Canada on The Huffington Post

Joe Cirincione: Stephen Colbert's Secret Plan to Defend America

2009-12-22T16:18:17Z

Stephen Colbert's plan to string a microscopically thin razor along our entire border is brutal, indiscriminate, dangerous... and smarter than the nuclear defense we now have.

Here is how I learned of his secret plan to defend America. A few weeks ago, I was a guest on his show, The Colbert Report. I came away convinced that Stephen Colbert is as smart as he looks.

He described his plan to me in graphic detail. It is best appreciated by watching his presentation, but here is how the conversation went:

COLBERT: So you're against all weapons?

CIRINCIONE: No.

COLBERT: What about a microscopically thin razor wire that is erected at neck level all around the United States? So as our enemies try to come in - "Like, there's no one guarding the border! Let's run in!" But the razor wire just goes [makes choking noise and pantomimes garroting of enemy].

CIRINCIONE: That absurd, brutal defense is actually more rational than what we do now.

Really? Killing thousands of innocents at the border is more rational than what we do now? Yes.

Let's review:

The Colbert National Defense Posture

Colbert was straight-faced when he proposed his micro-wire defense, so let's indulge his strategy for a second. Say we spend $20 billion to string up the wire defense around the United States. The wire cannot discriminate between innocents and evildoers, and instead kills tens of thousands of men, women and children. Terrorists simply find an easy way around the wire to attack the United States. As a result of our "defense," thousands of innocents have died, our strategy is directly responsible for their gruesome deaths, and the U.S. gets attacked anyway.

The United States' Nuclear Defense Posture

The United States spends at least $52.4 billion a year maintaining a nuclear arsenal of some 10,000 nuclear weapons. 2000 of these hydrogen bombs are poised on the tips of long-range missiles and bombers ready to launch at a moment's notice. One miscalculation or accident with just one of our bombs would destroy a city, killing hundreds of thousands of men, women and children.

Worse, Russia could make the same error with their 13,000 nuclear weapons. If one of their missiles is fired our way, or if terrorists get and use just one of these weapons, an American city is obliterated.

Wait, it gets worse. What if Russia makes another early warning blunder like they did in 1995? Then, Russian military officials mistook a Norwegian weather rocket for a US submarine-launched ballistic missile with 8 nuclear warheads. They thought they were under attack. For the first time in the atomic era, the Russian military opened up the "nuclear football" -- the remote control for Russia's thousands of nuclear warheads -- and told then-President Boris Yeltsin to push the button.

Fortunately, Yeltsin did not believe them. But what if that same mistake repeats again, and this time, with relations tense, the Russians launch even a fraction of their arsenal? Goodbye Colbert Nation.

Postures in Review

Both the Colbert strategy and the current U.S. nuclear strategy are insane. Both are immoral, expensive, and dangerous to American security. At least the dreamt-up Colbert strategy would kill a lot less innocent people.

This is why a growing bipartisan group of national security experts see nuclear weapons as a security liability, not an asset. (I doubt they considered the Colbert strategy.)

Put Nukes on Notice

Colbert agrees. In his interview with me, he agreed to reduce from today's 23,000 weapons to a little over one hundred:

COLBERT: Okay, so let's get it down to only being able to destroy the world once. I think anything above that you're being greedy.

CIRINCIONE: I will take that deal.

COLBERT: Good, at least we agree on one thing - to destroy the world once.

Previously on his show, Stephen promised Jordan's Queen Noor to support the Global Zero plan to eliminate all nuclear weapons. Reducing the roles, missions, and numbers of existing arsenals is a step in the right direction.

Stephen should now harness the power of the Colbert Nation to put nuclear weapons on notice. He should list nukes on his "On Notice Board" alongside such malicious forces as grizzly bears and, arguably, above Canadian Iceholes. Bring this threat down.

Lester Sloan: Symbol of Black History on the Auction Block: From the Detroit Stories

2009-12-21T08:39:48Z

The announcement was buried among hundreds of others in the special section of the Detroit newspaper informing readers of properties in foreclosure in Wayne County. But Second Baptist Church, located at 461 Monroe Avenue Avenue, is no ordinary piece of property. It is a part of the American landscape that, like the Statue of Liberty, represented hope and a new beginning for those fleeing the tyranny of slavery in America for a new beginning in Canada. Second Baptist Church served as a end-station of the Underground Railroad. The announcement of the pending foreclosure for back taxes was akin to putting an important symbol of Black History on the auction block.

"This is ours," my mother opined the next day from the other end of the phone, when I mentioned the announcement during our usual morning conversation. "It's our responsibility to save it. People on Social Security can do this. I'll put in twenty dollars, and add a little more if needed."

My mother is a firm believer that a little action by many can pay big dividends. "If everyone is willing to pick up a stick, no one will have to carry a log," she says. It is this kind of determination and dedication that helped to make Second Baptist the symbol that it became.

Located in the city's historic Greektown, the congregation was established in 1836. Thirteen former slaves broke off from First Baptist Church, ironically because of its discriminatory practices, and established their church at its Monroe street location, less than a mile from the Detroit River, a waterway to freedom. Sojourner Truth, John Brown, and Frederick Douglass were just a few of the abolitionist associated with the church.

George De Baptiste, a member of Second Baptist and a Detroit businessman, brought a steamboat, the T Whitney, to take runaways across the river to Canada. Because blacks were not allowed to captain a ship, he had to hire a white man, Captain Atwood, a dedicated abolitionist, to pilot the ship. Baptiste, along with other member of the congregation, would also hide fugitive slaves in their homes before making the crossing.

Runaway slaves were sheltered in the cavernous rooms of the basement of Second Baptist before making the night crossing of the river led by the so-called "conductors" of the Underground Railroad. Starting in 1936, more than 5000 former slaves passed through Second Baptist on their way to freedom from what became the largest African American Church in the Midwest.

In later years, Second Baptist was also instrumental in helping blacks who migrated to Detroit find employment and housing. Following the implementation of Henry Ford's $5-per-day pay for assembly line workers, Second Baptist, working with Ford officials, assisted in the recruitment of black workers for the River Rouge Plant and other facilities.

This historic church played a large role in helping African Americans move from chattel to citizenship in America. It is not only, as my mother said, ours to save, but also ours to cherish. It is an important part of the country's history.

Blame Canada: Canada's Bad Guy Status In Copenhagen

2009-12-17T05:53:47Z

You used to be able to count on the United States to be the bad guys at United Nations climate conferences. But this year, while the Obama administration's pledges aren't as ambitious as some might like, the US government is more willing to combat global warming than it has been for years. That's left our northern neighbor, Canada, to emerge as the summit's major stinker.

Doughnuts For Dorgan: Drug Reimportation Killed In Deal That Might Get Cheaper Drugs For Seniors

2009-12-15T20:22:22Z

President Obama and the Senate leadership can't whip up the votes necessary to pass a public option or even a Medicare buy-in compromise, but they didn't have any trouble persuading 30 Democrats to vote against prescription drug reimportation Tuesday night -- thus preserving the deal cut between the Senate Finance Committee, the White House and Big Pharma.

The amendment's sponsor, Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.), was asked after the vote if Democratic leadership opposed his amendment in order to preserve the deal.

"Well, and they apparently did," said Dorgan. "The last seven days, we've seen a lot of votes stripped away. What did we get, 51 votes tonight for my amendment? I believe seven days ago we had sufficient votes to pass it, but I think what is happening in the intervening period is other things developed. It's a great disappointment because it seems to me very hard to do health care reform without doing something about the escalating prices for prescription drugs."

The amendment had been scheduled to come up for a vote last week, but was held up amid much speculation that Dorgan had the votes. The vote Tuesday was 51-48, or nine shy of the 60 needed to overcome a filibuster. A total of 30 Democrats and independent Joe Lieberman of Connecticut voted against it.

One of those things that developed in the intervening period: a deal to kill the Dorgan amendment in exchange for closing the so-called doughnut hole -- the period of time when Medicare recipients must pay the full cost of drugs.

HuffPost asked Sen. Sheldon Whitehouse (D-R.I.), who is generally supportive of reimportation but voted against, why he did so.

"The colloquy yesterday, between Leader [Harry] Reid and Chairman [Max] Baucus and Chairman [Chris] Dodd, did not happen in a vacuum," said Whitehouse, carefully choosing his words. A colloquy is a public conversation on the Senate floor that often is used to ratify a deal struck in private.

What was the subject of the colloquy?

"Closing the doughnut hole," said Whitehouse. A senate Democratic aide confirmed that the doughnut-hole move was largely made in exchange for votes to kill Dorgan's amendment. "That was more or less the arrangement," he said. (The White House did not immediately respond to a request for comment.)

Dorgan was asked if he was aware of the deal. "You'll have to ask others that," he said.

HuffPost asked Sen. Kent Conrad (D-Neb.), a longtime supporter of reimportation, if he was aware of the deal. "I don't know that firsthand, but I've heard that," he said. Conrad, regardless, voted for Dorgan's amendment.

The commitment to close the doughnut hole was quickly applauded by AARP. "Thank you for your commitment -- and that of Chairmen Baucus and Dodd -- to closing the Medicare Part D coverage gap or 'doughnut hole' by 2019 during the upcoming House-Senate conference committee on health reform legislation. We understand, given Senate constraints, that this action must wait until conference," AARP CEO A. Barry Rand said in a letter to Reid Tuesday.

Dodd's vote on Dorgan's amendment only makes sense in the context of the doughnut-hole deal. Dodd is facing an increasingly difficult reelection race and a vote against reimportation is a political loser in Connecticut, where he has no room for error.

When the roll was called and Dodd's name was announced in the nay column, Sen. Bernie Sanders (I-Vt.), betrayed his surprise loudly enough to be heard in the press gallery. "Dodd?!" said Sanders, in a rising stage-whisper that indicated disbelief.

Ken Johnson, senior vice president for the Pharmaceutical Research and Manufacturers of America (PhRMA), said that if Congress or the White House wants to close the doughnut hole, they haven't talked to him about it. He did, however, leave the door open for further negotiations.

"We have had absolutely no discussions with anyone in the Senate or the White House about how they plan to pay for closing the doughnut hole. It's a laudable goal, but we are already committed to providing a huge amount of money to help seniors who hit the coverage gap, and no one has asked us to date to provide any additional funding," he said in an e-mail to HuffPost.

"Will that change moving forward? Who knows? Who could have predicted that the so-called Medicare buy-in would be in and out of the mix in a blink of an eye? We made an $80 billion iron-clad commitment to help make health care reform a reality back in June, and we have never, at any time, retrenched from that position. That said, we will continue to keep an open mind as the Senate moves toward a final vote."

The defenders of the PhRMA deal were forced to round up so many Democratic votes because the GOP decided to make mischief on the Senate floor. Twenty-three Republicans -- more than half their total -- broke with their traditional opposition to reimportation and voted with Dorgan, many of them smiling as they watched nervous Democratic leaders huddled around the table in front of the Senate president's desk. When it was clear it would fail, two of them -= Sens. Jim Bunning (R-Ky.) and John Ensign (R-Nev.) =- switched their votes back to no. Ensign was rewarded for his flip-flop by a sharp Senate-floor tongue-lashing from Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.), a longtime and serious supporter of reimportation.

Sen. John Cornyn (R-Texas), acknowledged to reporters that his yes vote had something to do with causing trouble for the overall bill. "It did occur to me that this could be for the greater good," he said.

Here's the full roll call:

YEAS -- 51

Alexander (R-TN)
Begich (D-AK)
Bennet (D-CO)
Bingaman (D-NM)
Bond (R-MO)
Boxer (D-CA)
Brown (D-OH)
Coburn (R-OK)
Collins (R-ME)
Conrad (D-ND)
Corker (R-TN)
Cornyn (R-TX)
Crapo (R-ID)
DeMint (R-SC)
Dorgan (D-ND)
Feingold (D-WI)
Feinstein (D-CA)
Franken (D-MN)
Graham (R-SC)
Grassley (R-IA)
Harkin (D-IA)
Hutchison (R-TX)
Johanns (R-NE)
Johnson (D-SD)
Klobuchar (D-MN)
Kohl (D-WI)
LeMieux (R-FL)
Leahy (D-VT)
Lincoln (D-AR)
McCain (R-AZ)
McCaskill (D-MO)
McConnell (R-KY)
Merkley (D-OR)
Murkowski (R-AK)
Nelson (D-FL)
Nelson (D-NE)
Pryor (D-AR)
Risch (R-ID)
Sanders (I-VT)
Sessions (R-AL)
Shaheen (D-NH)
Shelby (R-AL)
Snowe (R-ME)
Specter (D-PA)
Stabenow (D-MI)
Thune (R-SD)
Udall (D-NM)
Vitter (R-LA)
Webb (D-VA)
Wicker (R-MS)
Wyden (D-OR)

NAYS -- 48

Akaka (D-HI)
Barrasso (R-WY)
Baucus (D-MT)
Bayh (D-IN)
Bennett (R-UT)
Brownback (R-KS)
Bunning (R-KY)
Burr (R-NC)
Burris (D-IL)
Cantwell (D-WA)
Cardin (D-MD)
Carper (D-DE)
Casey (D-PA)
Chambliss (R-GA)
Cochran (R-MS)
Dodd (D-CT)
Durbin (D-IL)
Ensign (R-NV)
Enzi (R-WY)
Gillibrand (D-NY)
Gregg (R-NH)
Hagan (D-NC)
Hatch (R-UT)
Inhofe (R-OK)
Inouye (D-HI)
Isakson (R-GA)
Kaufman (D-DE)
Kerry (D-MA)
Kirk (D-MA)
Kyl (R-AZ)
Landrieu (D-LA)
Lautenberg (D-NJ)
Levin (D-MI)
Lieberman (ID-CT)
Lugar (R-IN)
Menendez (D-NJ)
Mikulski (D-MD)
Murray (D-WA)
Reed (D-RI)
Reid (D-NV)
Roberts (R-KS)
Rockefeller (D-WV)
Schumer (D-NY)
Tester (D-MT)
Udall (D-CO)
Voinovich (R-OH)
Warner (D-VA)
Whitehouse (D-RI)

NOT VOTING -- 1
Byrd (D-WV)

With reporting by Jeff Muskus

Stephen Harper Fake Assassination Photo: Canadian Liberals Apologize For Posting Pic

2009-12-15T16:52:51Z

The Liberal Party of Canada has been forced to apologize after showing a fake picture of Conservative Prime Minister Stephen Harper being assassinated on the party's official website.

The Liberal Party website had been hosting a picture contest where readers could create images of Harper in fictional situations. The contest had been designed to criticize the prime minister's perceived reluctance to attend climate change talks in Copenhagen by showing locations that he would rather be in.

However, one shocking photo had the Prime Minister's head digitally replacing the head of Lee Harvey Oswald in a picture that showed Oswald as he is shot and killed by Jack Ruby.

Liberal Party spokesperson Daniel Lauzon apologized in an e-mail to Canwest:

"Though we do screen the pictures before posting them, it appears the Lee Harvey Oswald picture slipped through the cracks -- it has since been removed," he said. "We apologize to those who took offense to the image."

Lauzon also apologized for another photo, reportedly a play on the idea of methane emissions from cattle, that showed Harper with his arm in a cow's rear end.

The Liberals are not the first Canadian party to show insulting images of political opponents on their website. Harper was forced to apologize last year when the Conservative website had an animated video of a puffin defecating on then-Liberal leader Stephane Dion.

Here's the photo, from rjjago.wordpress.com/, which the National Post credits with having discovered the photo.

Get HuffPost World On Facebook and Twitter!

Expedition Copenhagen: Steven Chu Snubs Canada's Environment Minister in Copenhagen

2009-12-15T13:31:30Z

The Toronto Star "Summit Insider" blog reports that U.S. Energy Secretary Steven Chu's snubbed Canada's Environment Minister Jim Prentice out of a photo op on Monday at the Copenhagen climate talks.

On Monday, Toby Heaps, a Canadian magazine editor, was handed a Canadian delegation press release about a photo-op to occur with the two officials outside one of the briefing rooms. When Heaps showed up, he saw Prentice's chief of staff arguing with Chu's entourage about the photo-op.

"The problem was the U.S. delegation hadn't given the green light for a photo-op, just for closed bilateral meeting between the two," Heaps writes.

More from Heaps:

Over the course of 10 minutes, Kelly repeatedly asked the U.S. delegation official to reconsider, to which the U.S. delegation official replied, negative. When Kelly asked for this to be taken up the chain of command, the U.S. delegation official replied "it came from pretty high up. It's not going to happen."

The U.S. official said he didn't understand why the photograph was so important, to which Kelly replied "we were carpetbagged this morning by (environmental non-governmental organizations) with a false press release, I gotta change the story."

The carpetbagging Heaps is referring to is the stunt by the Yes Men where a mirror image of a Wall Street Journal blog article reported about the Canadian delegation had suddenly changed its emissions targets and strategy at the talks. (Andy Bichlbaum of The Yes Men told HuffPost Green Editor Katherine Goldstein "I think Stephen Harper is so mad that he will personally sue us. And yes, so will the Wall Street Journal.")

Heaps said eventually another U.S. official came by saying with a compromise: The photo could be taken, but it could not be used for promotional purposes.

I verified the story with Liberal Member of Parliament David McGuinty who confirmed that indeed the "the minister's chief of staff got into a very heated exchange with Steven Chu's officials yesterday," and that the Canadian delegation has been "positively despondent" ever since.

Keep in mind, McGuinty is not an official member of the Canadian delegation as a elected member of the Liberal party, the official opposition to the Conservative Party that heads the Canadian negotiating team.

Members of the Canadian youth delegation I spoke with said that Canadian circles have been a-buzz with rumors about the snub. "Basically Prentice showed up to speak to Chu and the Canadians said "now for the photo-op!" and the staff said 'whoa, whoa, whoa, we didn't talk about this,' Thea Witman, a Canadian youth leader says.

But what's bad for Prentice's P.R. has been a boon to Canadian youth delegation. "Even the Americans don't want to be associated with Canada," Witman says. "We're trying to capitalize it and further push action at home and sway public opinion."

Liana B. Baker is the climate policy correspondent for Canadian Geographic magazine in Copenhagen

Confirmed: Yes Men Behind Prank Of Canada At COP15

2009-12-14T10:26:30Z

UPDATE (5:55 P.M. EST): Huffington Post Green Editor Katherine Goldstein, who is in Copenhagen at the COP15 Climate Change Summit, spoke to Andy Bichlbaum of The Yes Men earlier this evening about today's prank -- and Bichlbaum confirms that the Yes Men, were behind it. Asked about whether he thought he might be sued for today's stunt, Bichlbaum quipped, "Yes. I think Stephen Harper is so mad that he will personally sue us. And yes, so will the Wall Street Journal."

---------------------

So, did you hear the one about Canada making a huge splash at the COP15 Climate Change Summit in Copenhagen by completely reversing its climate change policy and setting aggressive new carbon reduction targets?

Well, then you've heard about a high-concept prank, which seems to have been perpetrated by someone willing and capable of going to dizzying lengths to show policymakers what they should be doing to combat climate change.

We're guessing this is probably the work of the Yes Men, obviously!

This time, the world was fooled by a well-timed press release and a well-constructed facsimile of a Wall Street Journal online article.

The fun began this morning when the Yes Men put out the following release, purporting to come from the Assistant Press Secretary, of the Canadian Office of the Minister of the Environment. Here it is in full:

CANADA ANNOUNCES NEW AGENDA FOR CLIMATE AND WORLD DEVELOPMENT
Plan includes stricter emissions reductions and immediate "climate debt" bailouts for most affected countries

COPENHAGEN, Denmark -- In a major development coming three days before the final round of UN climate change negotiations in Copenhagen, and responding to the recent concerns expressed by the G77 bloc of countries, Canada's Attache for Environment and Planning announced today an ambitious plan for a new climate change framework that answers vital concerns voiced by developing nations.

Dubbed "Agenda 2020," the plan sets strict new emissions-reductions guidelines for Canada and fast-tracks financing for vulnerable countries beginning in 2010.

"Today the G77 has again made their voice very clear," said Jim Prentice, Canada's Minister for the Environment. "This policy is our answer. Long in discussion, and slated for release later this week, Agenda 2020 is Canada's commitment to a science-based approach to climate change, and our way to assert our partnership with the developing world."

Agenda 2020 sets binding emissions reductions targets of 40% below 1990 levels by 2020 and at least 80% by 2050, in line with the recommendations of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change (IPCC) and approaching the levels demanded by the African Group (link). The plan also introduces a new instrument, known as the "Climate Debt Mechanism" (CDM), committing Canada to much-needed funding to those developing countries facing the most dire consequences of climate change. CDM payments will begin with 1% and rise to the equivalent of 5% of Canada's GDP annually by 2030.

"We believe all people will benefit from an equitable climate deal that truly energizes the world economy," said Prentice.

The initial 2010 CDM outlay (representing 1% of Canada's GDP, or $13 billion) will be allocated to the African countries for emissions-reduction strategies and alternative-energy development programs. Payments will also finance resilience-building projects in specific communities already facing the results of climate change or threatened with its most dire consequences.

The CDM is the world's first financial mechanism that truly addresses the rising costs of climate change in developing countries. It follows a November announcement from Canada and its Commonwealth partners committing $10 billion to climate change adaptation for vulnerable countries (link). By providing quick access to adaptation finance, the CDM builds on this commitment and takes the global lead in supporting vulnerable countries. CDM payments will be completely separate from pre-existing development assistance and will be considered to be payments in a balance of trade.

"Canada is taking the long view on the world economy," said Prentice. "Nobody benefits from a world in peril. Contributing to the development of other nations and taking full responsibilities for our emissions is simple Canadian good sense. We want to show the world that Canada is a leader on climate change."

The full details of the CDM framework will be released when Prime Minister Stephen Harper attends the high-level session of the Copenhagen climate talks this Wednesday.

All of that: totally fake! But it was backed up online by a story by "Gustav Rainer" at the "Wall Street Journal," which reads in part:

Canadian delegates to the United Nation Climate Summit in Copenhagen announced a significant shift in the country's climate stance today.

The announcement, in part seemingly prompted by today's walkout of the G77 bloc of nations, represents a major change in tone and substance for the large energy-producing nation. The new plan, dubbed "Agenda 2020," details an aggressive new commitment to curtailing carbon emissions, and lays out the guidelines for a new climate adaptation fund for developing nations.

"This agreement tackles the core drivers of social and ecological vulnerability," said Matthew Delane, Canada's Attache for Environment and Planning in Copenhagen. "It's nothing less than a new vision of international responsibility."

Since then, Canadian officials have been forced to walk this all back. In a press release from Frederic Baril, the actual press secretary of the Office of the Minister of the Environment, he combats the "spoof press release":

UPDATE: And now, we've been punked! This press release, which appears to walk back the original fake press release is ALSO A FAKE. This is a tangled web being woven!

Canadian Government Deplores Spoof Releases, False Hopes

OTTAWA, Ont. -- December 14, 2009 -- One hour ago, a spoof press release targeted Canada in order to generate hurtful rumors and mislead the Conference of Parties on Canada's positions on climate change, and to damage Canada's standing with the international business community.

The release, from "press@enviro-canada.ca," alleges Canada's acceptance of unrealistic emissions-reduction targets, as well as a so-called "Climate Debt Mechanism," a bilateral agreement between Canada and Africa to furnish that continent with enormous sums in "reparation" for climate damage and to "offset" adaptation.

Unfortunately, the spoof release was reported in major international outlets.

UPDATE #2: Yet another spoof press release, this one apologizing for all the confusion:

Tragic Ugandan Reaction to False "Canada" Announcement. Passionate response highlights cruelty of thoughtless pranksters

OTTAWA, Ont. -- December 14, 2009 -- We at Environment Canada wish to thank the international press community for their measured and understanding response to the hoax that struck our agency earlier this afternoon, while expressing our condolences to the Ugandan delegation who were swept up in the excitement of this false future "vision."

This sophisticated operation was reported in the Toronto Star, The Globe and Mail, and a number of other outlets as the irresponsible spoof that it was.

Environment Canada wishes to stress that the Ugandan delegation's impassioned response to the announcement is a dramatic tragedy for those who stand to suffer the most.

"It is the height of cruelty, hypocrisy, and immorality to infuse with false hopes the spirit of people who are already, and will additionally, bear the brunt of climate change's terrible human effects," said Jim Prentice, Canada's Minister for the Environment.

Signs point to the Yes Men, whose primary way of pranking-the-world-in-order-to-save-it is to pass themselves off as representatives of an organization and make big splashy announcements about major policy changes. Recently, the Yes Men posed as representatives of the United States Chamber of Commerce, and staged a press conference at which they announced that the Chamber was adopting a more progressive stance on climate change policy. The Yes Men have also previously pulled off remarkably well-built newspaper facsimiles.

Last week, the Yes Men attempted to use projectors to turn the Hopenhagen Globe that sits in the middle of Copenhagen's City Hall Square, into a massive anti-Coca Cola billboard. Their attempt was quickly ferreted out by Danish police.

The Huffington Post's Green Editor, Katherine Goldstein, who is on the ground in Copenhagen, reports that sources close to The Yes Men were acting very coy, "smiling," while saying, "Who said it was the Yes Men?"

We hope to be able to say so soon!

UPDATE: For the moment, if the Yes Men had anything to do with this, they are remaining coy:

Yes, Uganda was also punked as well. The Ugandan official in this video is not a Ugandan official This video is also, apparently, part of the hoax.

So many fakes within hoaxes within pranks. The best we can offer is this report from The Globe And Mail:

It's not clear who is behind all this but the suspicion is that it is the work of an American group called the Yes Men. They have pulled these sorts of stunts before, attacking the corporate world and globalization through their spoofs, which include making websites look authentic. The Yes Men, according to their spokespeople in the United States, are in Copenhagen and they are tweeting about the spoof.

"Yes, we have heard a bit about this hoax, we are investigating," Joseph Huff-Hannon, who works with the group, told The Globe in an email. "Word has it that more will be revealed tomorrow at 13:00 pm Copenhagen time. I hear that those responsible can't speak about it tonight though."

Any minute now, I expect a call from Copenhagen, or Ottawa, or Uganda, telling us that this report is a hoax, also.

[Would you like to follow me on Twitter? Because why not? Also, please send tips to tv@huffingtonpost.com -- learn more about our media monitoring project here.]

Sci Fi Author Peter Watts Arrested At US Border

2009-12-14T10:18:58Z

For author Peter Watts, life can be stranger than science fiction.

Watts - who has written six books in the genre - was on his way back to Toronto Tuesday after helping a friend move to the U.S. Before he crossed the border into Sarnia, American customs officers pulled him over.

Expedition Copenhagen: Canadian Youth To Canada: Lead, Follow or Get Out of the Way on Climate Change

2009-12-11T10:44:26Z

Original post appears in Canadian Geographic online.

Copenhagen-- A giant orb glows in a major city square, while in another part of Copenhagen new steel cages await unruly protestors -- all signs that the United Nations climate negotiations are underway in Denmark's capital.

On Sunday, I sat down with Amber Church, the national director for the Canadian Youth Climate coalition, to get her take on the Canadian negotiating team for the next two weeks.

The 28-year-old called Canada a "lost lemming" in the global climate negotiations, even falling behind the U.S. with its inaction.

"Right now Canada is not leading -- it's not even following very well because Environment Minister Jim Prentice's line is, We can't do anything until the U.S. does something," Church said. "To be perfectly honest, the U.S. is ahead of us and we're not even following very well."

Her advice for Canada in Copenhagen? "Canada should lead, follow or get out of the way," Church said.

Church, who lives in Whitehorse, will be leading the Canadian youth delegation at the talks. The delegation is composed of a 35 activists from around the country, making up one of the largest youth delegations at the conference. This doesn't account for another 50 or so more Canadians who are attending with student delegations from universities, such as the University of Toronto.

Church said the Canadian youth will lobby hard for strong reduction targets, holding the Conservative government's negotiating team accountable for not supporting a climate bill earlier this year in the House of Commons, which called for certain emissions reductions.

"The Canadian public along with the House of Commons supports these targets and so we'd like to make sure our government is actually speaking for our people."

With this goal in mind, Canadian youth will be meeting with a growing list of Canadian politicians while in Copenhagen, including Prentice, NDP leader Jack Layton, Green Party leader Elizabeth May, environment ministers from the territories, and Canada's chief negotiator, Michael Martin.

A meeting with Prime Minister Stephen Harper is still in the works.

Church said these lobbying sessions with politicians will not be soft photo-ops, since the Canadian youth will be driving home their message, Church says.

"Canada needs to stop being obstructionist and Canada needs to come to the table and actually start participating," Church said.

Check back soon for more developments on the Canadian youth delegation in Copenhagen.

Liana B. Baker is the climate policy correspondent for Canadian Geographic in Copenhagen.

The World's Friendliest Countries (PHOTOS, POLL)

2009-12-08T12:10:58Z

Looking for a friendly place to settle down? Then you may want to try Bahrain, which recently topped a list Forbes compiled of the ten friendliest countries for expatriates.

The tiny Middle-Eastern country provided a comfortable life for the 31 expats surveyed there. It came ahead of Canada, which had topped the list in 2008.

The perhaps surprising conclusion is drawn from data collected by HSBC for their Expat Explorer survey.

The data collected by HSBC may cause concern for those considering a move to Russia, Qater or India, who come bottom of the list for living standards for expats.

Perhaps more surprisingly, despite coming 1st for entertainment, the United Kingdom sits just above Russia, forth from bottom. Food appears to be an issue.

Are you currently, or have you ever been, an expat? Vote on the "friendliness" of the countries below and let us know about your own experiences in the comments.

Get HuffPost World On Facebook and Twitter!

Read more: Bahrain, Australia, Canada, Slidepoll, World News

Greenpeace Members Breach Security At Canadian Parliament To Protest Climate Inaction (VIDEO)

2009-12-07T16:45:10Z

By Rob Gillies (AP):

TORONTO -- Members of Greenpeace easily breached security and scaled two Parliament buildings in Ottawa to stage a protest on the roof Monday, the opening day of the climate conference in Copenhagen.

The 19 protesters unfurled a massive banner reading "Climate Inaction Costs Lives" as police, fire trucks and ambulances gathered below. Greenpeace spokeswoman Jessica Wilson said it was a protest against the rapid expansion of the massive oil sands mines in northern Alberta.

Industry officials estimate the oil sands could yield as much as 175 billion barrels of oil, making Canada second only to Saudi Arabia in crude oil reserves. But the extraction process produces a high amount of the greenhouse gases blamed for climate change.

"We need to see climate action now because millions of lives really do depend on it," said Greenpeace's Mike Hudema, who spoke on his phone to The Associated Press while hanging in a harness on the side of the West Block building, which houses ministers and members of Parliament.

Fourteen people climbed atop the West Block building and five climbed atop the Senate entrance to the Centre Block building. Twenty people - including one on the ground - were arrested and face charges of mischief and possibly more, police said.

The Royal Canadian Mounted Police are investigating how the protesters in blue jumpsuits and white climbing helmets were able to scale the buildings on Parliament Hill undetected.

"It's an incident that the RCMP is taking very seriously," Cpl. Caroline Poulin said. "It's important for the citizens of this country to have access to Parliament. This is certainly something we want to maintain, but at the same time we have to have appropriate security measures in place."

One possibility is that those on the West Block climbed up scaffolding at the back of the building at about 7:30 a.m. The last of them, dangling from ropes at the edge of the steeply pitched roof, were removed by an aerial fire ladder midmorning.

Check out the short clip of the protesters' view atop to the roof:

20 Years After Montreal Massacre, Ottawa Debates Gun Control

2009-12-07T14:41:43Z

OTTAWA -- Like public health care, Canada's tight gun-control laws help distinguish the country from its powerful neighbor to the south. But as Canadians commemorated the 20th anniversary of one of the country's most notorious shooting sprees on Sunday, their Parliament was on course to eliminate one of its most significant gun-control measures.

Pharma Deal To Be Tested On Senate Floor

2009-12-05T18:37:21Z

Senate Majority Leader Harry Reid (D-Nev.) has promised to allow a vote on re-importing prescription drugs from Canada as an amendment to the health care reform bill, Sen. Byron Dorgan (D-N.D.) told reporters on Saturday.

Dorgan, one of two lead sponsors on the measure, said that he was pushing for a vote on the amendment over the weekend but expects it to come up on the floor on Monday following debate on an abortion amendment backed by Sen. Ben Nelson (D-Neb.), which mirrors extremely restrictive language pushed by Rep. Bart Stupak (D-Mich.) in the House.

The measure is also being championed by Sen. Olympia Snowe (R-Maine); both she and Dorgan noted that Republican Sens. David Vitter (La.), Charles Grassley (Iowa) and John McCain (Ariz.) are cosponsors of a bill doing the same thing.

Snowe pledged to back it on the floor and do what she could to bring other Republicans along, she told reporters Saturday.

The measure would save the federal government $19 billion over the next ten years, according to the Congressional Budget Office -- and would save consumers billions more.

Big Pharma strongly opposes the amendment and has said it will use "hand to hand combat" to defeat it. The drug makers have a deal with the White House that their contribution to health care will not exceed $80 billion over ten years; Dorgan's bill could take them over the limit and, in any event, was specifically ruled out in negotiations with the White House.

Dorgan was not part of those talks, however, and noted that Obama, as a senator, had supported his measure, as had Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel when he was in the House. The White House, he said, had not attempted to discourage him from going forward.

"They should be sleeping well, because they have been strong supporters of exactly what we're trying to do," he said. "I hope and expect to get 60."

Dorgan also took a shot at the parliamentary evolution the Senate has taken, which requires his amendment to obtain those 60 votes rather than a simple majority.

"Nothing is 51 in the Senate. Apparently there's been a new Constitution that says you have to have 60 somehow," he said.

Dorgan, a member of Senate leadership, said that his amendment was the first Pharma-deal-buster to get final approval to go to the floor. Sens. Bill Nelson (D-Fla.) and Sherrod Brown (D-Ohio) are also pushing amendments that would take a bite out of drug-maker profits.

Michael Brune: Blame Canada! Country Takes Heat as Global Climate Saboteur

2009-12-04T17:32:44Z

With climate negotiations starting next week in Copenhagen, the world is losing patience with Canada.

Since announcing that it would abandon its targets to cut greenhouse gases under the Kyoto protocol in 2006, Canada has consistently been seen as a global climate laggard. This was again confirmed earlier this week in a report by the Pew Center on Global Climate Change, which showed that Canada has among the least ambitious emissions targets of developed countries heading into Copenhagen. Canada's record on climate change is so bad that a coalition of scientists and officials from developing countries is asking that Canada be suspended from the Commonwealth.

This past week has seen an increasing number of negative news articles that alternate between calling out Canada's Harper government as hypocritical, "creepy," and generally disappointing, for the government's obstructive tactics heading into climate negotiations. George Monbiot, Guardian newspaper columnist and the author of Heat, a bestselling book on climate change, spelled it out for the world in his column earlier this week: "Canada's image lies in tatters. It is now to climate what Japan is to whaling."

Monbiot writes that Canadian climate negotiators have been, "behaving with all the sophistication of a chimpanzee's tea party." He continues:

Until now I believed that the nation that has done most to sabotage a new climate change agreement was the United States. I was wrong. The real villain is Canada. Unless we can stop it, the harm done by Canada in December 2009 will outweigh a century of good works.

Why is Canada risking its reputation as a thoughtful and responsible world leader? You guessed it -- the tar sands.

Canada's efforts to protect its dirty interests in the Alberta tar sands has put it on a collision course with world efforts to stop global warming. Its investment in expanding tar sands projects is the most destructive and desperate attempt yet to profit from and prolong humanity's crippling addiction to oil. Extracting oil from these sludgy deposits in the heart of Canada's Boreal forest results in three times more global warming emissions per barrel than extracting conventional oil. It's the world's largest single source of greenhouse gas pollution.

If you care about the climate and our clean energy future, the tar sands is your business. Want to know more? Take a minute to watch this startling new video which chronicles just how dangerous and damaging the tar sands are. It will inspire you to take action -- whether you're in Canada, Copenhagen or California.

As climate talks begin next week, Rainforest Action Network -- along with a coalition of indigenous peoples, environmentalists, and scientists -- will be in Copenhagen to insist that Canada stop pushing the world towards a climate catastrophe, and embrace the clean energy future.

As George Monbiot put it: "The immediate threat to the global effort to sustain a peaceful and stable world comes not from Saudi Arabia or Iran or China. It comes from Canada. How could that be true?"

Mike Barber: White Man's Burden Redux: The Movie!

2009-12-03T11:50:00Z

As I am typing this, I am five hours and 25 minutes into a 15+ hour trip on a slow train to Baltimore. I'm en route to D.C. to interview sociologist and author Dr. James Loewen for my documentary film, A Past, Denied: The Invisible History of Slavery in Canada. This interview is two years in the making. In late 2007 when I originally conceived the idea to make a feature documentary on how Canada's over 200 years of institutionalized slavery of indigenous and African people is constantly escaping mention in our history books, James Loewen was one of the very first names that entered my head for interview candidates. His book, Lies My Teacher Told Me: Everything Your American History Textbook Got Wrong (1995) was one of the biggest inspirations for me to start thinking about making documentaries in the first place -- an inspiration possibly rivaled only by Errol Morris' (2004) documentary film, The Fog of War.

Lies My Teacher Told Me is the result of Loewen's research into the 12 most popular history textbooks used in American schools (circa 1996). He explores the common threads of what/who is given coverage, how much coverage is given, and in what lights that coverage is made. He also looks into what is conspicuously absent, what is biased, and, finally, what is flat out false. More than myth-busting, Loewen examines the far-reaching social consequences of the history of teaching practices, a history that he finds has served more as jingoistic propaganda than scholarly discourse. At its heart, this book (and the follow-up Lies Across America: What Our Historic Sights Get Wrong) is about why the way in which history is disseminated matters; and how society could benefit from a curriculum that is unafraid to look deeply into the dark side of Canada's past as opposed to the feel-good bits. (Both Lies My Teacher Told Me and Lies Across America as well as Loewen's Sundown Towns: A Hidden Dimension of American Racism are required reading, especially for those in the US. Get your hands on them now or turn in your "progressive" card.)

Loewen demonstrates how the bland, celebratory versions of history found throughout the pages of various Canadian textbooks serve as a form of boosterism catering specifically to a white, middle- and upper-class audience. In essence, stories about white people written by and for white people. Page after page, Europeans are exalted for their great achievements while non-Europeans, if mentioned at all, are painted as people in need of European help. This feel-good bias doesn't feel right, however, and worse, it goes beyond the classroom, visible in pop culture and everyday discussions about historical events.

The film and television equivalent of this form of boosterism comes in the Hollywood archetype of the white savior -- a white, typically middle- or upper-class, usually male and almost exclusively heterosexual character through whom the life of a person of color (or persons of color) is dramatically improved. The basic formula goes like this: through the white protagonist's selfless deeds the helpless, downtrodden victim of circumstance is rescued from the cycle of poverty and violence, changing both their lives forever. One gains new opportunities that would otherwise never be afforded to them, while the other gains redemption and a well-deserved personal sense of piety. Most importantly, the white audience gets to feel good about themselves.

White Man's Burden: The Movie

One problem with white savior films is that they perpetuate the archaic paradigm of the white man's burden. They tell stories of white people going outside of their privilege to help people of color who ultimately can't or won't help themselves. Whether it's Uncle Sam bringing "civility, education and religion" to the Philippines or Clint Eastwood teaching his young Hmong neighbor how to be a "real man," it's the same old story being played out again and again. It's been colonialism's best justification since Manifest Destiny in real life, as well as the template plot for movies like To Kill a Mockingbird, Finding Forrester, Gran Torino, Freedom Writers, The Blind Side...

Another problem with stories focusing on white heroes is that the reality of people of color working hard to improve their communities goes largely ignored. Just like the selective telling of history in textbooks, the audiences of white savior films walk away with the message that it is only white people that are doing anything to change things for the better. While there are films telling the stories of some of these individuals striving to improve the lives of the underprivileged, they are a disproportionate exception. For every Lean On Me (1989) there are at least three or four Dangerous Minds, a film which also exemplifies yet another issue.

"Destroyers and usurpers, curse them."

The movie Dangerous Minds (1995), which purports to be based on a true story, stars Michelle Pfieffer as a LouAnne Johnson, a white English teacher who tries to help her inner-city high school students learn an appreciation for poetry through the lyrics of Bob Dylan. The "based on a true story" isn't entirely dishonest. There really was a woman named LouAnne Johnson who used musical lyricism to connect with her underfunded inner-city high school students; in fact, it was her book, My Posse Don't Do Homework (1993) that was the inspiration for the film. The betrayal in the movie adaptation is that the real LouAnne Johnson was Latina and used rap music.

The filmmakers had a profound opportunity to tell the story of a non-white person inspiring a group of inner-city Black and Latino students, who had been otherwise written off, to become engaged with their own destiny. Instead, they chose to usurp LouAnne Johnson, while the movie tirelessly extols the virtues of being white.

(And if that doesn't churn your stomach just a little bit, wait until next summer's release about the true story of the Black Panther's Free Breakfast for School Children Program, starring Tom Cruise. (I'm kidding))

What are students supposed to make of such history? What is an audience supposed to make of such movies? The constant message is that white people shape the world; non-white people are passive participants merely benefiting from those efforts. White people are the only ones with the faculty to improve anyone's situation; non-whites are unorganized, hapless people, doomed until saved by the good will of their white saviors. Moreover, the white protagonist is usually the only character to have any depth or character development, while non-white supporting characters are foils to the white protagonist, and largely without history. The million-dollar film budget question is, why are white people the only ones deserving of inspiration?

The fact that none of these movies even mention, much less try to really address, the issue of systemic racism, is an appalling failure. The tragedy of over-crowded and under-funded inner city classrooms is never explained. It's never explained why these under privileged people are under-privileged to begin with. The situation is presented without any nuance, save for the givenness of white privilege.

White savior movies, like their history text counterparts, are designed to reinforce and perpetuate white privilege. White audiences get to walk away from these films feeling good about being white, and they are never prompted to empathize with supporting non-white characters. Furthermore, white audience members are never confronted with their own privilege or internalized racism. They are let completely off the hook for their own roles and responsibilities in the perpetuation of a racist power structure.

Since more whites than non-whites are shown throughout our pop culture as the people effecting change, the lesson inferred is that these individual cases we see in movies and on TV are the rule, when they are really the exception. This leads to a false sense of racial justice in the minds of all audience members. Just as the election of Barack Obama led some white Americans to actually believe that the West was entering a "post-racial" state [*insert bellowing gut laugh here*], white savior films give white audience members the notion that they don't have to do anything about racism themselves because, look, there are plenty of examples of white people out there doing good!

Back to the history question, Loewen deftly points out that "the Eurocentric history in our textbooks amounts to psychotherapy for whites." To run with this simile, I would liken these white savior films to psychotherapy for whites with a bonus happy ending. But like the history behind them, there is much therapy needed to right the normalization of whiteness, which is plainly wrong.

Cross-posted from Race-Talk.

Blame Canada: Pentagon Wonders If Neighbors Are 'Bad Guys'

2009-12-03T03:49:26Z

WASHINGTON — Can Canada be trusted?

In the midst of what turned out to be a bogus espionage scare over commemorative coins, senior Pentagon officials speculated whether Canadians – widely considered to be among America's closest allies – might be "bad guys" involved in the spy caper. "Who knows?" one official wrote in secret e-mails obtained this week by The Associated Press.

Pentagon Emails Suggest Distrust Over Ally Canada

2009-12-03T03:16:43Z

Canada Reads Contest Finds The Book That All Of Canada Should Read

2009-12-02T12:43:57Z

At Tuesday's announcement of the 2010 five-book reading list, much was made of the sales bump experienced by past winners of the annual CBC Radio literary competition. That expectation will be put to the test if Fall on Your Knees, selected in 2002 for the Oprah Book Club, emerges as the winner when the competition airs in March.

Canada Encourages Public Service On International Volunteer Day

2009-12-01T15:38:49Z

Since Barack Obama's election to the presidency in 2008, politicians and other public figures have encouraged Americans of all stripes to give their time and volunteer, most notably through the White House's United We Serve campaign which kicked off this summer.

Lest Americans think that they're the only ones encouraging an increase in giving, Canada has celebrated International Volunteer Day on December 5 since 1985. On this day, Canada urges its citizens to give not just money, but their time and effort to help others. They've even established their own social consciousness network at GetInvolved.ca.

For this year, GetInvolved.ca is initiating Power of the Hour, a campaign aimed at inspiring Canadians to volunteer over two million hours in 2010.

If you're living in Canada and want to get started, click "Take This Challenge" on GetInvolved.ca's Act page and find volunteer opportunities.

The site also includes stories with ordinary Canadians working to make a difference.

WATCH:

Get HuffPost Impact On Facebook and Twitter!

Eric Margolis: Canada Accused Of Torture Collusion

2009-12-01T09:49:41Z

America's armed forces are not alone in wrestling with the issue of torture and mistreatment of prisoners. US allies that have been drawn into Iraq and Afghanistan face the very same disturbing questions.

When Canada first sent token troops to Afghanistan in 2002, and then deployed combat units to the war zone in southern Afghanistan in 2006, this column warned that its soldiers would inevitably commit atrocities and become brutalized.

Having covered fourteen wars as a correspondent and serving in the US Army, I knew that all of what we delicately call "counter-insurgency wars" - or "campaigns of pacification" as they used to be called in less euphemistic times - eventually produce brutality and war crimes against prisoners and civilians.

Canada has long been admired around the globe as a nation of high ethics, human rights, and respect for law. Over the past 50 years, Canada has devoted itself to multilateralism and peacekeeping. That is, until intense pressure from Washington dragged Canada into contributing 2,500 combat troops to the war in Afghanistan.

Now, Canada's sterling reputation is being seriously degraded by the spreading scandal over its involvement in torture in the Afghan conflict. Canada's current conservative government, a close ally of the former Bush administration, ardently backs the war and is fanning nationalism.

A courageous Canadian diplomat, Richard Colvin, recently revealed his government had been routinely turning over Afghan prisoners to the Kabul government's notorious secret police for torture and execution.

Emulating the Bush administration, senior government officials and military officers in Ottawa closed ranks, stoutly denying any Afghans had been tortured.

They are either amazingly ignorant or deceiving their nation.

To understand the roots of this ugly business, we must go back to the 1980's.

During the ten-year Soviet occupation of Afghanistan from 1979-1989, the Soviet intelligence service, KGB, created the Afghan Communist secret police agency, known as KhAD. Its mission was to liquidate or terrorize all suspected or real anti-Communists and opponents of Soviet occupation. Most prisoners arrested by KhAD were subjected to frightful tortures, particularly at Kabul's dreaded Pul-e-Charki Prison.

Prisoners were burned alive with gasoline, or buried alive by bulldozers. Special refrigerated cells froze prisoners to death. Others were electrocuted, skinned alive, beaten to death, castrated and blinded, or slowly lowered into vats of acid.

Some 27,000-30,000 political prisoners were murdered at Pul-e-Charki by KhAD. Torture centers also existed in all other major cities. The Soviets (who withdrew in 1989) and Afghan Communists killed 2.5 million Afghans.

In notoriously cruel Afghanistan, atrocities were not confined to one side: the US-backed Afghan mujahidin also committed their share. But the KhAD's sadistic cruelty and huge number of victims horrified even violence-hardened Afghans.

After the Soviet withdrew in 1989, Afghanistan dissolved into civil war and chaos as the seven mujahidin factions battled for power. A special KGB unit fanned the flames of conflict between Afghanistan's ethnic Pashtun, Uzbeks, Tajiks and Hazara by staging false flag operations, assassinations, and provocations.

By 1995, the anti-Communist Pashtun religious movement, Taliban, backed by Pakistan and the Gulf Arabs, had seized power, imposed law and order and driven the Communists from 90% of Afghanistan. The Afghan Communists retreated to the far north, and became part of the anti-Taliban Northern Alliance.

Ethnic Tajiks and Uzbeks, many of whom collaborated with the Soviet occupation in the 1980's, dominated the Alliance. Its leader was the Tajik warlord Ahmed Shah Massoud - who was mistakenly hailed an anti-Soviet "freedom fighter" in the West. In fact, he was an important Soviet asset.

The US invaded Afghanistan in 2001, using Russian-armed Northern Alliance soldiers to overthrow Taliban, and install Hamid Karzai as figurehead president. Real power in Kabul was held by the Northern Alliance. In essence, the US and Russia established a very discreet condominium over war-torn Afghanistan, with Moscow calling shots in the north through its Tajik and Uzbek allies.

Two of its strongest Northern Alliance figures were pro-Soviet Uzbek warlord Rashid Dostam, and Tajik general Mohammed Fahim - KhAD's chief from 1992-2004. Both had close links to Russian intelligence.

After thirty years of civil war, the minority Tajiks and Uzbeks had became blood enemies of the Pashtun, Afghanistan's majority. Most Taliban are Pashtun. Though there were many Tajiks that fought the Soviet occupation (see my book, `War at the Top of the World'), most Pashtun accused Tajiks of being Soviet collaborators.

Fahim and the Tajik-Uzbek-Communist Northern Alliance took over the revived secret police, the National Directorate of Security (NDS) and the prison system. In short order, the KhAD's old torturers were back in business. Pashtun prisoners captured by Canadian forces were routinely handed to the NDS-KhAD. Many were brutally tortured and executed.

Today, Fahim is officially Karzai's number two as vice president. But as commander of the Tajik-Uzbek militia and secret police, Fahim is the Afghan regime's most powerful figure and strongman. His supporters deny he was the KhAD chief and claim it was another person named Fahim.

Every child in Afghanistan knows torture of prisoners takes place. But somehow, Canada's see no evil/hear no evil generals and civilian officials actually claim they were sweetly unaware Afghan prisons were being run as torture centers by the revitalized Communists.

Amnesty International and the Red Cross warned Ottawa that prisoners Canada was handing to the Afghan government faced torture -and worse. The US State Department repeatedly warned of widespread torture in Afghan prisons, including `pulling out fingernails, burnings..beatings..sexual humiliations, sodomy' and rape of children. So did the UN and Dutch government.

Canada should have run its own prisoner camps under the proper rules of war. Yet Canada kept handing prisoners to the Afghan NDS, a clear violation of the Geneva Convention and human rights.

Ottawa tried to justify its action by claiming it had a memo from the secret police promising not to torture captives.

Now we see Canadian military men and high government officials trying to lie or bluff away their serious misdeeds - some of which may constitute war crimes, and slandering the messenger. A disgusting spectacle that deeply shames and sullies this good nation.

Dave Zirin: Amy Goodman And Canada's Olympic Paranoia

2009-11-27T13:54:58Z

When it comes to independent, agitational journalism, the standard is Amy Goodman and her radio/television institution, Democracy Now! Goodman and her staff often find themselves accosted by officials, foreign and domestic. This happened again on Thursday. But it didn't happen in East Timor or Burma. Goodman was detained by our neighbors to the north.

Canadian border officials held Goodman in Vancouver for 90 minutes when she attempted to enter Vancouver to attend events launching her new book, Breaking the Sound Barrier. But the Canadian Border team didn't care what she was there to do. They wanted to know what she was going to say. They demanded to see her notes. They searched her car and surreptitiously checked her laptop. They returned her passport with papers demanding she leave the country within 48 hours.

What could possibly have led to this level of scrutiny? They cared little that she was there to discuss the wars in Afghanistan and Iraq or the state of health care. The critical concern of the Canadian Border authorities was that Ms. Goodman would be discussing the 2010 Winter Olympic games in Vancouver. This is not a joke.

In an interview with CBC News, Goodman recalled that the border agent "made it clear by saying, 'What about the Olympics?' And I said, 'You mean when President Obama went to Copenhagen to push for the Olympics in Chicago?' He said, 'No. I am talking about the Olympics here in 2010.' I said, 'Oh I hadn't thought of that,' He said, 'You're saying you're not talking about the Olympics?' He was clearly incredulous that I wasn't going to be talking about the Olympics. He didn't believe me."

Ponder for a moment the Canadian state's paranoia wedded with arrogance. They moved quickly from concern that Goodman would be a critic of the games, to aghast that it would not be the centerpiece of her speech.

As Derrick O'Keefe, co-chair of the Canadian Peace Alliance said to me, "It's pretty unlikely that the harassment of a well known and respected journalist like Amy Goodman about whether she might be speaking about the Olympics was the initiative of one over-zealous, bad apple Canadian border guard. This looks like a clear sign of the chill that the IOC and the Games' local corporate boosters want to put out against any potential dissent."

In Vancouver, dissent is now the only obstacle to an Olympic-sized theft. The games stand to cost Vancouver, in the analysis of the Vancouver Sun, "$6 billion and counting so far." Local papers are starting to ask, "Could the Olympics bankrupt the City of Vancouver, or put it in a financial straitjacket for decades to come?"

But it's not just the economic theft.

Harsha Walia, member of No One Is Illegal and the Olympic Resistance Network, said to me, "In the lead-up to the 2010 Vancouver Olympic Games, we have witnessed and been subjected to an increasingly fortified police state, including intimidation and harassment of activists by security and intelligence forces as part of an unparalleled $1 billion security and surveillance network. In contravention of basic rights, police have stated their plans to set up checkpoints, search people without cause, and erect security exclusion zones."

The Canadian government has leveled public housing, stifled civil liberties and harassed local activists. The last thing they want is someone like Amy Goodman telling the world.

"I am deeply concerned that as a journalist I would be flagged and that the concern -- the major concern -- was the content of my speech. " said Goodman.

We need to see what happened to Ms. Goodman as a challenge to expose truth about Vancouver. Amy Goodman is just the tip of the iceberg. Let's make the 2010 Games the Titanic.

Happy Gilmore Shot Illegal, Canadian Judge Rules

2009-11-25T18:28:09Z

A Canadian judge has ruled the "Happy Gilmore" golf swing has "breached the standard of care owed to other players on the course."

Sarah Holewinski: Bad Math in Afghanistan: Deaths vs. Compensation

2009-11-21T18:00:00Z

Nobody's manning the calculator at NATO.

This year is on track to be the deadliest for Afghan civilians since the war began in 2001. Yet Oxfam just reported that of the 700 Afghans they interviewed just 1% received any compensation or apology for the harm done to them.

War never delivers clean numbers. But no matter how you look at these, something doesn't add up.

International forces acknowledge that civilians are key to their mission but still haven't figured out a coordinated way to help Afghan war victims. Just months ago, General McChrystal specifically endorsed a collective policy of compensation in his 60-day assessment of the Afghan war, but NATO is still dragging its heels.

To break this down into real terms: If your home is accidentally bombed by a Coalition airstrike, you may get compensation for the loss of property. But you likely won't. If your son is shot at a checkpoint by, say, a European, you may get some money. You may even get more than if your house was destroyed. Or you may get nothing at all.

Is this really the right way to respect the population? To win them over?

Some states like the U.S., Canada and Australia are relatively good about offering compensation when Afghans are caught in their crossfire, and are getting better about not making knee-jerk denials following tragic incidents. But the international coalition includes 26 NATO, 10 partner and 2 non-NATO countries. Taken together, their efforts to address civilian suffering are horribly scattered -- ad hoc, slow and under-used to the point that most Afghan civilians receive nothing for their losses.

The fact remains there is no coordinated system or even uniform guidelines for addressing civilian harm among international forces. Survivor's pleas for apologies, investigations and assistance have been largely met with silence. That's a big missed opportunity for respecting and establishing stability among the Afghan population.

There's a big NATO gathering coming up in early December, where all of the big decision makers will gather in Brussels to discuss Afghanistan.

How about finally addressing the human cost of this war for Afghans?

Leo W. Gerard: Business Council Honors Vale CEO for Clipping Workers, Wacking Towns

2009-11-16T15:09:47Z

A business group is honoring Roger Agnelli, the CEO of Vale, one of the largest mining companies in the world, which, coincidentally, is in the midst of its longest ever labor dispute. The award is for exceptional accomplishments in corporate social responsibility.

The Business Council for International Understanding will give Agnelli the Dwight D. Eisenhower Global Citizenship Award, feting him for his corporate behavior five months after he provoked the strike by more than 3,000 miners, mill workers and smelters in my hometown of Sudbury and neighboring Port Colborne, Canada.

The strikers now include 450 Vale nickel and copper workers from Voisey's Bay, also represented by my union, the United Steelworkers (USW).

Vale is the Brazilian-based corporation that boasted $13.2 billion in profits last year and reported third-quarter, after-tax earnings of $1.7 billion this year, more than double its second quarter haul. Vale is a highly profitable corporation demanding workers take concessions. For example, it wants deep cuts to pay supplements workers get only when nickel prices are high.

Cash flush even during the worldwide recession, Vale has engaged in a buying spree for mines and properties worldwide. In 2008, it announced it would spend $2 billion on electrical projects, mostly coal-fired, and by year end reached agreement to spend $300 million on Colombian coal assets. It got permission from the Brazilian government this year to buy iron ore mines for $750 million. It spent $17.8 billion in 2006 for Inco's nickel mines and smelters in Canada, and as metal prices rose, earned nearly as much from them over the next two years as Inco had in the previous 10. Still, Agnelli insisted the very Canadian workers whose labor helped Vale make that money take cuts to their income -- causing the strike.

Workers and their families have struggled since the strike. The towns in Ontario and Newfoundland have suffered as well because many mining supply and service companies temporarily closed, idling untold additional workers. Kari Cusack, a member of Families Supporting the Strikers, talked about it early in November before a family day on the picket line in Sudbury. She told a local newspaper reporter:

"We see Vale's attack on Local 6500 as an attack on our entire community, and we want to do our part to fight back against corporate greed."

The Business Council for International Understanding chose that corporate social responsibility to reward.

In Brazil, Agnelli has shown off some of that corporate social responsibility as well. In September, the government fined Vale $20 million for failing to comply with an antitrust order. Last year, Agnelli secured a court injunction in an attempt to block protesters from the country's largest social activist group, the Landless Rural Workers Movement, rather than negotiate with those complaining that the company's iron furnaces were polluting their village and that a hydroelectric dam in which Vale is a partner was flooding their homes. Also last year, Brazil's Office of the Environment fined Vale $3 million for illegal sale of wood.

Workers from Canada and Vale Brazil demonstrated together in August in front of the multinational's Rio de Janeiro headquarters. They served pieces of a giant cake commemorating the 30th day of the USW strike in Ontario. There the Canadian workers learned that Agnelli had forced its Brazilian workers to accept a defined contribution pension plan. Now Agnelli is trying to force the Canadians take the same inferior plan.

The International Metalworkers' Federation (IMF), the National Union of Metalworkers of South Africa (NUMSA), the Botswana Power Corporation Workers Union (BCPWU) and others from around the world have written Agnelli expressing outrage about the strike. Bohithetswe Lentswe, BCPWU General Secretary, wrote:

"We have every reason to believe that Vale is trying to destroy its strongest collective bargaining agreement for the purpose of setting a precedent to weaken other collective bargaining agreements throughout the world. Vale is also attempting to export its anti-worker, anti-union practices in Brazil to the rest of the world."

Of course. That's what great CEOs do, as the Business Council for International Understanding will proclaim at its Dec. 3 dinner in the Waldorf-Astoria, New York City. With the cheapest tickets going for $1,000, it's likely none of those $29-an-hour Vale workers will get a seat. But Agnelli, who is one of six Vale executives who together pulled down $33 million last year, could effortlessly drop $100,000 for an "underwriting level" table of 10 at his award dinner.

Perhaps there the Business Council for International Understanding will detail its reasons for selecting Agnelli for the Dwight D. Eisenhower Global Citizenship Award. It only profiles Vale and Agnelli on its web page, without, for example, providing the kind of insight into Agnelli's personality that Antonio Regalado did for the Wall Street Journal in 2008 in a story:

"Current and former Vale executives say Mr. Agnelli can be hard on subordinates. Some of them cite what they say is an autocratic style and a table-pounding temper. . . . In internal company surveys, employees complain frequently that they are under too much pressure . . . Marco Dalpozzo, Vale's head of human resources, doesn't deny that Mr. Agnelli can be rough on people, "He's a tough guy," he says."

Again: of course. That's what business groups prize -- executives with table-pounding tempers.

The Business Council is, however, a group that claims it was started by the late President Dwight D. Eisenhower and named its prize for him. It's not clear, though, that the business values of the current council and Agnelli resemble those of President Eisenhower. For example, here's what the President wrote in November 1954:

Should any political party attempt to abolish social security, unemployment insurance, and eliminate labor laws and farm programs, you would not hear of that party again in our political history. There is a tiny splinter group, of course, that believes you can do these things. Among them are H. L. Hunt. . ., a few other Texas oil millionaires, and an occasional politician or business man from other areas. Their number is negligible and they are stupid.

To let the Business Council know the ways in which you think this award for Agnelli will increase its goal of international understanding, call 212-490-0460 in New York, 202-595-2668 in Washington or 44-207-225-3561 in London.

LabourStart has created a web page so you can easily write a personal note directly to Agnelli. It's here. It enables you to quickly drop Agnelli a little note telling him just how much you think he deserves this honor.

"Thatcher Dead" Text Sparks Fears - Despite Referring To A Cat

2009-11-13T10:15:46Z

A misconstrued text message announcing the passing of a beloved pet has sparked a flurry of diplomatic activity in Canada.