Cialis - Buy Cialis Online

In a Politicswatch news story, “Liberal MP Colleen Beaumier alleged that Canada’s mission in Afghanistan has been a failure and suggested that Afghans were better off under the Taliban.” Beaumier went on to say that all the mission has brought the Afghan people is instability. Under the Taliban she said, “there may have been oppression, but there was not fear for people’s lives every single day because of suicide bombers.”

When I reported previously on this news item, a comment was posted challenging my assertion that life was not in fact better under the Taliban as the Liberal MP suggests. During debate on a recent Liberal motion to recall our troops from fighting the Taliban, Conservative MP Jay Hill dared to call the Taliban “evil.” In a shocking defense of the enemy our troops are fighting, Liberal Defense critic Denis Corderre shouted “This is outrageous! How can he say that?”

For Mr. Corderre and Ms. Beaumier and all the other Liberals who feel that life was better under the Taliban, let me refresh your memory about why we are there fighting to give the Afghan people a chance to live in freedom like we do. I will here begin to post a series of links that document the atrocities of the brutal Taliban and then you can decide whether the challenges of rebuilding a nation are worth protecting innocent lives. These links are unfiltered and be warned that some content may be graphic. (Note: We do not specifically endorse the sites linked below, content is for information only)

1. Interview with Taliban torturer (graphic descriptions)
   
2. US Department of State documents Taliban atrocities.
3. Taliban’s betrayal of the Afghan people.
4. UN Report on mass killings.
5. Taliban rule of terror.
6. Taliban’s brutality of women explored.
7. Taliban uses 12 yr old boy to behead “spy.”
8. Radio address by First Lady, Laura Bush.
   

Liberal outrage becomes more transparent and hollow with each passing day. Last week we witnessed more phony Liberal outrage as they called for the head of the Defense Minister over allegations that Afghan prisoners may have been abused. On Saturday, veteran reporter Joel-Denis Bellavance reported in Montreal’s La Presse, that the former Liberal government had been warned by diplomats in Kabul that Afghan prisoners faced torture in 2003, 2004 and 2005.

“In spite of these warnings, the Martin government decided to sign an agreement with the Karzai government, in December 2005, in order to deliver to the Afghan authorities all the prisoners captured by the Canadian soldiers” the article states. Liberal MP John McCallum was Defense Minister at the time and Bill Graham was Minister of Foreign Affairs. In an interview with La Presse, Mr. McCallum said that he had not seen the reports.

The Liberals had all the same reports of the potential for abuse for years and yet they chose to transfer prisoners to Afghan authorities. It is no secret that torture was commonplace under the Taliban. It is safe to assume that when the Canadian government initiated an agreement with the new, democratically elected Afghan government that prisoners were to be treated fairly.

The 2005 Liberal agreement was insufficient and the Conservative government drew up a new agreement with additional safeguards. As a work in progress, the Conservatives continue to collaborate with their Afghan counterparts to ensure that prisoners are not mistreated. No one is suggesting that the former Liberal government knowingly condoned torture, but the current opposition is not hesitating to level that accusation against the Conservatives. Part of our mission in Afghanistan is to impart higher values to a culture where fair treatment and human rights are often foreign concepts. For the Liberals to exploit accusations by the Taliban to cover their own tracks is unacceptable. Their phony indignation has yielded nothing more than confusion on the subject.

In a move that is sure to incense women’s rights activists across the province, the government cut funding late last week to the Homeless Women’s Shelter in Saint John. One of the shelter’s board members, Dorothy Shephard, said the facility could be forced to close as early as Monday, April 30^th.

A CBC news article on the story reports, “‘Nobody with government or with Family and Community Services has contacted us to see what’s going to happen with these women,’ Shephard said Thursday. ‘We don’t know what’s going to happen. It is our hope that we will find some way to maintain the shelter over the short term, until we rightfully get back the funding that we deserve.’”

The Liberal government had been providing $12,000 per month to the shelter and starting April 30^th funding will be cut back to a contribution of $10,000 per year. Ms. Shephard told CBC news that they will no longer be able to pay their staff and the money is not enough to keep the shelter running. It should be noted that the government that cut the funding to this essential service to women was not the federal government, but Shawn Graham’s provincial Liberal government.

At a time when the federal Conservatives have increased the funding to Status of Women to record levels ($15.3 million), it is inconceivable that the provincial Liberals should be shutting down women’s shelters! We are prepared to stand in solidarity with the cries of outrage that are sure to come from Women’s Groups. This kind of insensitivity cannot be tolerated and MP’s Brian Murphy and Dominic LeBlanc will no doubt be organizing another protest march against these mean-spirited, ideological cuts to women’s programming.

From a story in the London Free Press (Ontario) we read that Green Party leader Elizabeth May’s “voice broke and her eyes filled with tears as she delivered a moving sermon at Wesley-Knox United Church in Wortley Village.”

“Delivering what she called an environmental sermon, May took aim at those she says are pushing or enabling the destruction of the planet. Borrowing a quote she said was made by a foreign dignitary about Prime Minister Stephen Harper, May said his stance on climate change ‘represents a grievance worse than Neville Chamberlain’s appeasement of the Nazis.’”

I have a question: Why is it OK for the leader of a national party to link the Prime Minister of Canada to the “appeasement of the Nazis”? Why was John Baird’s analysis of Kyoto’s economic impact “fear mongering;” while Ms. May’s attack on Mr. Harper as “pushing or enabling the destruction of the planet” is acceptable? How dare she make an analogy between the historical atrocities of the Holocaust and the speculative impact of human carbon emissions? Her comments are nothing short of obscene!

This is the kook that M. Dion has partnered with to “save the planet!” Her over-the-top statements are not far removed from those lately espoused by recent Green party candidate, Kevin Potvin, who wrote that the 9/11 attacks on NYC were “beautiful.” Mr. Potvin went on to say, “The only reason September 11 merits so much attention is because the targets were so supremely symbolic. Corporatism and militarism were struck that morning, and that’s why it’s such big news…I recognized these facts on that fateful day and so did a lot of other people, and I know I wasn’t alone when I heard that little voice inside me say, ‘Yeah, beautiful!’“

There is a reason why the Green Party has always remained on the fringe and it’s becoming increasingly clear that Ms. May is merely a somewhat more palatable part of that fringe. It is disconcerting that a mainstream (though disagreeable) party like the Liberals would continue to collaborate with such extremists. The Hill Times is now reporting that the deal between the Liberals and the Greens may expand to other ridings! This is not only troubling for democracy, but for the future of political debates where the hypocrisy and duplicity of Liberals is becoming legendary.

For those who would note that Ms. May did not make the implication directly, honest brokers would know that quoting another’s assessment in attacking an opponent is tantamount to endorsing it. Clearly this was her intent. There is no link between Stephen Harper and Nazis that is acceptable. There is no analogy between the terrible atrocities of the Third Reich and the environmental debate that is appropriate. Ms. May should be ashamed of herself, and M. Dion should run in the other direction as quick as possible!

Note: It is impossible to do justice to the environmental debate without a bit of substance. For those of you too impatient to read these paragraphs, I have highlighted the key points in bold so that you can follow the train of the argument. - Admin

Environmentalists have made a lot of hot air in opposition to the Conservative government’s “intensity based” targets for reducing greenhouse gas emissions. Here is a stunning fact however: Kyoto Protocol reductions are also intensity based. Kyoto targets are based on population intensity (per capita emissions) whereas the new Conservative government plan is based on economic intensity (per production unit emissions). Both are “intensity based” formulas but according to Kyoto, the greater your population – the more right you have to pollute.

This is why a country like China (the 2^nd largest emitter and soon to overtake the US as #1) is exempt from Kyoto reductions. As a “developing country” the world’s fourth largest economy spews 3650 megatonnes of GHG’s into the atmosphere every year. In contrast, Canada’s figures for the same time period are only 758 megatonnes. In terms of “absolute emissions” China emits 5 times as much as Canada, but they get a free pass (0 reductions required under Kyoto) because their population intensity is much higher than ours.

The same is true of other highly populated countries. In fact, the United States, China, Russia and India combined account for 50% of all emissions worldwide. For one reason or another, none of these countries fall under the reduction demands of the Kyoto Protocol. In contrast, if Canada spends billions to meet all of our Kyoto commitments right now, we would only reduce global emissions by .067%! That hardly seems fair.

One news report says “The official treaty to curb greenhouse-gas emissions hasn’t gone into effect yet and already three countries are planning to build nearly 850 new coal-fired plants, which would pump up to five times as much carbon dioxide into the atmosphere as the Kyoto Protocol aims to reduce. The magnitude of that imbalance is staggering. Environmentalists have long called the treaty a symbolic rather than practical victory in the fight against global warming.”

“By 2012, the plants in three key countries - China, India, and the United States - are expected to emit as much as an extra 2.7 billion tons of carbon dioxide, according to a Monitor analysis of power-plant construction data. In contrast, Kyoto countries by that year are supposed to have cut their CO2 emissions by some 483 million tons… ‘If all those power plants are online by 2012, then obviously it completely cancels out any gains from Kyoto,’ says Gavin Schmidt, a climate modeler with the Goddard Institute for Space Studies, part of the National Aeronautics and Space Administration”

“China is the dominant player. The country is on track to add 562 coal-fired plants - nearly half the world total of plants expected to come online in the next eight years. India could add 213such plants; the US, 72… If only those plants with start dates are built, then the expected emissions from the three nations would total only 1.2 billion tons of CO2, still more than double the required reduction from Kyoto.”

Perhaps the most telling is a statement by David Hawkins, director of the Natural Resources Defense Council’s climate center. In the same report quoted above he tells the research author: “The point is that a relatively small number of countries hold the fate of the planet in their hands in terms of climate change.” And that is exactly the point. Canada with her .067% impact on global warming pales in comparison to the giant emitters like the US, China, Russia and India (all of whom are exempt)!

The new Conservative EcoAction Plan did not kill Kyoto – that happened 10 years ago when the Liberals signed the protocol and watched emissions go up year after year! What the new government has done is finally stopped propping up the corpse. It’s time for the Suzuki Foundation, Climate Action Network, the Sierra Club, et al to finally admit they’ve been courting a dead issue for the better part of a decade.

The Conservatives have put forward a realistic, forward-thinking plan that (get this) will actually start reducing emissions. It is absolutely time to “Turn the Corner” and get on board with “the least flawed alternative for a government stuck on a tightrope between end-ofthe- world environmentalists and pivotal industries hooked on carbon discharge.” (1) Various news organizations reported yesterday Minister Baird’s declaration “‘What we’re representing today does meet Kyoto, if today was 1997. But the reality is that I didn’t decide to do nothing in 1997,’ Baird said. ‘I can’t take responsibility for 10 lost years, but I can fully accept our responsibilities today and we’re doing just that.’”

All the information you need on the Conservative Government’s new EcoAction Plan to address Greenhouse Gas Emissions AND Air Pollution. Follow the link above and familiarize yourself with the substance of this first real action by a Canadian government.

Mr. Dion is advertising his accomplishments in Montreal in 2005, but what was really accomplished? Here is a summary of M. Dion’s accomplishments from none other than the Climate Action Network under the title:

“What was achieved at the 2005 United Nations Climate Change Conference?”

1. “we have launched Kyoto Phase Two… calls for negotiations through an “ad hoc working group” with a goal of completing negotiations… That means concluding negotiations by 2008-9… THIS IS HUGE! It means climate negotiators will be working between now and the next COP”
2. “We passed all the rules to make Kyoto work…”
3. “We enhanced the Clean Development Mechanism”
4. “A decision was also made to prepare well for the discussions at the next COP-MOP, December 2006 in Nairobi”
5. “The … conference in Montreal really shone a spotlight on the progressive elements within the US, beyond the regressive and dangerous Bush Administration… the youth call to protect their future led one (male) US official to cry.”

That’s IT? 182 countries held negotiations under M. Dion’s leadership to launch the next round of Kyoto negotiations? IT’S HUGE that climate negotiators will be working from now until the next conference? They passed rules and made a decision to prepare well for the next discussions? They promoted the environmentalist cause while trashing an unpopular US administration? (No political agenda there eh?)

What was happening while M. Dion and company were emitting hot air? “Facilities also reported emitting greenhouse gases into the air, totaling more than 279 million tonnes CO2 equivalent (279,842,143) in 2005 for all gases, according to Environment Canada’s Greenhouse Gas Emissions Reporting Program.” (Pollutionwatch.org)

What are the Top 5 companies across Canada reporting GHG emissions in 2005? (1) Ontario Power (ON), TransAlta Utilities (AB), Saskatchewan Power (SK), Alberta Power (AB), Nova Scotia Power (NS). Until we find a more environmentally friendly way to produce electricity, the only way to reach Kyoto targets NOW is to cut electricity availability by 1/3. It’s not as easy and painless as the Liberals try to make it out to be.

From a report by CBC today, “Two Canadian human rights activists have asked the International Criminal Court in The Hague to investigate “possible war crimes” by top Canadian defence officials. The request for a probe into the treatment of Afghan prisoners comes from Michael Byers, a political science professor at the University of British Columbia, and William Schabas, another Canadian professor who is director of the Irish Centre for Human Rights in Galway. Byers said he and Schabas sent a letter to the court’s chief prosecutor on Wednesday outlining media reports of ‘serious allegations of misconduct by Canadian soldiers and Canadian decision-makers in terms of transferring detainees into an apparent risk of torture.’”

There has never been any question to date about how Canadian soldiers treat captives. To the contrary, Canada’s soldiers have been praised for their fair treatment of detainees. What has been in question is whether prisoners were possibly abused after they were turned over to Afghan authorities. This is clearly an attempt to smear the Conservative government and our proud military who are serving faithfully in Afghanistan.

The more desperate the opposition gets to embarrass the government, the lower they will stoop to bend public opinion. The Liberals had every opportunity to work with the government to get to the bottom of these troubling allegations, but chose rather to make a public spectacle of the whole affair for political gain! Now that questions about Afghan police mistreating prisoners has morphed into accusations against Canadian soldiers, will the Liberals finally accept the truth and apologize to the military?

Below is a chart depicting the distribution of global greenhouse gas emissions. The countries in red on the right are either not part of the protocol, or they are not required to reduce emissions under its conditions. Therefore Kyoto has no effect at all on fully one-half of greenhouse gas emissions worldwide. On the left side of the pie are countries who have signed Kyoto and are required to reduce emissions. The tiny bright green slice pulled out from the pie at the 9 o’clock position represents Canada’s total emissions. If we were to fully implement our Kyoto reductions, it would only reduce global emissions by about 1/3 of Canada’s tiny slice (that is represented by the yet tinier sliver of bright green in Canada’s segment). Clearly Canada’s tiny sliver of the bright green slice is not nearly enough to save the planet as M. Dion claims.

Friends of the Earth: Kyoto will cost $100 billion. Buzz Hargrove (Canadian Auto Workers union): Kyoto will cost 150,000 jobs in the auto sector alone. Can the Liberals convince you that this gamble is worth reducing global emissions by .067%?

In Parliament this afternoon, Hon. Stockwell Day rose to inform the House that an RCMP investigation into the Jim Hart affair has been concluded. The RCMP was asked to investigate claims by Liberal MP Mark Holland after he lifted private documents marked for movement to the PMO’s office. These misappropriated documents were then sifted through by Liberal operatives in an effort to dig out dirt on Conservatives. Minister Day rose in the house today to declare that he has been cleared once again of these spurious allegations and to demand an apology from Mr. Holland. Once again Liberal attempts to manufacture scandal have blown up in their faces.