A Thought On A Hot Evening

Confined as I have been to the house today and tonight thanks to the heat and humidity, I thought I would make a brief posting. I've been writing recently about the importance of critical thinking skills. Following is a link to a National Post piece that my son just sent me in which reporter Jonathon Kay justifies publishing articles by convicted felon Conrad Black. If you are interested, take a look at the piece and see if you can spot some of the shortcomings of logic within it and the likely real purpose it serves.

Some Insights On Rupert Murdoch's Troubles

My friend Gary, who has developed quite a talent for epistolary irony, sent me an email this morning on the Murdoch appearance yesterday before the British Parliament. With his permission, I am posting it here:

Hi Lorne:

I was pleased to see and hear that the people at the top are innocent of any wrongdoing, and it appears that they were either mislead, deceived, or simply let down by those in upper or lower middle management. Once the evil had been discovered and recognized they moved quickly to extend their apologies for the actions of those they had entrusted the everyday operation of the company to. The accountability buck stops at the top and they want the public, and especially the victims, to know that it will never happen again on their watch.

Rupert himself is a victim of a pie thrower and it was only through the quick actions of his trophy wife that he escaped embarrassment and shamed the police. A person who surrounds himself, both in his personal life and working life with such beauty and talent can't be held accountable for the actions of those who let such a great man down. A man who built his empire through his own personal strength and the wise words of his father. A man who even had the ear of the Prime Minister and perhaps other body parts. It is the bad, the ugly and simply those who are jealous of this man's greatness. Rupert is a true corporate soldier who even when facing peril wanted Parliament and the Public to know the truth. A very humble man indeed.


I have notice when flipping the channels how the Sun Station is playing this all down. The Sun keeps repeating how the wiki leaks, which they hammer, was far worse, has been suppressed by the left and their left leaning papers. Sun spokespeople, with their talk experts, keep repeating that it is wrong by other media to see this as an opportunity to pile on Murdock.

Our Canadian Papers Can Take a Page and a Lesson From This:

Canadian Conservative Media 101: Gary

More Evidence Of Bill Blair's Failed Leadership

The 'offer no apologies and accept no responsibility' head of the Toronto Police Services, Chief Bill Blair, has another facet of failed leadership to answer for. According to a report in The Toronto Star, a U of T student has documented at least eight occasions Toronto police have violated rules in place since 2006 requiring them to wear name tags.

According to the story,Vikram Mulligan says he was so troubled by police failing to identify themselves at last summer’s G20 summit he began photographing officers without proper name tags.

At a time when the Toronto force inspire more fear and loathing than admiration, this is hardly the moment for them to become de facto 'secret police.'

The rogue police behaviour the article describes is yet one more troubling indication that the lack of strong leadership and ability to inspire discipline is continuing to have widespread repercussions.

Once More, The SIU Cannot Fulfill Its Mandate

In what I can only construe as inept or complicit leadership at the top, the Toronto Police Service, thanks to massive obstructionism amongst the rank and file, has once again thwarted the SIU in fulfilling its mandate to properly and effectively investigate police wrongdoing.

As reported in The Globe and Mail:

Three officers investigated in a high-profile case of alleged police brutality at last year's G20 summit will not be charged after several peers, including supervisors, did not or could not say whether the officers had been involved in beating Adam Nobody, the province's police watchdog said Monday.

In my opinion, that lead tells us all we need to know about how much the Toronto Police co-operated with the SIU in its investigation. That after all this time only one officer, Babak Andalib-Goortani, has been charged, despite the fact that Adam Nobody was attacked by a phalanx of cops, means that the corrupt concealment of the truth by Toronto's 'finest' has been ongoing, and the person most responsible for facilitating that culture in the context of the G20, Police Chief Bill Blair, has much to answer for.

Despite his unwillingness to acknowledge any responsibility for his officers' actions or their subsequent concealment and obstructionism, Chief Bill Blair needs to resign as the first step in beginning to heal the massive breach in public trust that arose from the G20 police actions. To do anything less is to put career above the public good.

A Late Afternoon Thought On The Murdoch Scandal

I just read a post by The Disaffected Lib discussing the mounting number of resignations resulting from the Rupert Murdoch scandal. Both the Commissioner and Assistant Commissioner of the Metropolitan London Police (Scotland Yard) have resigned because of the disrepute they have brought to the organization through their actions and omissions.

Its a funny thing about the British, isn't it? I remember years ago when they were involved in the Falklands War, Lord Carrington, the British Foreign Secretary, resigned because he hadn't anticipated the conflict.

Meanwhile, in Canada, whenever something goes awry, a politician or public official may say he or she 'accepts full responsibility,' she retains her job, and everyone moves on as if nothing happened. Or to bring it even closer to home, Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair, who apparently apologizes for nothing and accepts responsibility for nothing, continues in his position despite the atrocities committed by the police under his control during last June's G20 summit.

Only in Canada, you say?

An Ethical Dilemma - One Posible Answer

Yesterday I posed a hypothetical ethical dilemma sent to me by my son; briefly, it outlined a situation where a friend would be attacked by a bear, his injuries not known, but they could range from life-threatening to superficial. The only way to save him (her) from that fate was to accept a fate of your own, which was to live the rest of your life in rain. Here is the answer that I sent him:

This is the sort of vexing question that seems to have no right or wrong answer.  In considering the seemingly selfless option of saving your friend from an uncertain fate, you must also consider the consequences of that act of altruism against the misery that you will inflict, not only on yourself, but on those around you.  For example, if you were married, would it be fair to consign your partner, who presumably had no say in your choice, to a lifetime of rain? Indeed, wouldn't that lifetime of rain also have an effect on everyone around you, perhaps sending them into deep depression, disability or even death through suicide? 

When you think about it, the dilemma involves all of your neighbours, friends, and fellow citizens. Because of the related nature of the world, none of the choices we make are truly made in isolation, so the premise of the original question is flawed.  Is it more altruistic to save your friend, or is it more altruistic to consider the possible repercussions of your act on a much wider range of people?

Reminds me of the saying that no good deeds go unpunished.

I will return to this in my next post as to why recognizing this inter-relatedness is vital if there is to be any hope for humanity's future.

An Ethical Dilemma

Although the following might seem rather tangential to what I usually discuss on this blog, an email recently sent to me by my son is, I think, highly relevant for a number of reasons, which I will discuss tomorrow.


Here is the ethical dilemma:

Think of someone who is your friend (do not select your best friend, but make sure the person is someone you would classify as "considerably more then an acquaintance"). This friend is going to be attacked by a grizzly bear. Now this person will survive the attack; that is guaranteed. There is a 100 percent chance that your friend will live. However, the extent of his injuries is unknown; he might receive nothing but a few superficial scratches, but he also might lose a limb (or multiple limbs). He might recover completely in twenty-four hours with nothing but a great story, or he might spend the rest of his life in a wheelchair. Somehow you have the ability to stop this attack from happening. You can magically save your friend from the bear. But his (or her) salvation will come at a peculiar price: if you choose to stop the bear, it will always rain. For the rest of your life, wherever you go, it will be raining. Sometimes it will pour and sometimes it will drizzle-but it will never not be raining. But it won't rain over the totality of the earth, nor will the hydrological cycle de disrupted; these storm clouds will be isolated, and they will focus entirely on your specific where-abouts. You will also never see the sun again. Do you stop the bear, accepting the lifetime of rain?

He sent me the response given by a friend of his, and closed the missive with the following:

Dad, what would your response be?

I sent him a response, but won't post it until tomorrow in case anyone would like to weigh in on this scenario.

The Ever-Increasing Importance Of Alternative Media

After reading Rick Salutin's column yesterday about the very real limitations of Canadian journalism even when juxtaposed against the scandal engulfing Rupert Murdoch's publishing empire, I had the opportunity to read a story from rabble.ca that confirms the need for the independent voices working in alternative media. Entitled CUPW: A cautionary tale of union-busting, with a little help from the media, the article underscores the frequently lazy journalism practised in MSM while amply demonstrating how the conservative forces in our country use it to propagate and perpetuate its message.

The following excerpt provides a brief overview of a few of the fictions about Canada Post promulgated by those eager to whet the newly-awakened appetite for union-busting rife in North America:

 ...as the strike loomed, Canada Post announced that it had calculated the union's demands would cost $1.4 billion. When the union demanded an explanation of this eye-popping figure, management refused. But the figure appeared in many media stories.

Another widely used figure was a 17 per cent drop in mail volumes that supposedly occurred between 2006 and 2010. This number received massive media coverage and was cited to support the myth of financial crisis....Prior to the strike/lockout, the union was informed that admail and parcels were rebounding. Between 2006 and 2009, letter volumes decreased by 7 per cent, not 17 per cent. But the fake 17 per cent is still being bandied about by the media, despite union requests that this misleading figure be corrected. Nobody who reported the 17 per cent, including reputable academics and columnists, ever bothered to publicly correct their misleading statements, despite being contacted.

I hope you will take a few minutes to read the entire article. The more information we have from all sources, the more effectively we can think for ourselves - a much preferable option, in my view, than the Pavlovian slobbering the conservative agenda is designed to elicit.

Rick Salutin on Rupert Murdoch

For those exulting in the ongoing misfortunes of Rupert Murdoch (and I readily and enthusiastically admit to being one of them), Rick Salutin has a thoughtful column in today's Star warning us that we really have little room for self-righteousness when it comes to the state of journalism in Canada.

Offering a brief historical overview of the craft, Salutin calls into question the traditional notion of journalism as a noble calling. Considering the decline in news quality we have witnessed over the past several years, especially in CBC television news, I think the columnist is once more spot on.

Tory Lite - McGuinty and Public Sector Cuts

Dalton McGuinty, the Ontario Premier who, as I mentioned in previous posts, will not be receiving my support in the October election over his shameless disavowal of any responsibility for the police abuses during last year's G20 Summit, has often been called Blue Lite, a reference to his conservative proclivities. Today, its seems that he has stolen a page from his rival Tim Hudak's 'Changebook' by announcing that between now and next March, 1900 public sector workers will lose their jobs.

As reported in The Star, the first round of cuts mean the province will stop verifying local social assistance distribution, reduce staffing that monitors collection agencies, and lay off 57 people with technical expertise in water safety and air quality in the environment ministry.

Not to worry, according to Environment Minister John Wilkinson, who says these 'staff reductions' will have no impact on the public, and that the cuts were the type of “pruning” people expected.

Orwell warned about the political misuse of language, including euphemisms, as a means of defending the indefensible, but I cannot help wondering whether this 'pruning' will have an impact on the McGuinty 'harvest' in October.

How The Harper Government Defines Efficiency At The CBC

While it will likely come as no surprise to many, the Harper Government has within its sights the CBC, the sometimes irksome public broadcaster that the right-wing so often loves to hate. As reported online in today's Globe, the Heritage Minister, James Moore, says that a 5% federal funding cut should not be onerous for the Corporation.

Perhaps part of the larger Tory agenda, not just for the CBC but the country as a whole, was revealed in the following statement by the Minister:

“The truth is the CBC is finding efficiencies. The CBC used to have nine unions. Now there are six. They’ve sold assets that, frankly, they weren’t using.”

So, it would seem that union-busting and asset sales form an important part of the long-term strategy of these self-proclaimed master managers of the economy.

One can only shudder when considering the future shape of this country.

Critical Thinking: Do We Get The Kind Of Political Leadership We Deserve?

In many ways, I suspect that we get exactly the kind of political representation that we deserve. A population that is either largely disengaged from the political process or lacking in fundamental critical thinking skills invites our elected representatives to treat us with disdain, safe in the knowledge that few will rouse themselves to object. The effects of this kind of passivity and lazy thinking are most evident when politicos are campaigning for our vote, making outrageous promises and guarantees that show how little they really think of us.

Take, for example, Rob Ford's successful bid to become the mayor of Toronto, based almost exclusively on the promise to “end the gravy train” that was, according to the mythology advanced by the true believers, sapping the Big Smoke of its monetary resources and bleeding the taxpayers dry. So, in a mass Pavlovian response, the people elected the big fellow, only to now learn that the putative rich diet of the metaphorical locomotive never existed.

In an excellent piece by Roy James in today's Star entitled Rob Ford's gravy train running on fumes, we learn that, after spending $350,000 on a consultant telling them things they already knew, the City spends most of its money on core services, nary a gravy boat in site (forgive me for mixing my metaphors):

As on many other files, the civic leader was missing in action. So, too, was the anticipated list of huge savings to be found in bloated departments. And the hit list of waste and gravy.

It turns out that if Ford is going to find “savings” from the city’s water, garbage and transportation departments he will have to convince city council to keep the blue box out of apartments and condos, reduce snow clearing, cut the grass and sweep the streets less often, and end fluoridation of Toronto’s drinking water — all politically explosive issues.

For that — and a list of nickel-and-dime, nip-and-tuck manoeuvres — Toronto could potentially, possibly, save up to $10 million to $15 million in departments that spend $1 billion, one-third of which comes from taxes.

City councillors didn’t need to pay a consultant $350,000 to tell them where to find those “savings.” Council considers them every year — and often recoils from implementing them.

The mayor has fed the general expectation that the consultants from KPMG would use their fresh eyes to uncover bushels of low-hanging fruit that nobody had identified before — the “gravy.”

They haven’t.

Can this reality actually come as a surprise to the voting public? I would like to say no, but sadly, for the aforementioned reasons, the answer has to be yes.

I hope you will take a few moments to read the entire article.

Netweeper Inc. - A Canadian Company That Facilitates Internet Censorship Abroad

In an age when regulation of shoddy business practices seems to be rapidly eroding, the ethos today being that anything inhibiting growth is bad, it may not come as a surprise that both the Federal and the Ontario Provincial Governments are complicit in inhibiting the free flow of information in countries with repressive regimes.

The latest Canadian salvo against human rights is revealed in a story appearing in today's Toronto Star. Entitled Canada needs clear cyberspace censorship policy, watchdog says, the piece reveals how both levels of government virtually endorsed a Guelph-based company that produces content-filtering software that it sells to repressive countries to control what is available to their citizens on the Internet. In the United Arab Emirates, Netsweeper Inc., which has received Canadian government grants, presented a domestic telecom called Du with an award for its use of green technology. Representatives of both the Harper and McGuinty governments were on hand for the ceremony, but as reported in The Star, the problem is this:

Du uses Netsweeper software to block content from UAE Internet users, including political, religious and human rights material, according to the Open Net Initiative, a collective of researchers that track Internet censorship and surveillance.

The question we, as Canadians, have to ask ourselves is whether it is right to both fund and endorse companies that make it easier for such countries to repress their citizens. Do we take a stand based on common principle, or do we hew to the egregiously amoral philosophy that markets will decide the fate of such enterprises?

The State of Journalism

Thanks to Dr. Dawg for posting this link to an essay by Kai Nagata, who writes about why he recently quit his job as a reporter for CTV. His observations about the current state of television journalism are instructive, and will be of interest to anyone who worries about the increasing vapidity of news content these days.

Unions - Part Two

Thanks to fellow-blogger Orwell for providing this link to the Australian version of the video I wrote about yesterday:

What Have Unions Done For Us?

I just came across the following video on You Tube. Although directed toward an American audience, its message is completely applicable to Canada as well. Enjoy!

Critical Thinking: The Assault On Reason

The following is a review I wrote about four years ago of Al Gore's book, The Assault on Reason, a work that addresses many of the problems arising when the populace at large lacks the capacity for critical thought. Although geared to an American audience, Gore's points are universally applicable, and especially germane to my previous post on critical thinking, the only real defense we have against government manipulation of the electorate:

Having just completed Al Gore’s The Assault on Reason, I have to confess to being profoundly disturbed. If his thesis is to be accepted, the greatest threat to the foundations of American society comes not from some shadowy terrorist organization but something much closer to home: the American government itself. It is an assertion that deserves to be taken seriously.

Drawing upon the beginnings of the American Constitution, Gore tells us that the Founders placed a heavy reliance on two interrelated notions: reason and a well-informed citizenry. These, plus the checks and balances implicit in the three branches of government (executive, legislative, and judicial), were believed to provide the greatest chances of survival for this new experiment in democracy. However, under the current Bush-Cheney Administration, Gore suggests that these safeguards are failing

In an obviously well-researched effort, the author takes us through a variety of means whereby that administration sidesteps, circumvents, ignores or otherwise contemns the constitutional strictures on the executive branch. Were this a work of fiction, the reader would find the narrative implausible. Sadly, what Al Gore conveys is all too real.

This tale of administrative malfeasance has many facets: there is an indifferent legislative body more intent on raising money to get reelected than debating in Congress; there are the machinations of George Bush and Dick Cheney to reward their friends while at the same time ensuring that the average citizen is ill-served; there is the manipulation of people’s fears as opposed to appealing to their reason; all are grim reminders of what happens when people take their government for granted. Whether Gore examines the sinister repealing of pollution laws or the insidious misinformation put out about climate change, the reader quickly realizes that unless citizens promptly re-engage in the democratic process, there is little hope for the future of America’s grand experiment.

He does, however, end the book on a note of real hope. Although the historical notion of the marketplace of ideas, where people shared information and communicated with government in a meaningful way no longer exists, Gore suggests that a new infrastructure has arisen and is evolving whereby that marketplace might once again thrive. It is called the Internet. He points out the current egalitarian nature of the Web, whereby anyone with an opinion can form a group and invite others of like mind to join, whether it is a blog, a community forum, or a national meeting place. Its advantage is the absence of geographical or travel obstacles to forming or joining such groups, meaning that they are open to everyone. The potential to be once again well-informed and active is there, although I think the author downplays the difficulties inherent in having such a cornucopia of choice. How, for example, doe one separate the proverbial wheat from the chaff? Nonetheless, his underlying point is sound, namely that citizens now have a means to begin reinserting themselves in the democratic process in a meaningful way.

This is a book that has implications for all democratic governments and therefore should be widely read. As a Canadian, I couldn’t help but think of my own government under Stephen Harper which has, for example, severely restricted the flow of information about our troops’ mission in Afghanistan; facts that were previously widely available are no longer so, the justification being ‘national security issues,’ but more likely is a response to widespread criticism of the mission amongst Canadians.

A good first step on the journey to becoming an informed citizen who can work toward a renewed democracy is the reading of The Assault on Reason; it is a book alternately disheartening, inspiring, informative and provocative. At no time is it boring.

Is This A Quest For Justice, Or A Thirst For Revenge?

While I doubt that I will ever be accused of being 'soft on crime,' agreeing with the view held by many that the Canadian judicial system tends to be too lenient in too many cases, my belief in the deterrent effect of stern sentencing and less liberal parole provisions is trumped, when the two areas come into conflict, by my deep desire to see justice done and fairness practised. In the case of the 15-year-old who stands accused of killing Officer Garrett Styles, it seems the Crown is motivated, not by a quest for justice, but a thirst for revenge.

As reported in The Star, the Crown is seeking not only to charge the teen as an adult, which may or may not be defensible, but also with first-degree murder, which, upon conviction, would require a minimum 25-year-sentence before parole. From my perspective, this charge is unwarranted and indefensible.

Although Canadian law allows for the laying of a first-degree murder charge when a police officer is killed, one of the hallmarks of a fair and compassionate system of justice is the consideration of the circumstances surrounding the death. Clearly, from what I do know of the situation, the teen panicked when stopped by Officer Styles and foolishly tried to flee, dragging the officer along with him, his actions culminating in the van overturning, leading to Styles' death. Without minimizing the loss to the family and the larger community incurred by his death, it was clearly unintended, caused by a stupid thing a kid did.

And I think that is the lens through which this tragedy should be viewed. A foolish kid, engaged in foolish behaviour without consideration of consequences, the sort of thing teens have been doing for millennia. Should a stiff sentence be sought? Perhaps, but justice will not be served by ensuring that a 15-year-old who made some stupid choices does not get out of prison until he is 40.

Shame on the Crown for pandering to the public and the police for the choice it has made.

The Real News Commentary on G20 Summit Police Crimes

As always, The Real News offers a refreshing perspective rarely found in the mainstream media. Anything that continues to keep the G20 police abuses of Charter Rights in the public forum can be nothing but good for our democracy.

A New Anti-Hudak Ad

Putting aside for the moment my concern about critical thinking skills, I must confess to deriving considerable pleasure out of the latest ad calling into question Tim Hudak's plans should he win the October Ontario election. Enjoy!

Developing Critical Thinking Skills – Travelling A Road That Never Ends

Even though I consider myself reasonably-well-educated and reasonably well-read, one truth I have come to realize is that the journey toward critical thinking never ends – it is always a work in progress, if I may mix my metaphors. I very much doubt that any of us can say that we have become the consummate analyzer of facts and information, dispassionately assessing information for its objective truth. No, because we are human, our values, our passions, and our prejudices will always be factors in how we process the information that bombards us daily. However, I think we are making real progress when we can recognize the role those factors play in our lives, and even just occasionally are able to stand outside of them and give another viewpoint some respect and consideration.

I mentioned in my previous post the ingredients I believe are necessary in this journey toward better thinking. Today I'd like to address one of those requirements, the need to read widely, something that I realize is a problem for many people. During my working life, I would always try to read a couple of papers, one local and one national, but otherwise the bulk of my reading, both fiction and non-fiction, was confined to bedtime and weekends. I know that for many, because of such time constraints, reading is not a priority. Yet there can be no substitute. It is surely an irony of the times that we have access to more information than any previous epoch, yet have so little time to consider it.

With that in mind, I would like to recommend a book that I recently read: The Trouble with Billionaires, by Linda McQuaig and Neil Brooks.
Now, the reactionary (one with whom I associate a reluctance to think widely and honestly) would immediately and simply reject considering such a work because Linda McQuaig is a 'leftie.' A more open-minded person would see the opportunity to learn new things or see issues from a new perspective. And that is precisely what this book enabled me to do on a number of issues including progressive taxation, corporate donations, the disproportionate influence the wealthy have exerted on government policy both historically and contemporaneously, and the problem of rising inequality in North America.

One small illustration from the book will serve to exemplify its value in widening one's perspective. Increasingly, corporate donations are being pursued and relied upon by universities. However, beyond the obvious danger that over-reliance on such funding sources can pose for program development and content, the authors reveal something that I have never considered:


The public also has an inflated sense of how much financing wealthy donors actually provide through philanthropy. For instance, there was much celebration in April 2010 when it was announced that a new $35 million donation from Peter Munk would enable the University of Toronto to establish a school of global studies. The new Munk School of Global Affairs (incorporating the existing Munk Centre for International Studies) is to be housed in a century-old stone building on fashionable Bloor Street West, and feature an elevated pixel board flashing the latest world news headlines.

But, although it wasn’t mentioned in the announcement, Munk will receive a $16 million tax reduction for his $35 million contribution, reducing his actual personal contribution to $19 million. So he will really be paying just a little more than half the cost of his contribution, while the government (Canadian taxpayers) will be paying just a little under half. For that matter, if Munk made his donation in the form of shares in publicly traded companies — as most donors do — then his tax savings will be considerably larger (possibly by millions of dollars) and his personal contribution far smaller than $19 million.

The Ontario and federal governments also announced that they would each contribute $25 million to the new Munk school, bringing the total contribution of Canadian taxpayers to at least $66 million. But when it came to naming the building, the taxpayers’ $66 million simply disappeared; only Munk’s $19 million (or less) counted. 

The authors then go on to talk about the influence Mr. Munk will have on the sorts of programs offered there. For example, is an examination of the role of multi-nationals and their sometimes nefarious behaviour in African gold extraction likely to be welcomed by Mr. Munk, head of Barrick gold?

I know that I have come no closer to answering the questions originally posed by fellow-blogger Orwell, but I will return with more thoughts on the development of critical thinking skills soon.

The Problem And The Power Of Critical Thinking

Fellow blogger Orwell recently wrote a post entitled The capacity for critical thought – how do we build it? In it, he was challenging readers to brainstorm ways in which this vital ability can be inculcated.

I posted the following as a comment:

While I am glad you asked the question, how to inculcate critical thinking skills is a tall order, one that I have wrestled with for several years. 

I am convinced that one of the absolute necessities that by no means guarantees success is a broad-based education, not merely the skills-training that often passes for education today. In that objective, both high schools and universities fail more than they succeed. Most provinces, I believe, require only one secondary school course in history, usually Canadian, and that is wholly inadequate for providing the kind of contextual knowledge that is needed in making critical assessments. 

One also has to have the time and willingness to read widely, refusing to allow only that which appeals to our values and prejudices to determine what we expose ourselves to. That in itself is a tall order.

There are, to be sure, methods to help us analyze arguments. To become familiar with and on the lookout for common fallacies of reasoning can help us detect b.s. more readily, whether the b.s. is based on absolutism, ad hominems, or straw man arguments, to name three common fallacies.

I look forward to reading what others have to say, and wish you luck in this noble quest.

As a teacher in my former life, I realized a long time ago that most of us are inclined to what might be called 'lazy thinking;' the act of simply accepting and regurgitating what one has been taught or told is much easier than actually having to think about and analyze situations. Let's face it, real thinking is hard work, forcing us to consider a variety of sources of information, the biases of those who produced that information, the role that our own values and prejudices play in interpreting that information, being open to alternative views, etc.

Yet what is the alternative? To be manipulated and ruled by those who talk and rant the loudest? (Think Fox News or Sun News.)

Inspired by my blogger colleague Orwell, I would like to examine some aspects of critical thinking in upcoming posts. Some will be original, while others adaptations of articles I wrote in the past on my other blog.

As always, all comments and suggestions are welcome.

The Right - Rarely Gracious, Even When In Power

One thing that I have noticed about the far right, and I think this applies both to those in the United States and in Canada, is that they have a winner-take-all attitude that rarely permits them a moment of serenity or grace. For example, even though they have largely won the battle of the airwaves, Fox News and their rabid supporters frequently grow almost apoplectic when any of their views are challenged. An examination of almost any Bill O'Reilly interview or utterance from the likes of the witless Ann Coulter offers ample confirmation of my contention.

That this affliction of spirit has permeated the Canadian political landscape is undeniable. The latest manifestation is found in Toronto City Councillor Giorgio Mammoliti who, like a prudish class monitor, videotaped the Dyke Parade this past weekend during which signs critical of Israel's treatment of Palestinians appeared. The witchhunt is now on, and, as reported in today's Star, Deputy Mayor Doug Holyday wants to examine the possibility of rescinding funding for Pride activities, and also opens the door to scrutinizing the funding of arts groups:

Holyday said art grant recipients — which are paid out of the same city fund as Pride — will also need to be scrutinized, but he isn’t sure the same rule should apply to them.

“I do think it extends to all communities, but I’d need to think a little bit more about that,” he said.

Quite an interesting position of outrage to take, given that no city official that I am aware of even raised a whimper of objection over the Islamic conference also held this past weekend which, although not publicly subsidized, saw two speakers talk about how gays would be killed in Islamic countries for their orientation.

It seems like freedom of expression in the Ford administration extends only to those whose views do not offend or threaten their personal beliefs. Or is that too harsh?

Toronto Star Readers Speak Out On Police Abuses

I have written before about how much we are enjoying our subscription to The Toronto Star, one of the few newspapers that still seems to be doing the job that the press traditionally performed: keeping the public well-informed and reminding the powers-that-be of ongoing scrutiny, functions vital to the maintenance of a healthy democracy. While much of the mainstream press has largely abandoned these roles in deference to their corporate masters, The Star, as they say, 'keeps on truckin.'

Part of that mission is well-fulfilled in the publication of readers' letters, something that reassures those of us in the progressive blogosphere that we are not alone in our thirst for societal fairness and justice. Three letters in today's paper, critical of the Toronto Police and the judiciary that treats them so differently from others, are well-worth reading.

Exploding the Myth: Conservatives as Able Managers of the Economy

Well, we have confirmation by Thomas Walkom in today's Star of two facts about Conservatives:

a) They are ideologically opposed to government being in the business of business
b) They are inept managers of the economy.

Both facts are evident in Walkom: AECL saga shows Conservatives have no business being in government, whereby the veteran journalist reveals how, in their haste to dispose of Atomic Energy Canada, they have concocted a sweetheart deal for their corporate sector friends at SNC-Lavilin Inc. that other 'free-enterprisers' can only dream about: in exchange for the $15 million purchase price for $1.1 billion in assets, Mr. Harper and the gang are paying SNC-Lavilin $75 million and placing AEC's $4.5 billion in liabilities solely on the shoulders of taxpayers.

Reminiscent of the time that other paragon of financial rectitude, former Ontario Premier Mike Harris, gave away for a pittance to a German Consortium Highway 407.

No doubt, to the true believers, such deals make sense. The rest of us can only ponder the truths revealed.

To Vote Or Not To Vote

Next to Stephen Harper achieving a majority government, for me the deepest disappointment in the recent federal election was the relatively poor voter turnout. Despite some really creative efforts to mobilize young people to become participants in the process, and despite warnings from pundits that the key to Harper's fate lay in the Conservative ability to mobilize their cadre of supporters, less than 60% of eligible voters turned out.

I mention these facts because of a thought-provoking column by Tim Harper in today's Star in which he poses the question of whether or not we have become a conservative country. His analysis is well worth reading on this Canada Day.

Sun News Network – Full of Sound And Fury, Signifying Nothing

When Sun News Network was fast approaching its debut, I had this fantasy whereby I would watch it diligently so that I could make regular complaints to the CRTC for every infraction of broadcast regulations it made. However, after watching about 10 minutes of its programming and realizing that it was aimed at a very dim audience devoid of even the most rudimentary skills in critical thinking, I knew that I lacked the constitution to fulfil that fantasy, and that my remaining time on earth could be better spent in more worthwhile pursuits.

I am therefore very happy to learn that others have taken up my aborted mission. According to a story in The Globe and Mail, the Canadian Broadcast Standards Council has been overwhelmed by a deluge of complaints following an interview by host Krista Erickson with dancer Margie Gillis broadcast June 1. The CSBC, which normally receives about 2000 complaints per year, has so far fielded 4300 on this interview alone, so many that it has requested on its website that viewers stop sending in any more objections to that sad episode.

Boorishly and pugnaciously aggressive, Erickson launches into an attack that can only be described as contrived and transparent, almost a caricature of what one might find on the Fox network. To her great credit, Gillis handles the attack with grace and calm, but seems a bit perplexed by the interview, clearly never having experienced such a sad attempt by a host to pander to what I hope is a diminishing audience.

If you have the stomach for it, here is the first part of that interview:

Judge Excoriates Cops As Thugs, Expresses Contempt For Superiors Who Conceal

Yesterday I posted some of the comments made by Justice Allen upon sentencing two Toronto police officers to a year of house arrest for beating a Cabbagetown man in 2009. Today there are further comments in The Star by the Superior Court Judge, including the following:

Police turned a blind eye to thuggish behaviour by officers that’s worthy of a criminal gang. He said, “This attitude is inconsistent with effective policing. It is inconsistent with the rule of law” describing it as "...behaviour we expect from gang members on the street, not the police.”

Allen was sharply critical of superior officers at 51 Division who didn’t report the attack to the civilian Special Investigations Unit, which probes incidents where police cause serious injuries.

“Any officer who is prepared to turn a blind eye to the use of excessive force has to take some responsibility when their colleagues are facing the loss of their career and their liberty.”

Justice Allen's most damning comments came when he spoke of what motivated the police attack:

“This crime was committed because Mr. Moore spoke disrespectfully to the officers, calling them the rich man’s army and suggesting they go arrest some gangster,” Allen said. “The officers decided to put him in a cell overnight and then beat him severely when he did not cooperate in his arrest.”

Clearly, despite the myriad examples of police brutality and abuse of authority being made public, the Toronto Police force and, I suspect, the forces in many other jurisdictions, are still out of control, aided and abetted by superiors ignoring the brutality either because they are part of the 'blue wall of silence' or crave career advancement.

More on Asbestos

The other day I wrote a piece lamenting the ongoing immoral Canadian export of asbestos and the fact that Canada was the sole country that recently prevented it from being listed as a toxic substance under the Rotterdam Convention. I also suggested that the government has made all Canadians who say or do nothing about this indefensible export complicit in it.

The Star's Tim Harper has a good column about the issue, and the fact that efforts are being made to keep this issue in the public arena. Kathleen Ruff, a senior human rights adviser to the Rideau Institute, is one such person unwilling to shrug her shoulders and lament her lack of power, reminding us that the export of this deadly substance is a question of democracy, saying, "If Harper cannot be budged from his position ... Canadians are nothing but serfs in a dysfunctional democracy.

We need to all get involved. Write to your Member of Parliament, and even if you get, as I did, the official party line about how chrysotile is safe if handled properly, your opposition is on record. To do anything less is to give permission to this Government to continue a practice that, according to The World health Organization, kills as many as 107,000 people annually.

the Real News Asks Some Important Questions About The G20 Secret Law

Although hardly the best interview I have seen, the following is worth viewing inasmuch it raises real questions about credibility regarding who the driving force was behind requesting the Public Works Protection Act invoked during the G20 Summit. Was Bill Blair acting on his own initiative, or was it at the behest of the RCMP? Just one of the many questions that only a public inquiry can answer, an inquiry that both Dalton McGuinty and Stephen Harper are steadfast in their refusal to call.

Judge: Police Have A Culture That Rejects Accountability

Those were the words of Justice Elliot Allen as he sentenced two Toronto police officers to one year of house arrest for beating a Cabbagetown man in 2009. As is the usual practice when one of their own is under judicial scrutiny, the courthouse was packed with brothers and sisters in blue. Whether this had the effect of intimidating Justice Allen is unclear; he cited understaffing and overcrowding as reasons he didn't sentence them to a penitentiary term, saying their security couldn't be guaranteed. One wonders why protective custody wouldn't have provided that guarantee, since they would then have been segregated from the general prison population and permitted one hour of carefully monitored exercise per day.

Even though the sentence includes a prohibition on firearms' possession for 10 years, one wonders if the lack of a jail sentence means they get to keep their jobs.

Why Civilian Oversight of the Police is Crucial

Rex Meade of Dundas has a very interesting letter on police heavy-handedness and how to deal with it in today's Star. If you get a chance, take a look at it.

G20 Summit Police Tactics Continue to Outrage Canadians

There is a series of letters in today's Star that articulate the ongoing sentiments of ordinary Canadians a year after people had their Charter Rights ripped away by an out-of-control police force during the G20 Summit in Toronto.

There is also one by Bruce Cox, the Executive Director of Greenpeace, about the not-so-subtle lesson that 'kettling' imparts.

All of the letters speak for themselves, and need no further comment from me.

Asbestos - Canada's Shame Continues

I recently wrote about the opportunity that Canada had to end its pariah-like status by no longer opposing the listing of asbestos as a toxic product in the Rotterdam Convention. Because the Convention requires consensus, Canada, of all the member nations, was the only country to oppose that listing once again, scuttling any attempt to rein in its use in developing countries.

Bearing in mind that Canada's agreement would not have actually impeded its indefensible export of death, but only add a warning as to its danger, our country insisted upon being the lone holdout, continuing to adhere to the fiction that asbestos is safe when handled properly.

This is, of course, the Conservative Party line, one that was parroted by my Member of Parliament when I wrote to him about the issue. Now Geoffrey Simpson has written an article excoriating Canada for its position; it is a timely reminder of how, thanks to the neo-con agenda that has been so vigorously promoted these past several years, Canada has not only lost its former exemplary international reputation, but also made all of its citizens who say and do nothing about this abominable behaviour complicit in it.

Chief Bill Blair: No Apology, No Resignation

Having released a self-serving 70 page report reviewing the G20 Summit debacle, Toronto Police Chief Bill Blair has concluded he has nothing to apologize for and will not consider resigning. As reported in today's Star, despite a public opinion poll showing a dramatic drop in public support for police actions at the Summit, (2010- 72%) (2011 - 41%), the Chief seems content to talk about things that went right, such as protecting the perimeter fence, while ignoring the widespread violations of Charter Rights in the arrests of over 1100 protesters, promising only that kettling will not be used in the future.

Also absent from the report is any explanation for the obstructionist tactics employed by the police this past year in identifying offending officers, despite the plethora of video evidence submitted by citizens. The fact that only two officers have thus far been charged says a great deal to me about the Chief's 'commitment' to uncovering the identity of these renegades.

Despite the erosion of public trust in the police and despite the ongoing trauma of people who directly experienced last June's police-state actions, something positive emerged for Bill Blair - the opportunity to hone his political skills to the point where his public utterances match the platitudinous quality of the most seasoned of Queens Park or Parliament Hill veterans.

Clearly, should his police career suffer an unlikely reversal, a new one serving the people awaits him.

Canada's Quasi-Police state

While the Premier of Ontario continues to blithely and glibly disavow any responsibility for the horrendous abuses of Charter Rights that took place during last June's G20 Summit, admitting only that he "could have done a better job of communicating," evidence continues to mount that we are living in a quasi-police state.

Thanks to the Toronto Star's superb ongoing coverage, the issues arising from the illegal actions police took during the Summit continue to raise profoundly disturbing questions about the erosion of our freedoms and the almost complete impunity enjoyed by the police responsible for that erosion. The latest revelation, found in today's Star, has the headline, Police sued over hellish 11-hour G20 arrest ordeal. The story reveals how Sean Salvati claims he was arrested, strip-searched, beaten, denied access to a lawyer and left naked in a cell for nearly an hour.

What was Mr. Salvati's 'crime'? Speaking to two female RCMP officers who did not care to be spoken to on the eve of the Summit. Although the term is perhaps used too much, 'Kafkaesque' is the only one that seems appropriate for what followed. Please read the entire article to see what you think.

Tangentially, I guess there is one thing that people do like about Premier McGuinty. He recently promised to make the (GO) trains run on time. And for some, I guess that's all that matters.

Some Penetrating Truths

While I always attempt to write as carefully as I can, conciseness and clarity sometimes elude me. Because of these lapses, I take the liberty of reproducing a letter that appeared in today's print edition of the Toronto Star by Enrico Carlson that offers some timely and, I think, some very important observations, given the power the moneyed class has to heavily influence both the media we consume and the political agenda of our elected representatives:

How right hoodwinks the poor

Re Good jobs aren’t in the plan, June 18

I expect the rich and powerful to look after their own interests, but as always it’s the growing number of poor that remain a dilemma. Why do they support conservative policies designed to undermine their interests? Among the many reasons are five that stand out:

(1) the ability of the right to define the parameters of reality (what is “doable,” “affordable,” “realistic”) and the willingness of the majority to buy into those parameters;

(2) the right’s penchant for simplistic explanations easily digestable to a pseudo-citizenry wanting easy answers (“law and order,” “the economy” vs “labour disruption”);

(3) the ever diminishing possibilities of finding long-term, decent paying jobs, which leads to a spiraling down of expectations and a misguided suspicion of unions;

(4) the mass diversions in gadgets and “reality TV” that take away from really paying attention to political and economic realities; and,

(5) easy scapegoating (when things go wrong, point fingers).

To paraphrase Thomas Jefferson: vigilance is the lifeblood of democracy; no vigilance, no democracy.

Enrico Carlson-

The Moral Fiber of Dalton McGuinty - Being Smug Means Never having To Say You're Sorry

I have written so much about last June's G20 Summit and the widespread violation of Charter Rights presided over by Police Chief Bill Blair and Premier Dalton McGuinty that my postings almost border on obsession. However, the absence of any redress for what happened continues to trouble me deeply.

Despite the gravity of the police abuses, the ever-smug Premier continues to 'hang tough', insisting there is no need to call an inquiry, and that the only thing he has to apologize for is not communicating as effectively as he should have. Such a caviler attitude toward violations of rights that essentially define us as members of a democracy is the main reason I will not be voting Liberal in the fall election.

However, Mr. McGuinty should be aware that the aftermath of this sad episode is not just a threat to his political hide. Many people, including me, are now deeply suspicious of the police and their attitudes, and that suspicion, without the catharsis that would be afforded by an inquiry, will only continue to fester and sicken the citizenry in any number of ways.

Today, the failure of the police to acknowledge any wrongdoing or regrets, even as they vow not to use the tactic of kettling again, as reported in the Star, is yet another bad decision that will do nothing to begin the healing process or abate the widespread disillusionment being experienced by the good people of this province.

With Powers Beyond Those of Mortal Men (And Women)

Loathsome worm that I am, I have spent the past year regularly criticizing the police for their mass suspension of our Charter rights during last June's G20 Summit in Toronto. I saw them as a force gone wild, intoxicated by their own power, emboldened by a police chief (Bill Blair) who withheld from the public that the 5-meter fence rule was a fiction, and abetted by a Premier (Dalton McGuinty), who waited until the Summit had left town to tell the public the truth about the non-existent law.

How wrong I was. In a story carried in the Toronto Star, which has done a consistently fine job in tracking the entire debacle, the real truth has been revealed. The mass arrests were not only defensible, but necessary:

Toronto police maintain, however, they are justified, to preserve the peace, in temporarily holding people they believe are about to engage in criminal activity.

So there you have. In addition to possessing legendary crime-fighting prowess, their secret weapon has been revealed: a highly attuned psychic ability enabling them to see beyond any semblance of innocence into the true hearts of darkness lurking in the over 1000 protesters arrested.

But then again, we do have that rather pesky fact that almost all of the charges were subsequently dropped.

Perhaps a bit more practice is called for, boys and girls in blue?

Corporate Ethics - A Contemporary Oxymoron

To those trusting souls willing to leave their and their country's fate to the market forces of unfettered capitalism, please take a few minutes to read the situation of black South African gold miners who toiled under apartheid with no protection from the environmental hazards of their job.

It seems that Anglo American, the company responsible for the deaths and ill-health of the workers highlighted in the article, feels no obligation to pay compensation to the miners or their survivors, as evidenced by the following excerpt:

Anglo American says it is not responsible for the compensation claims because it owned only a minority share in the South African mines where the plaintiffs were working. It says it is “sympathetic” to the plight of the former workers and is working to find a “sustainable solution” so that they can obtain medical treatment and compensation benefits.

I interpret the second sentence to be only the meaningless political bafflegag everyone seems so fond of practicing these days.

You can read the complete story here.

Asbestos - An Opportunity to End Canada's Shame

While I have written previously on Canada's ongoing indefensible practice of exporting chrysotile (asbestos) to developing nations despite its well-known lethal health effects, this country does get the chance to begin to rectify things today as it meets in Geneva with 142 other countries that have ratified the Rotterdam Convention, which concerns pesticides and industrial chemicals that have been banned or severely restricted for health or environmental reasons.

Canada has previously opposed the listing of asbestos; judging by the response I got from my M.P., I am not hopeful that it will relent this time, despite international and domestic pressure to do so.

The full article about Canada's past obstructionism and present opportunity can be read here.

Does This Peel Police Action Help You To Sleep Better at Night?

I stand to be corrected, but I was under the impression that in Canada, we are, at least in theory, protected from arbitrary police intrusion and arrest. Apparently the Peel Police are not aware of this legal 'quibble'.

Some Food for Thought

Perhaps it is because I am currently reading The Trouble With Billionaires, by Linda McQuaig and Neil Brooks, but I have become especially sensitive to the increasingly shrill anti-union rhetoric by CEO's and some allegedly 'ordinary' members of the public. Were we to accept the word of lavishly-paid corporate leaders and their minions, Air Canada and Canadian postal workers are living in the past in their fights to prevent the introduction of two-tier wages and benefits (including pensions0 for new hires.

It is therefore refreshing to see the other side of the question being represented in newspapers such as The Toronto Star, which thus far has resisted the trend to simply becoming organs for the business agenda.

I am providing links here to an article and two letters found in today's paper that help to provide non-business perspectives on these issues.

Good jobs not in the plan, is written by John Cartwright, president of the Toronto and York Region Labour Council.

This is followed by two letters that question the motives of the Conservative government and Canada Post respectively.

Another Sad Story of Police Misconduct

The headline in yesterday's Globe (on-line edition) really says it all: Peel police officers fabricated evidence in prostitution case: judge

The story tells of how the two offending Peel officers claimed that a fake i.d. allowing a 17-year-old to work in Brampton sex clubs was found in her pimp's wallet. The truth is the i.d. had been turned over to the police by the girl herself. Because of this malfeasance, some very serious charges against Courtney Salmon, including human trafficking, had to be thrown out of court.

While Superior Court Judge Douglas Gray severely rebuked the officers, saying that he had to throw out the case to protect the integrity of the justice system, his words and action will be have been for naught if the offending officers are not charged and, if convicted, dismissed from the force. The erosion of public trust in the police continues unabated.

The Ugly Truth About Shark Fin Soup

I was pleased to read in today's Star that two Toronto city councillors, Glenn De Baeremaeker and Kristyn Wong-Tam, are making a motion this week to ban the sale and consumption of shark fin soup, long regarded by the Chinese community as a status symbol. Perhaps not everyone knows the barbaric cruelty involved in bringing such a dish to the table, but essentially it involves cutting off the fins of living sharks and then dumping them back into the ocean to either drown or bleed to death. Amazing how indifferent we can be to the earth's other creatures, isn't it?

An excellent documentary on the industry, especially strong in Costa Rica despite its illegality, is Sharkwater, which is availble for viewing on You Tube. To watch the first part, click on the image below and also learn the vital role sharks play in ocean ecology, upon which we are dependent for our survival:

Syria's Torture and Murder of Its Children

Despite this being an age of almost instant communication and information, it has become very easy for us to isolate ourselves from the larger world, ensconced as we are in our protective shell of flat-screen televisions, blu-ray players, and myriad other technological wonders. Once in a while, however, the reality of that larger world breaks through that shell and throttles us.

One of those moments occurred last night while I was watching Anderson Cooper 360 as he presented graphic video depicting the kind of brutality we may have become inured to in movies but not in real life. I should warn you that this video, showing beatings and shootings of unarmed Syrian citizens, is difficult to watch; even more horrifying is the segment that deals with the torture, mutilation and murder of Syrian children, their only 'crime' being their participation in peaceful protests.

As well, if you really want to think about it, the Syrians' thirst for democracy and freedom and what they are willing to risk for it puts our own cavalier attitude toward democracy, as evidenced in the recent federal election, to shame.

Finally, a G20 Police Arrest

There is little doubt in my mind that the relentless efforts of the Toronto Star played a major role in the arrest of Toronto police officer Glen Weddell in the G20 beating of Dorian Barton, the Toronto baker whose only crime was to take some pictures of police horses at Queens Park during the G20 Summit in Toronto last June. That it took almost a year for this to happen is a sad commentary on the leadership of Police Chief Bill Blair and the officers on the force who obviously willfully concealed the accused officer's identity.

Whether justice will actually be served remains to be seen, given the double-standard of justice the courts often apply to the 'brotherhood of the blue."

Linda McQuaig on Canda's Role in Africa

Although Canadians have traditionally regarded themselves as champions of the underclass, that image is challenged in yesterday's Toronto Star column by Linda McQuaig as she examines how the Candian Government's support of multi-national corporations is contributing to the fact that resource-laden countries such as Tanzania are getting a mere pittance for the gold extraction operations of Barrick gold.

As well, she talks about how a private member's bill that would have made Canadian companies more accountable for their actions (think of last month's killings of several Tanzanians at Barrick's gold mine) in the countries of their operations was defeated.

As is often the case, the image of Canada's benign influence on the world is at steep odds with the truth.

Cost-Saving Innovations in Policing

Dismayed as I may be over the sometimes heavy-handed actions of police, I would never suggest that the necessary role they play in society is exaggerated. Nonetheless, there appear to be ways of providing service that help to reduce overall costs without sacrificing effectiveness.

A story in yesterday's Star, called The thinning blue line discusses how American forces are coping with declining budgets by using civilian investigators to do the paperwork for non-violent crimes such as burglaries, as well as adopting new technologies that replace the human factor. It is an article well-worth reading.