vigilent.
One of the more bizarre items in the pages of expense reports released by the McGuinty government this week in the house-clearing at the OLG had to be a claim by Larry Flynn, senior vice-president, gaming. His 2008 salary was $291,974.26 and the item in question was . . . wait for it . . . $250 for his Weight-watchers membership.
Stories have noted there were no clear guidelines and much confusion over what could be claimed by the now-defunct board and fired CEO Kelly McDougald. I'll say.
* * *
Liberal Red for the Winter Olympic Games in Vancouver?
A Globe story suggested yesterday tensions within caucus over leader Michael Ignatieff's huge leap closer to a fall election might have an interesting origin. Tension apparently exists between caucus members nervous about a fall vote and Ignatieff's inner circle "who would love to see him as prime minister for the 2010 Olympics."
If true (not the reticent caucus part, but the Games theory), that would be some argument to place before the public.
Sometimes a single comment offers an entirely new perspective into a period of history one imagines knowing well, in this case the horrific facts concerning the extermination of 6 million Jews by the Third Reich during Second World War. This year, TVO has been running an extraordinary series, The Nazis and the Final Solution, and last night's episode dealt with "Factories of Death" at concentration camps like Auschwitz. It examines the sordid saga of the Vichy government's agreement with the Nazis to co-operate by first rounding up and shipping foreign-born Jews from France to extermination camps, including Auschwitz in Poland. The rationalization for the French was that giving up only foreign-born Jews - many of whom had already fled Nazi persecution in other countries - wasn't as bad as sending French nationals. That, or course, would soon follow.
In 1942, French police took Jewish families from their homes and first separated parents from their children, sending the adults by train to so-called "work camps" in eastern Europe. During the autumn of that year, about 4,000 of these "left-behind" children were sent to live in miserable conditions in the Paris suburbs. The children ranged in age from about 2-3 to 12 and so many of the younger ones were unable to care for themselves, they lived in filth, sleeping on hard floors with the smallest lying in their own excrement. The episode features an interview with a French woman who cared temporarily for these children in Paris, saying aid workers lied to them by promising them they would be reunited with their parents. The children knew better, she said, and many begged to be adopted. The line in last night's episode that really floored me was when she said it was difficult to get any concrete information from the children because most, when asked for identification, were too little to know their names. They said things like:
"I'm Pierre's little brother."
There is no image of this particular child, no photo to identify someone who in a short life would have been loved in a family with at least one sibling until, in the middle of the night, life was ripped apart by a knock at the door. The horror.
These children were taken to train to Auschwitz and gassed, most often within hours of their arrival.
If you haven't tuned into the TVO showings of the series by award-winnng writer/producer Laurence Rees - already shown on the BBC - it is worth watching, albeit painful. There is another episode tonight.
I may have drawn the film, The Boy in the Striped Pajamas, to your attention earlier this year when I saw it, but it's a fictional work on the Holocaust I also think is worth seeing. It's tough to tell you much about it without revealing the twist that is the core of the film but it focuses on the different values we misguided human beings place on life. It is chilling to reflect the Holocaust happened only 60-some years ago - the blink of an eye. Since then the world has witnessed exterminations in Cambodia and Rwanda, to name only two, on a planet where lessons were to have been learned.
Political Decoder by Linda Diebel
Linda Diebel is a veteran political reporter who worked across Canada, including on Parliament Hill, and as the Toronto Star's bureau chief in both Washington and Latin America. She has written two books, Betrayed: The Assassination of Digna Ochoa, and Stéphane Dion: Against the Current.
She's been described as "that mean Diebel person" by President George H.W. Bush and someone "with a good head on her shoulders" by Noam Chomsky. They're probably both right.
TheStar.com
Copyright Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. All rights reserved. The views expressed are those of the writer and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Toronto Star or www.thestar.com. The Star is not responsible for the content or views expressed on external sites.
Distribution, transmission or republication of any material is strictly prohibited without the prior written permission of Toronto Star Newspapers Limited. For information please contact us using our webmaster form. www.thestar.com online since 1996.
Recent Comments