Judged By The Company You Keep

By the titled measure, I think we know how to evaluate Jamil Javani, the peripatetic Conservative who seems to have a special relationship with his old pal, JD Vance. Indeed, he even made it over to the chief MAGA propagandist, Breitbart News (formerly run by Steve Bannon), where he said, in regard to Canadian trade tensions wrought by Herr Trump's fits of pique,

Canadians would be “shooting ourselves in the foot if we continue this anti-America hissy-fit.”

In addition to media scrutiny over his unhelpful  comments, Toronto Star letter-writers have chimed in: 

“Anti-America, hissy fit,” is a rich statement coming from Jamil Jivani. His own “hissy fit” was on full display on election night, when he complained about Ontario Premier Doug Ford. This elected official seems to only care for promoting himself.

Paul Terech, Courtice, ON 

It’s difficult and problematic to have multiple voices speaking for the same political party. Having an MP saying one thing and the leader saying another is politically strange and probably not unifying. Conservative Leader Pierre Poilievre says he speaks for the party and that Conservative MP Jamil Jivani speaks for himself. Does this mean that a member of the party can say anything, even if it’s at odds with the party line? The Conservatives have numerous opinions under their very big tent, but when dealing with the public, conflicting messaging does come across as ambiguous and somewhat puzzling.

Douglas Cornish, Ottawa, ON 

The race to sell out Canada

For the last few months, we’ve had a clear front-runner in the race to sell out to/bow down to/kiss the ring of our former American friends — the Alberta separatist movement. After reading  Conservative MP Jamil Jivani’s comments regarding Canada’s efforts to remain sovereign and united, it’s no longer clear. The separatists are  neck and neck with the federal Tories.

Craig Gibson, Thornhill, ON

In addition to being an embarassment to Canada, Jamani can't be earning any points with his leader, Pierre Poilievre, still fighting the latest defection from his party's ranks, with possibly more to come.

Some Editorial Reflections

Although throughout most of my life I have been an inveterate writer of letters to the editor, I rarely write such missives anymore, for reasons that are not entirely clear to me. However, I do read editorial letters daily, and often like to acknowledge the keen insights contained therein. 

What follows are some of those insights:

Air Canada, WestJet, Air Transat suspend flights to Cuba, work to return travellers on island nation, feb. 11

Three people I  know in Toronto just cancelled their trips to Cuba. The reason they were given was a “shortage of fuel.” One of them said, almost casually, “It’s too bad my parents can’t go because of the fuel situation, while another one said, “Oh well, these things happen.”

The problem is not just a shortage of fuel. There is political strangulation that produces a fuel shortage. There are people making decisions that destroy livelihoods .

Cuba is being economically suffocated, and the people paying the price are not governments, but ordinary human beings: taxi drivers, hotel workers, musicians, café owners, guides, families who make their livings from tourism and human connection.

We are watching collective punishment.

It feels like we’re all in a school with a bully. Everyone knows who he is. Everyone knows what he’s doing. The rules exist. The charters exist. The teachers exist. And yet nothing happens. Not because no one sees it. But because everyone is afraid.

The bully is rich. He controls resources. He retaliates. He ignores norms. So the institution adapts. It stops enforcing rules and starts managing damage. Leadership becomes appeasement. Silence becomes strategy. This is how systems rot.

We are told to be calm. To be civil. To avoid anger. But there is something deeply corrupt about a world that demands politeness in the face of organized cruelty. Anger is not the problem. Moral numbness is.

Mary Y. Mouammar, Richmond Hill  

Do Republicans even know why they hate Canada?

Donald Trump threatens to block new Windsor-Detroit bridge, demands part ownership, Feb. 9

It is absolutely amazing how much U.S. President Donald Trump hates Canada. He is surrounded by a large group of sycophants who seem to hate everyone, with  Canada  at the top of the list. The problem is they react to things they do not understand, and they do not seem to look at facts. The Gordie Howe International Bridge is the subject of the latest stupidity. Canada paid for the bridge with Michigan’s co-operation and help in building it. That an American and a Canadian construction worker shook hands when both sides met in the middle  says it all, but the White House has no clue. 

Jack Hughes, Welland, ON

Tired of the insults, I’m no longer buying U.S. goods

As a senior living in southern Ontario, I have for years enjoyed the purchasing options of many U.S. branded products and services. I’ve purchased automobiles, major appliances, clothing, footwear, computers and  a wide range of American brands of food, home use cleaning chemicals, personal care items, lawn equipment and tools. I have also enjoyed  multiple  American-owned restaurant experiences. I’ve travelled south of the border and bought U.S.  entertainment  over the decades.

 Now I find myself  frustrated and tired of the ongoing insults from the current U.S. president claiming lack of respect and unfair treatment to America from Canada.

Now it’s time for me to move away from American products and  focus  on domestic  products and those  manufactured outside the U.S. — in countries that   value, appreciate and respect loyal customers.

Barry Brigham, London, ON

We could do more for Cuba 

I agree with the letter-writer who said she was happy to see that Mexico is offering some humanitarian aid to Cuba.

I would like to see Canada doing likewise. Is there any way that we can help Cuba with green energy? They have a great source of energy in sunlight, wind, and the ocean  to produce power on the island.

It puzzles me that the world stands by while a deranged president bullies the world into listening to his demands.

It breaks my heart that we are not doing more to help.

What has happened to Venezuela is unconscionable.

The Cubans are wonderful people and their island country is a good place to visit for those of us who love the sun, especially in the winter.

Lillian Shery, Toronto

While our government may have to be circumspect as it creeps around the mad king, it is clear that regular Canadians cannot and will not be silenced.

Callousness Or Cowardice?

 

In my previous post, I spoke about Canada's strange silence regarding Cuba, despite its long relationship with the island nation. In today's Globe and Mail, a letter-writer addresses the issue: 

Double standard?

Re “Cuba loses its Canadian tourists” (Morning Update, Feb. 11): Mark Carney seems to understand international bullying. He calls for “a new order that embodies our values, like respect for human rights, sustainable development, solidarity, sovereignty and territorial integrity of states.” So why is he silent so far about the U.S. attempt to strangle Cuba?

Mr. Carney says Canada should be principled and act consistently, “applying the same standards to allies and rivals.” That appears to be Canada’s position when it comes Greenland, but what about Cuba?

Mr. Carney specifically says we can’t “criticize economic intimidation from one direction, but stay silent when it comes from another.” So what about Cuba?

Mexico is not silent on Cuba’s situation, sending 800 tons of humanitarian aid. What about Canada?

Or are we just going to wait until we are the ones being economically terrorized by the bully?

Don McLean Hamilton

The only politician speaking out about the grave injustices Cuba is being subjected to is Don Davies, the interim leader of the federal NDP. And be sure to listen to Anita Anand's feckless non-response to him:

Canada's reaction to Trump's attempt at genocide is callous at best and cowardly at worst, and stands in sharp contrast to Mexico's. 

While Canada has many things to be proud of, this surely is not one of them.

Carney's Words Reverberate

I only have time for a short post, so I offer this point. While one hopes Mark Carney's words lead to lasting changes in international relations, one thing is certain. Many people are talking about it and even offering ways in which the Americans can be brought to heel. Two letter-writers demonstrate this:

Well, well, Prime Minister Mark Carney broke the internet. It’s not exactly on the scale of Taylor Swift but it’s so satisfying to see many political commentators, journalists and ordinary Canadians shower him with praise. Carney’s speech is well-structured and direct. It’s smart that he takes complex ideas and renders them in language that the ordinary person can understand and be convinced of. I think it is particularly smart of him to admit that Canada is a “middle power.” We are for sure not a superpower like the U.S., but if this middle power forms a strong alliance with the other middle powers of the world, our impact may exceed that of a superpower. I am extremely doubtful that Pierre Poilievre will be able to write or deliver a speech similarly powerful and substantial. Thank you prime minister, we are so proud of you.

 Gloria Fung, Unionville, ON 

How middle powers could impact the U.S. economy

As of November 2025, the top five holders of U.S. Treasury Securities were, in billions of U.S. dollars: Japan, $1,203; U.K. $889; China, $683; Belgium, $481; and Canada, $472. All others held $4,920.

NATO countries, including France; $378, Norway; $219, and Germany; $110, hold a total of at least $2,549 which is more than one quarter of all foreign held U.S. Treasury Securities.

There is already a trend for foreigners to reduce their already large U.S. Treasury holdings due to low-yield and increasing risk. If NATO countries, along with some non-NATO others, sold off their U.S. Treasury Securities in a co-ordinated response to aggressive action against Greenland, the risk of financing the increasing U.S. budget deficit would decrease incentive for foreigners to finance additional U.S. government borrowing.

The resulting higher U.S. interest rates and reduced government spending would have a major disruptive impact on the U.S. economy.

Mike Priaro, Calgary, AB 

One can only hope that the momentum continues.

And since Trump is so fond of A.I., here is a video posted by a social media wag:

Violence In The Classroom

I am a long-retired high school teacher who saw his share of unpleasantness in the classroom, but the events currently transpiring across the country are nothing I ever had to confront.

Recently, The Globe and Mail offered a detailed examination of widespread violence in  schools, and that includes violence perpetrated against both fellow students and teachers. Fortunately, because we are not a culture that worships the gun, as do the denizens of the Benighted States, most of that violence is physical and verbal, although dangerous weapons are not completely unknown.

Because the causes are myriad, there are no simple solutions. Poor parenting, frightened staff members, feckless administrators and large classes with few supports all contribute to the problem, and I shall excerpt just one paragraph from the piece that sheds some light:

The first step in addressing violence in schools is to puncture the culture of silence that surrounds it. Nobody on the ground wants to talk. Teachers are afraid they will be accused of incompetence or of betraying student confidentiality. Principals don’t want to alarm parents or to expose their own weakness as leaders. School boards worry about legal action. Victims fear retribution.

While those were problems even in my day, I can only imagine they have intensified. My retired teacher friends often lament the lack of institutional memory among today's staff, a memory that includes standing up to supine administrators and not being to afraid to make a fuss about problems. There were always firebrands amongs us, but today's staff, I suspect, are taught that having problems reflects badly on them and hence the impulse to let things fester. The norm has changed, and not for the better.

Globe and Mail readers offer some insights well-worth considering:

School of thought

Re “Violence in Canadian schools is reaching a tipping point. What needs to change?” (Opinion, Nov. 29): Schools are becoming more violent. Who is responsible? Well, everyone.

But it does start with parents who fail, often by example, to teach their children values such as empathy, compassion and respect for others. And it ends with parents, too.

As a former school trustee, here’s how I see that working: Teachers are unable to enforce discipline because they cannot rely on principals to back them up; principals in turn cannot count on support from administrators, who in turn cannot count on boards of trustees; elected trustees can be soft on discipline because of ideology or because they are terrified of voters, a great many of whom are parents.

This downward spiral will likely persist until those within the system get a grip and stop letting the buck be passed around. Instead, say “no” and hand it back.

Tom Masters Former Victoria school trustee; North Cowichan, B.C.

 

Before I retired, I taught in a school with a police officer stationed there on a daily basis (a school resource officer). He happened to be Black.

I witnessed the benefits as he broke down preconceived notions about the police, as well as prejudiced views about Black people. The students loved him and would often turn to him with their personal problems; he was like a big brother to them. There was no violence.

I witnessed the same interactions in a school where I did a stint as a supply teacher after retiring. That officer also happened to be Black. In both cases, the benefits were obvious.

I knew it was a big mistake when political groups insisted on terminating the program because of misguided concerns. The presence of these officers served not only to protect, but also offered fine role models for students.

Sheryl Danilowitz Toronto

It is said that the first step in solving a problem is acknowledging its existence. With so much evidence staring us in the face, it is past time to move on to the next step: addressing the violence in all ways possible. 

 

Setting The Record Straight

 I'm still in a bit of a writing slump, so I'll let others do the talking for me.

H/t Moudakis

A  Globe and Mail letter-writer weighs in on the F-35 versus Gripen question.

Canada should adopt a fighter jet which best meets the need for one that is cost-efficient, works well in our northern climate and falls within our control for easy maintenance and software.

I appreciate that some military officials favour the F-35 and believe while the U.S. administration is antagonistic to Canada, close co-operation with the U.S. military is possible. I think that trust is misplaced.

There is concern over a mixed fleet, but many of our allies have such arrangements. The air force currently operates more than 20 varieties of aircraft, so objections to adding Gripens to this fleet seem puzzling.

The Saab proposal to manufacture them in Canada sounds like a win-win that would allow us to rebuild our aeronautical capability. The F-35 does have better stealth capabilities, so buying the number already committed to may have merit.

Beyond that, I think the Gripen better suits Canada’s overall interests.

Carey Johannesson Victoria

 And a Star reader reflects on the hypocrisy of Pete hoekstra

Why the U.S. ambassador is wrong about his criticism of the Ronald Reagan tariff ads, Nov. 24

U.S. Ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra was not merely hypocritical for blaming Canada for “political interference” because of American propaganda seeking to influence politics abroad, as Éric Blais points out. The U.S. has, through use of military — either covertly or overtly, with or without allies — tried to force political change in other countries. In this century, America has exercised at least some level of political persuasion in Afghanistan (2001-2021), Iraq (2003-2011), Libya (2011), Syria (2014 to present), Pakistan (2000s to 2010), Yemen (2002 to present), Somalia (2007 to present) and the Philippines (2001 to present), not to mention Venezuela. There are dozens more examples if we go back through the previous century, including covertly supporting or waging actual violence against democratically elected regimes (Iran in 1953, Guatemala in 1954, Chile in 1973).

And let’s not forget the gratuitous insults against our head of state when U.S. President Donald Trump referred to Justin Trudeau as very dishonest and weak, two-faced, and “governor” while challenging Canadian sovereignty.

Hoekstra has opposed reproductive rights, gay adoption rights and gay marriage, parental leave for federal employees and expanding health care for kids. He has an A rating from the NRA for opposing gun control. He’s a true Trumpian, including the staggering hypocrisy he shows in his criticism of an ad that was simply truthful.

Barry Kent MacKay, Markham, ON

No doubt the questions will rage for some time, but the bottom line has to be that we can only retain our sovereignty by making assessments and needs that reflect our country, not the whims, passions and prejudices of foreign entities.

Thanks For Your Input

My previous post centred around that loud-mouthed 'diplomat', Pete Hoekstra, and his incessant nattering which, I guess, is supposed to put us in our place. When Uncle Sam's emissaries speak, we are supposed to listen and click our heels, no matter how much threatening, bellicose nonsense they may spew.

Well, many take issue with both the content and the tone of Hoekstra's delivery when talking to Canada. Here is a measure of their displeasure.

Future of trade talks depends on Canada’s purchase of American fighter jets,” Nov. 19

It’s time to stop giving U.S. Ambassador Pete Hoekstra a platform and a voice to malign and threaten his host country. He is not living up to his post as Ambassador which includes promoting his nation’s interests through diplomacy, trade, and cultural exchange. Not “f-bombs” and schoolyard bullying.

In any other circumstances and from any other country, this man would be declared “persona-non-grata” and thrown out for his egregious behaviour. But of course, since we’re walking on the eggshells that U.S. President Donald Trump has strewn before us, our politicians have to be the adults in the room and behave with tact and clearer heads.

The only thing we can do, and should do, is shut him up by ignoring him completely and not inviting him to ever address another audience in Canada again.

Bonnie Beaudry, Burlington, ON

U.S. wants us to buy American arms, not defend ourselves

Ambassador Pete Hoekstra’s insistence on Canada buying U.S.-made F-35 fighter jets confirms a suspicion I’ve had for some time. U.S. President Donald Trump wants us to massively increase our military budget, not so we can defend ourselves, but so that we’ll spend lots of money on American arms.

Elizabeth Block, Toronto 

Let’s renew CUSMA before we buy any jets

Here’s the deal Ambassador Hoekstra: No decision regarding further purchases of your F-35 fighter jets until AFTER the Canada-U.S.-Mexico Agreement is renewed.

Robert Woodcock, North York

Canadians traditionally have been a very reasonable, accommodating people. Clearly, Mr. Hoekstra and the mad king he works for have misinterpreted that national characteristic as a weakness inviting rampant abuse. One hopes the unfolding of events ultimately convinces them otherwise.

My Aching Joints

I have to admit I am feeling somewhat abused these days, and my psychic joints are paying the price. First it was 'elbows up', then it was 'elbows down", followed by the latest exercise, clearly the most painful of all, 'bowing down',  Like the old man on the porch brandishing his cane, I want to tell the kids to either get off my lawn or show some spine.

And I am clearly not alone in my sense of injury. The other day, Andrew Phillips wrote:

I won’t pretend to know what was going through the PM’s mind as he bowed to the president [i.e., apologized for the Reagan-Ford ad]. I can only assume he was thinking many of the same things any self-respecting Canadian would be thinking. Such as: “I can’t believe I have to do this.”

And what did Carney get for that act of self-abasement? Nothing, as far as we can tell.

But this apology is troubling for a lot of reasons. It’s not just that it makes Canada look weak and divided, though the hard reality is that this country is both of those things right now, much as we’d all like to think otherwise.

It’s worse than that. It reinforces the worst of all the things we’ve learned about Trump and how he deals with anyone who gets in his way. Which is that, according to him and his acolytes, pushing back is the greatest sin for those he’s decided to lean on.

Such grovelling, according to Phillips, is an affront to truth.

It accepts the premise that it’s illegitimate for Canada to make its case with the United States openly and unapologetically. It undercuts the notion that talks between Canada and the U.S. are a dialogue between two parties with their own valid interests. Not between equals, exactly, but between countries that have the most basic right to advocate for themselves.

Letters to the editor reflect widespread discontent with what Carney did. 

Carney’s apology to Trump an embarrassment for Canada

As a proud Canadian I was embarrassed when Prime Minister Mark Carney apologized to President Donald Trump for Doug Ford’s TV ad, a perfectly fair critique of Trump’s reckless tariff threats.

That ad spoke truth to power. Carney’s apology spoke weakness to it.

This wasn’t leadership. It was capitulation. Apologizing when nothing wrong was done isn’t defaulting to Canadian politeness. Rather, it erodes our credibility and emboldens bullies. Trump’s bluster over tariffs is the real offence — risking a trade war that harms everyone. Ford did what was right by advertising the truth. Whereas Carney’s needless deference whitewashes the aggressor and makes Canada look weak.

Where does this end? Will Carney next grovel to U.S. ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra, the Trump clone whose rhetoric has been laced with expletives?

At this rate, Carney will likely apologize on our behalf for existing on the same continent. It’s time for Carney to reclaim the persona he showed during his election run: the bold economist who charmed Americans on The Daily Show with wit, courage, candor and unapologetic smarts. He was the anti-Trump: thoughtful, internationalist, unafraid to call out nonsense.

Canadians aren’t being led right now; we’re being shamed. We voted for a leader who’d stand tall on the world stage, “Elbows Up,” advocating for fair trade, enduring alliances and a respected Canada.

Prime Minister Carney, stop apologizing when you are in the right. Reclaim your voice. Our pride and our principles depend on it.

Tony D’Andrea, Toronto

Our PM needs to stop apologizing to our neighbour to the south

Canada owes no apologies to Donald Trump or the United States. Trump cares only about his ego and the almighty dollar.

I’m sure many decent Americans would agree. The apology our prime minister owes is to Canadians for wilting under pressure.

Stop being nice and stand up for our country.

That is what strong leaders do.

Rick Lockman, Orillia, Ont.

You stand up to bullies, you don’t say sorry to them

As a left-winger, I never thought I’d ever say this, but I’m totally on Doug Ford’s side when it comes to standing up to Trump.

You cannot appease bullies and tyrants, you must confront them. Ford was right to run the Reagan ad during the World Series. Prime Minister Mark Carney was wrong to apologize for it to a wannabe dictator.

It’s as if Carney decided to go as Neville Chamberlain for Halloween.

Steve Andrews, Toronto

Here's one more:

Good cop, bad cop

Re “Ford the bully, Carney the conciliator: the dream team” (Report on Business, Nov. 3): Sure, we’re known for politeness, but there’s a difference between courtesy and submission. When Doug Ford aired the truth about tariffs on U.S. television, that was courage.

That’s why Mark Carney’s apology shames me as a proud Canadian. After nine months of failed diplomacy, he should read the national mood of resistance to Donald Trump.

Mr. Ford stood up for Canada; Mr. Carney bowed down. His deference whitewashes the aggressor and makes us look like beggars in our own backyard.

We voted for a leader who’d stand tall on the world stage, “elbows up,” advocating for fair trade, enduring alliances and a respected Canada. He should rediscover the bold economist who once charmed Americans on The Daily Show with wit, courage and candor, and spoke truth without flinching.

Mr. Carney should stop apologizing when he is in the right and reclaim his voice. Our pride and principles depend on it.

Tony D’Andrea Toronto

National pride is a delicate virtue, one that needs to be regularly nourished by strong, visionary leadership. I fear that presently, there is a deep void that no one, as far as I can discern, seems fit to fill. 

It's Plain To See

Just a brief post today. For anyone clear-headed enough to see, it is obvious that the United States is led by a man-baby. Trump's recent tantrum over Doug Ford's ad attests to that fact. Two letters in today's Star are offer some thoughtful reflection on his 'leadership'.

Susan Delacourt’s opinion piece caused me to think outside the box. Since neither thoughtful and informed discussions, nor good cop-bad cop tactics are effective ways to get Donald Trump to consider fair negotiations, how about bringing together different kinds of experts that might know better how to crack that nut?

Since Trump acts like a petulant and vindictive child, why not try brainstorming with a team of leading child psychologists to explore ways to tap into a more rational side of Trump?

Think about it: All methods of negotiating, such as those that might be taught at Harvard Law School mentioned in the opinion piece, assume rational and mature thought as a base line.

So why not try an approach with Trump more suited to deal with the behaviour he is demonstrating?

Annie Brown, Newmarket

 

 As an American now living in Canada, I would like to thank our president and his loose cannon rhetoric.

Since his failed bid to annex this fine country, angry Canadians are spending their vacation money at home. I live in rural Cape Breton, and we had the best tourist season ever.

Keep up the good work King Donald.

Martin Aucoin, Margaree, N.S. 

Perhaps a measure of wry disengagement is part of the antidote to Trump's childishness; it may help to save both our national character and our sense of humour.

Snowflakes In Amerika

The term snowflake has traditionally been used by the right to denigrate progressives; it is a pejorative suggesting that the left is too easily offended by things the right represents. However, during the tenure of Herr Trump's second presidency, it seems to be a more apt description of the right.

We now know how easily offended they have become; for example, anything less than a full-throated endorsement of the late Charlie Kirk sends them into paroxysms of indignation and rage. Indeed, that inability to tolerate any criticism or alternative view led to the removal of Jimmy Kimmel (now reinstated), threats of retaliation, firing of professors, etc. And, of course, Trump's thin skin is legendary, prompting him to go after those he feels have wronged him, i.e. criticized him in any manner.

The entire regime sings from the same hymn book. One of the more recent examples is to be found in the U.S. Ambassador to Canada, Pete Hoekstra, clutching his pearls over what he feels is an insufficient deference to and adulation of his benighted country by Canadians.

“I’m disappointed that I came to Canada, a Canada (where) it is very, very difficult to find Canadians who are passionate about the American-Canadian relationship,” said Hoekstra during a luncheon with the Halifax Chamber of Commerce.

While we undoubtedly grieve over Hoekstra's hurt feelings, we are not about to embrace him and his values.

 "When you kick the dog, you can't blame it for snarling back," said Flavio Volpe, president of the Automotive Parts Manufacturers' Association and member of the prime minister's Canada-U.S. relations council.

"It's gaslighting 101," Volpe added. "You probably should get someone to tell him a little bit more about how to properly do Canada-U.S. diplomacy, but I'm not sure he'd listen." 

In an interview on Rosemary Barton Live that airs Sunday morning, Conservative House Leader Andrew Scheer said any time a foreign country slaps tariffs or raises the idea of annexation, "of course Canadians are going to react negatively to that."

One would think that would be obvious to everyone, but perhaps the American hubris and arrogance is so great they cannot conceive of anyone thinking ill of them.

Perhaps, too, the delicate Mr. Hoekstra should be shielded from this fact: Canadians are continuing to shun travel to the U.S.

That big reduction amounted to a 32.4 per cent drop in the number of Canadian-resident return trips from the United States in July. About 2.6 million trips meeting that criteria were made, Statistics Canada said. 

The animus toward the U.S. is widespread and deeply felt by Canadians. Consider these two letters from The Star:

Canadians are passionate, just not about the tire fire south of the border

U.S. ambassador to Canada disappointed by ‘anti-American’ rhetoric, ‘elbows up,’ Sept. 18

Pete Hoekstra, the U.S. ambassador to Canada, is disappointed we are not passionate about the American-Canadian relationship.

Is he not paying attention?

I believe Canadians are passionate about peace, order and good governance. And good governance means good for all citizens, not just those who agree with you. The majority of us still aspire to a more just, equitable and inclusive society. “Elbows up” is not just about tariffs. It’s also about values. We are not passionate about our relationship with Russia or China. Those countries and the U.S. can govern themselves however they see fit. That is their prerogative. But we don’t have to agree or like it.

I am passionate about our relationship with the U.S. and am very concerned. I am sure many other Canadians are as well. I am concerned their democracy is in trouble.

It disappoints me ambassador Hoekstra doesn’t seem to understand that.

Stan Spicker, Midland, Ont.

Ambassador not thrilled with Canada’s ‘elbows up’ attitude. Too bad

U.S. ambassador to Canada Pete Hoekstra doesn’t like the idea the Canadian elbow is in the eye of their economic interest . Tough!

Canada is not your 51st state and freedom of speech and ‘elbows up’ is a Canadian democratic right.

The U.S. ambassador may believe the unjust tariffs imposed on Canada are a goodwill gesture, and the fascist state of mind of the United States is something to which Canadians should acquiesce. But Canadians would be wise to remind him he is a guest here in this country and we don’t appreciate being lectured to by a foreign government who turns a blind eye to the genocide that is taking place in Gaza.

We as Canadians want a good relationship with our neighbour from the south, but we are well-educated adults and we are quite capable of conducting our affairs without joining United States or accepting their propaganda.

Elbows up is a slogan of importance and Mr. Ambassador should feel lucky it’s not the middle finger. 

Cran Campbell, Langley, B.C.

The sun is rapidly setting on the American empire, leaving its citizens in a darkness that seems to be both impenetrable and irreversible.