The future, or a flop?

By Josh Dehaas - Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 8:00 AM - 0 Comments

Kimimasa Mayama/Bloomberg/Getty Images

At a recent trade show in Tokyo, Toshiba unveiled a 3-D television that doesn’t require users to wear bulky glasses. “A dream TV is now a reality,” said Masaaki Oosumi, president of Toshiba Visual Products. The main impediment to widespread 3-D TV adoption has always been that consumers—at least half of them, according to Nielsen research—refuse to buy 3-D TVs because of the hassle of wearing special glasses.

Despite that obstacle, industry research firm iSuppli estimates that by 2015, 40 per cent of TVs sold will be 3-D. Other manufacturers are betting on 3-D, too. Nintendo will soon launch a glasses-free hand-held gaming console, the 3DS. But even as manufacturers rush to churn out more 3-D products, some analysts say the sales predictions are too bullish. “If [the iSuppli forecast] is true, I’ll eat my light bulb,” says Alan Middleton, a consumer behaviour expert at the Schulich School of Business in Toronto. It’s true that Toshiba has overcome the biggest hurdle to mainstream adoption, but consumers can be fickle, says Middleton. For one thing, 3-D appeals particularly to sports fans and their “dream TV” doesn’t max out at 20 inches, like the new Toshiba. It also likely costs less than the Toshiba’s $2,950 price tag. Then there’s the question of comfort. The new Toshiba model produces its 3-D effect by shooting nine beams of light at each eye at slightly different angles. But to get a clear picture, viewers need to position themselves at a specific angle to the screen.

Another challenge for manufacturers will be to convince the average consumer to buy 3-D TVs when most TV content still isn’t filmed in 3-D. After all, “no one seriously expects all TV programming to gradually be converted to 3-D, unlike HD,” says Stewart Clarke, editor of TV industry magazine TBI. “There’s unlikely to be much demand to watch the six o’clock news in 3-D,” he adds. For those reasons, Clarke says it’s still too early to know if 3-D will become the new standard at home. Middleton agrees. “Mass adoption is certainly not going to happen in five years,” he says. “In 10 years, it’s possible, but before then? I expect not.”

Did 2010's man of the year die in 1897?

By Colby Cosh - Thursday, October 21, 2010 at 7:14 AM - 0 Comments

Marxism is dead; long live Georgism! With Britain in austerity mode, its government pre-emptively decommissioning aircraft carriers that haven’t been built yet and preparing to bounce a half-million public-sector employees, everybody is looking for policy solutions to make the state’s in-flow exceed its out-go with the least possible agony. That has some progressives, including the Liberal Democrat Business Secretary Vince Cable, looking at the notion of Land Value Taxation (LVT)—applying the new tax burdens not to capital and labour income, which would discourage work and investment, but to the unimproved value of land area, where, to a first approximation, it would merely encourage efficient land use and make it more affordable.

As the Spectator‘s James Forsyth points out, LVT is an “eye-catching” policy that the Conservatives, if only for cultural or spiritual reasons, would be unlikely to adopt. (They’ll still be the party of the great country houses long after the last one is reduced to ashes and its occupants sent to the salt mines of Gliese 581g.) The Lib Dems will need distinctive policies to help preserve their identity after years of helping the Conservatives govern.

When Henry George fought for the “single tax” on land in the 19th century—becoming a mirror-image Marx, a preacher of land-labour rivalry rather than capital-labour rivalry—he grew to be one of the world’s most popular orators and social theoreticians. His philosophy brought together liberal modernizers, non-revolutionary radicals, and the literate working class; it was attractive to a broad spectrum of opinion between the Marxian socialists (plus the anarchists) and the great estates (plus their sycophants). George’s big idea might still have the ability to splice together a coalition of class interests and intellectual tastes. It’s not just the nerdiest of utopian Lib Dem nerds who like it; in July, Martin Wolf, perhaps the English-speaking world’s most respected finance columnist, went on a Georgiacal tear in the Financial Times:

In 1984, I bought my London house. I estimate that the land on which it sits was worth £100,000 in today’s prices. Today, the value is perhaps ten times as great. All of that vast increment is the fruit of no effort of mine. …This appropriation of the rise in the value of land is not just unfair: what have I done to deserve this increase in my wealth? It has obviously dire consequences.

First, it makes it necessary for the state to fund itself by taxing effort, ingenuity and foresight. Taxation of labour and capital must lower their supply. Taxation of resources will not have the same result, because supply is given. Such taxes reduce the unearned rewards to owners.

Second, this system creates calamitous political incentives. In a world in which people have borrowed heavily to own a location, they are desperate to enjoy land price rises and, still more, to prevent price falls. Thus we see a bizarre spectacle: newspapers hail upward moves in the price of a place to live—the most basic of all amenities.

If you’re a renter who reads the newspapers, you have spent the last few years in a constant state of low-level anger at this “bizarre spectacle”—the unexamined assumption that perpetually escalating housing prices are the natural state of human affairs, and certainly a good enough proxy for economic health that the two quantities are freely interchangeable. How much more bizarre must it look in England?

There are practical problems with LVT, the biggest one being how exactly you assess the unimproved value of a plot of land. How do you calculate the part of the asset value that’s derived not from human activity, but from the pure quantity of the footprint and its geographical station? There’s no easy answer, but, hell: the odious necessity of forcing citizens to define, document, and disclose their income is an enormous “practical problem” with the income tax, yet by some miracle, we are oh so lucky enough to have one. Towns and cities already employ an army of land-value assessors that can’t be 1% as large as the hordes of enterprise-destroying revenuers that virtually every polity considers itself obliged to provide with the necessities of life. Henry George was already falling out of favour before the industrial democracies adopted income taxation to any serious degree; contemporaries who argued against him all shrieked to heaven about the sacredness of property, hardly suspecting that the alternative was to be wholesale readoption of the corvée.

It is common for economists—like Wolf and Cable—to harbour admiration for George, a figure all but forgotten outside their profession (although 100,000 people attended his funeral, and John Dewey compared him to Plato). Milton Friedman said that “in my opinion, the least bad tax is the property tax on the unimproved value of land, the Henry George argument of many, many years ago”. (This is a quote to which undergraduates are now being exposed through the medium of Greg Mankiw’s Essentials of Economics.) Friedrich von Hayek admitted that “It was a lay enthusiasm for Henry George which led me to economics.” Paul Krugman, confronted recently by a latter-day orthodox Georgist in Germany, escaped by admitting that “urban economics models actually do suggest that Georgist taxation would be the right approach at least to finance city growth” and scrambling away, making but-of-course-it’s-impossible noises. Barry Eichengreen credits George with anticipating modern business-cycle theory.

Similar examples could be compounded endlessly, but the basis for George’s big idea isn’t merely theoretical: see, for example, the 2008 OECD paper that ranks types of taxes on their apparent growth-friendliness, and finds, unsurprisingly, that the worst-to-best order runs 1) corporate income taxes, 2) personal income taxes, 3) consumption taxes, 4) “Property taxes, and particularly recurrent taxes on immovable property.” It must be remembered, however, that economists count non-avoidability as a virtue. The main reason they find land-value taxation attractive in principle is basically this: good luck finding a place to stand that’s not land, sucker.

[A glowing biographical notice of George, which highlights his fleeting connection to British Columbia, can be found at the website of the Federal Reserve Bank of Dallas. It was, naturally, written by the Dallas Fed's senior economist (who carelessly describes pre-Confederation B.C. as part of "Canada"). The OECD paper was brought to my attention by Brian Dell, who has so many degrees there must be one with "economics" scribbled on it somewhere in the pile, and who did a little Georgizing himself a few days ago.]

"It's hard to believe this is happening"

By Michael Friscolanti and Cathy Gulli - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 9:20 PM - 0 Comments

Russell Williams knew he was caught. The depth of his twisted double life had finally been exposed.

It was Feb. 7, 2010, a Sunday evening, and the colonel had already been sitting in a police interrogation room for more than three hours when Det.-Sgt. Jim Smyth of the Ontario Provincial Police showed him two pieces of paper. One was a boot print left near the home of Jessica Lloyd, a Belleville woman who had vanished nine days earlier. The other was a photocopy of the bottom of a shoe Williams wore to the police station that morning.

“These are identical,” Smyth told him.

The colonel stared at the prints on the table in front of him, but didn’t utter a word. “You and I both know that you were at Jessica Lloyd’s house,” Smyth continued. “And I need to know why.” Williams, still silent, pulled the two papers closer to his eyes.

“Well,” he said, after another long pause. “I don’t know what to say.”

“You need to explain it,” Smyth answered.

For the next few minutes, his mind racing, Williams clung to the hope that he would somehow walk out of that interrogation room a free man. But Smyth, a renowned expert in his trade, had his target cornered. He told Williams that the tires on his Nissan Pathfinder matched tracks left in the snow near Lloyd’s house on the night she disappeared. He told him that the police had search warrants, and were already scouring his new home in the Ottawa neighbourhood of Westboro. And he told him—repeatedly—what Williams now realized: “It’s over.”

At 6:25 p.m., with the cameras in the room still rolling, Smyth could see that Williams was wavering. “What’s the issue you’re struggling with?” he asked. Wearing jeans and a striped blue golf shirt, Williams took a deep breath, rubbed the left side of his face, and crossed his arms.

“It’s hard to believe this is happening,” he said.

“Why is that?” Smyth asked.

The commander of CFB Trenton, the country’s largest and busiest air base, took another deep breath. “It’s just hard to believe.”

Finally, a few minutes after 7 o’clock, Williams told the detective he had “two immediate concerns”: how his situation will affect the Canadian Forces, and how it will affect his partner of 18 years, Mary-Elizabeth Harriman. “I’m struggling with how upset my wife is right now,” he said. “I’m concerned that they’re tearing apart my wife’s brand new house.”

It would be another 30 minutes, however, before Williams finally gave in and admitted the truth. “I want to minimize the impact on my wife,” he repeated.

“So do I,” Smyth answered.

“So how do we do that?”

“You start by telling the truth.”

The colonel paused again. “OK.”

Over the next six hours—in the same calm, concise voice that made him such a respected commander in the Canadian air force—Williams walked Smyth through each of his heinous crimes: dozens of break-ins targeting female lingerie, two home-invasion sexual assaults, and the violent rapes and murders of Jessica Lloyd and Marie-France Comeau, a corporal from CFB Trenton who was killed in November 2009, two months before Lloyd. At one point in the conversation, Smyth asked Williams the question that, to this day, remains a mystery: “Why do you think these things happened?”

“I don’t know,” Williams said.

“Have you spent much time thinking about that?”

“Yeah, but I don’t know the answers. And I’m pretty sure the answers don’t matter.”

Portions of the confession were played in court Wednesday morning during Williams’ historic sentencing hearing—part of another grueling day of evidence that included heart-wrenching victim-impact statements from Jessica Lloyd’s grieving friends and relatives. One of those friends went so far as to interrupt her statement to demand that Williams raise his head and look her in the eyes. He did.

“Strictly because of who Russell Williams was—an important figure in the Canadian military—this case has drawn so much attention that our grieving process is constantly interrupted,” said Jessica’s older brother, Andy, holding back tears. “I am a very proud supporter of the Canadian Armed Forces. I believe that the men and women that serve our country are heroes, and deserve to be led by a responsible and morally sound individual, not someone who could commit such horrible crimes.”

Jessica’s late father served 25 years as a naval officer before his death from cancer. “He was a proud Canadian and a very proud member of the military,” Andy Lloyd said. “He would be mortified that any member of the armed forces, let alone someone of such high ranking and importance, could commit such terrible crimes against his daughter. I feel for military personnel on an individual basis, knowing how much they must have been dishonoured and misled by their commanding officer.”

In yet another stunning revelation, court also heard Wednesday that Williams—a remorseless serial predator who lied and connived until the moment he knew he was caught—actually sat down in that interrogation room Sunday night and wrote notes of “apology” to his victims. Scribbled on sheets of paper, it is hard to imagine words more hollow.

“You won’t believe me, I know,” he wrote to Lloyd’s mother, Roxanne. “But I am sorry for having taken your daughter from you. Jessica was a beautiful, gentle young woman, as you know. I know she loved you very much—she told me so, again and again.”

He also penned a note to his wife. “Dearest Mary Elizabeth,” it reads. “I love you, Sweet [illegible]. I am so very sorry for having hurt you like this. I know you’ll take good care of Sweet Rosie [the couple’s cat]. I love you, Russ.”

Williams was a rising star in the Canadian air force, an elite officer who piloted prime ministers and the Queen, and whose Trenton posting almost certainly would have ended with a promotion to general. To everyone in uniform, he was the quintessential military man, an intelligent, even-keeled leader who inspired respect and signed every email with the same two words: “Take care.”

But over the past few days, a courtroom in Belleville, Ont., has heard what police have long known: that Williams’ was the ultimate Col. Jekyll and Col. Hyde. By day, he was in charge of 3,000 people at the country’s most strategically important air force base, a facility that supports the war in Afghanistan and welcomes home every flag-draped casket. By night, he was a relentless sexual deviant who stalked his victims, obsessively catalogued his crimes, and grew more dangerous over time.

It all began in September 2007, when Williams started breaking into homes in search of women’s lingerie. He targeted properties in Tweed, Ont., where he and his wife owned a waterfront cottage, and in the Ottawa suburb of Orléans, where the couple lived for more than a decade until moving to the new townhouse in Westboro.

The pattern of each break-in was always the same. He photographed the bedroom, then the underwear drawer, then himself wearing the underwear. Once back home, he would meticulously photograph each individual item, storing the shots in a “complex” collection of well-hidden folders on the very same computer he shared with his wife.

With each new heist, Williams grew more confident—and more daring. During one late-night robbery, he walked away with 87 pieces of lingerie; during another, the stash was double that. Before leaving one girl’s bedroom, he took the time to type a note on her computer: “Merci.”

When Williams took command of Trenton in the summer of 2009, he moved full-time to Tweed, a 30-minute drive from the base. Harriman remained in Ottawa, where she works as associate executive director of the Heart and Stroke Foundation of Canada. They connected on weekends.

On July 11, just four days before being sworn in as 8 Wing boss, Williams stood in a neighbour’s backyard and stared through an open window. It was dark, after midnight, and when the woman inside climbed into a shower, Williams pounced. He stripped naked, headed for the bedroom, and fled the scene with a single black thong. “Very tempting to take her panties/bra from bathroom,” Williams later wrote on his computer. “Decided it would be entirely obvious that someone was in the house while she was in the shower—took panties from panty drawer instead…”

Williams would later confess to detectives that as he stood in that woman’s backyard (his clothes lying on the ground beside him) his predatory drive was “escalating.” He wanted, as he put it, “to take more risks.”

A few weeks later, the elite officer would graduate to sexual assault, targeting two women who lived within walking distance of his cottage. Both were tied up, blindfolded, stripped, posed and photographed. And after both attacks, Williams was back at his office early the next morning, sporting the same wide grin and the same can-do attitude that motivated so many of his subordinates.

On Nov. 23, a Monday night, Williams climbed through the basement window of Comeau’s Brighton, Ont., bungalow. He beat her with a flashlight, knocked her unconscious, and raped her repeatedly while videotaping the entire attack. Comeau fought back, but Williams overpowered her each time, ignoring her pleas to live. “I don’t deserve to die,” she said at one point, her mouth muzzled with duct tape. “I’ve been good all my life.”

Williams put another piece of tape over her nose and recorded her final breaths. Then he washed her sheets with bleach, walked out the back door, and drove straight to Ottawa—a three-and-a-half hour journey—for a morning meeting with fellow officers. He had dinner that night with his wife, and after kissing her goodbye, drove back to Tweed. Comeau’s body was still in her home, waiting to be discovered.

Williams spotted his next murder victim, Jessica Lloyd, while droving home from the base along Highway 37, the rural road where she lived. She was running on the treadmill near her basement window, getting in shape for an upcoming trip to Cuba. The following night, Jan. 28, Williams broke in, made sure she lived alone, and then waited in his car—parked near a tree line on the edge of her property—until she returned.

Lloyd was bound, raped, and ordered to model her lingerie. Williams promised his terrified victim that she would live as long as she obeyed his commands, so she complied with every order. When he walked her to his car and drove her to Tweed, she didn’t fight back—desperate not to upset him. The colonel called in sick that Friday morning (and told his subordinate not to tell his wife if she happened to phone the office) and then spent the rest of the day torturing and videotaping his captive. He then struck her over the head and strangled her to death with a rope.

Williams left her body in his garage for four days. When he finally returned—after a one-day flight to California, and a weekend with Harriman in Ottawa—Williams dumped her corpse near the side of a dirt road.

She would be his last victim.

Police found tire tracks on Lloyd’s property, and on Feb. 4, they set up a RIDE-style check along Highway 37, looking for a potential match. Williams’ Nissan Pathfinder was among the first vehicles through—and his treads were identical. That Sunday, while the colonel was back in Ottawa with his wife, Det.-Sgt. Smyth phoned him and asked if they chat. Williams came to the station right away.

He was chatty and polite. He even told Smyth that he was glad to see the police working so vigorously to find Jessica Lloyd. When the officer read him his rights, Williams said he didn’t need a lawyer and was willing to answer any question.

But as the footage reveals, Williams was clearly nervous. He chomped on a piece of gum, and nodded his head constantly as Smyth explained the status of their investigation. At one point, the officer asked Williams what police might discover if they conducted a thorough background check of his life. Williams grinned. “It would be very boring,” he said.

Four hours later, Williams began a startling confession that would lead to this week’s guilty plea—and an automatic sentence of life behind bars with no chance of parole for 25 years. Early the next morning, he led detectives to Lloyd’s lifeless body.

“I can tell you that she did not suspect the end was coming,” he wrote in his note to Jessica’s mother. “Jessica was happy because she believed she was going home.”

Of all the evidence presented so far, few pieces are more shocking than those letters Williams printed in the hours after his confession. They are so clinical and so insulting that it’s hard to believe they were written by a human being.

“I am sorry for having taken your daughter, Marie-France, from you,” he wrote to Comeau’s father. “I know you won’t be able to believe me, but it is true. Marie-France has been deeply missed by all that knew her.”

To his first sexual assault victim, he wrote two sentences: “I apologize for having traumatized you the way I did. No doubt you’ll rest a bit easier now that I’ve been caught.” His second sexual assault victim, Laurie Massicotte—who lives just three doors down from his cottage—received more of a pep talk than an apology. “I really hope that the discussion we had has helped you turn your life around a bit,” Williams wrote. “You look like a bright woman, who could do much better for herself. I do hope that you find a way to succeed.”

On Wednesday afternoon—after enduring two-and-a-half days of gruesome evidence—Williams’ victims finally had their chance to speak. When the time came, however, most chose to say nothing. The Comeau family did not submit a victim-impact statement, and neither did Massicotte or the first sex assault victim (whose name is protected by a publication ban). But Lloyd’s friends and relatives—six in all—lined up for the chance to face the man sitting in the prisoner’s box.

One friend—angry, indignant and fearless—stared straight at Williams and professed her absolute hatred of him. “I despise Russell Williams. How dare he? His selfishness has changed who I am,” she seethed. “I hope that man loses everything. I hate him.”

“This year I didn’t want to have a 28th birthday, because Jessica didn’t get to celebrate hers,” said another friend. “Christmas was one of Jessica’s favorite times of year; this year I will prefer to sleep through it. I hate Russell Williams. I will never forgive him. People say forgiveness heals all wounds. I guess my wounds will bleed until the day I die.”

When it was Andy Lloyd’s turn, Justice Robert Scott offered his personal condolences, and congratulated his for having the bravery to act as the family spokesman throughout their ordeal. “I was looking forward to being an uncle almost as much as I was looking forward to being a father,” he said. “That won’t happen now. No big brother should have to go through what I went through.”

It was Andy Lloyd who, in the days after his sister vanished, was on the news, imploring people to come forward if they had any clues. “What did Williams think seeing me on every major media outlet?” he asked. “I can’t help but think he laughed at me, thinking: ‘She’s in my garage.’”

Roxanne Lloyd was the last to take the stand. “I am Jessica’s mother,” she said. “I loved her from the moment I realized I was pregnant…I will continue to love her for the rest of my years on Earth, and even after I die.” She described the anguish she felt knowing that she’d never see, hug or hear her daughter again. She’d never go shopping or traveling with her. She’d never hear that her daughter had fallen in love. Or was getting married. Or was going to be a mother herself. Even after Jessica’s body was recovered, Roxanne did not fully believe it. “I prayed some big mistake had been made,” she said. “But when I saw her in that casket I knew my hopes and dreams were over.

The Commons: Sound economic theory

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 8:01 PM - 0 Comments

The Scene. Michael Ignatieff stood to relate the concerns of another individual he’d recently met—the latest in his 33-million-part series on the lives of average Canadians. “Mr. Speaker, on Monday, at Our Lady of Lourdes High School in Guelph, a young student named Diane asked me a question,” he recalled.

Across the way, various Conservatives groaned. But the Liberal leader would not be troubling anyone on the government side to respond to Diane’s question. In fact, he had already answered for them.

“‘We’re caring for my grandmother at home. If elected, what would you do to help people for caring for the sick and elderly at home?’” Mr. Ignatieff reported this young lady as having wondered. “I replied to Diane, ‘Our answer is the family care plan.’ The Conservatives’ answer is, ‘Use your vacation time.’”

No doubt the Conservatives appreciated that Mr. Ignatieff had saved them the trouble of telling Diane that much themselves.

“The question is this,” Mr. Ignatieff continued, now seemingly speaking for himself. “How can the Prime Minister justify tax breaks for profitable corporations instead of helping families like Diane’s?” Continue…

Did You Know "My Wife and Kids" is Popular?

By Jaime Weinman - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 6:15 PM - 0 Comments

I sure didn’t, but there we are. A few weeks ago, when it was announced that ABC’s production arm had signed Damon Wayans and Don Reo to do a new comedy pilot for them, I was a bit puzzled. Wayans and Reo’s previous ABC show, My Wife and Kids, wasn’t bad, but it was one of those ’00s family sitcoms that managed to run for over 100 episodes primarily because there wasn’t a huge crop of bread-and-butter sitcoms out there — like Yes, Dear (whose creator went on to get huge buzz with My Name Is Earl and Raising Hope, neither of which will make him as much money) no one talked about it.

Then I looked at the ratings for syndicated shows, and found out why ABC wants to get back in the Damon Wayans business at least at the pilot stage: My Wife and Kids has become one of the top-rated shows in syndication. On the list of top 25 syndicated shows in the U.S., it ranks # 15. It’s outranking some shows that are new to syndication and therefore are on the list because they were sold into a lot of markets. (A show like American Dad, for example, is syndication-friendly — cartoons always are — but probably won’t rise much higher than it currently is; same with Criminal Minds and How I Met Your Mother. These shows outrank Friends or The Simpsons not because they’re more popular, but because the stations have cleared some of the better time slots for their new acquisitions. As time goes on, some of them will drop further down as they’re shifted out of the good slots.) It just seems to have creeped up on everybody.

This already happened a couple of years ago with another sitcom ABC aired, though it didn’t own this one. “George Lopez” went into syndication, mostly in late-night slots, because nobody expected much from it. It turned out to be a surprise syndication hit, and remains in the top 20 now. Wife and Kids probably followed the same pattern, starting out in not-so-good syndication time slots and slowly proving that it was more popular than the stations expected it to be.

There are always reasons why shows become unexpected hits in syndication. What Kids and Lopez have in common is that they’re shows about people network TV comedies don’t have much room for now — African-Americans, Latinos — and they are traditional sitcoms with 100+ episodes from an era that didn’t produce a wide range of those types of shows. The infamous According To Jim also has 100+ episodes, but in the syndication market, it’s in direct competition with far better shows of its type. Whereas the only recent black sitcoms with a lot of episodes are Everybody Hates Chris, a movie-style comedy that inevitably died in syndication as movie-style sitcoms usually do (Reo also executive-produced that for a while, by the way), The Bernie Mac Show, same deal, Girlfriends, which might be too female-skewing for syndication, and the Tyler Perry shows, which are clearly inferior in production values to a show like Wife and Kids.

Finally, these are shows that are about men, that have a strong appeal to men, and syndicated hits — except for talk shows like The Oprah Winfrey Show – tend to be the ones with a lot of guy appeal, as you can see by Continue…

A test of patience

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 4:03 PM - 0 Comments

The Canadian Press gets the latest news, such as it is, from the Afghan detainee document review.

The committee — made up of Conservative, Liberal and Bloc Quebecois MPs — has been poring over documents since early July. But a three-member panel of independent arbiters has yet to authorize public disclosure of any information…

Bryon Wilfert, one of two Liberal MPs on the committee, says there’s no indication the panel will become an obstacle to the eventual release of documents. ”Just say that it’s a work in progress,” he said. “Although it’s not as fast as maybe we would like, it’s working well. There’s good faith all around, both with all the members of the ad hoc committee and with the arbiters.”

The healing power of groceries

By Julia Belluz - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 3:40 PM - 0 Comments

Wu Kaixiang/Zuma Press/Keystone Press/ Matt Rourke/AP

How many hopeful consumers have gulped down sweet beverages like POM Wonderful or Vitaminwater believing they weren’t just quenching their thirst but taking a dose of medicine?

Enough to turn the nutrient-enhanced food and beverage industry into a multi-billion-dollar business. And despite a growing controversy over the claims of certain health foods, there’s no sign the market is slowing. Last week, the global food giant Nestlé SA announced that it’s betting US$510 million on the fact that people will continue to indulge in “pharma foods.” Over the next decade, it plans to invest in a health science business that will create products to treat obesity and a range of chronic ailments, from diabetes to cardiovascular disease.

Continue…

Nebraska Governor returns campaign donation to TransCanada and worries about water impact of oil sands pipeline

By Luiza Ch. Savage - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 3:37 PM - 0 Comments

Hillary Clinton says she is inclined to approve TransCanada’s proposed Keystone XL pipeline that would bring oil sands production into the US as far as Texas.

Meanwhile, Nebraska governor Dave Heineman has written to Clinton expressing his concerns about impacts on water in his state. He writes that, “Almost 300 miles of the proposed pipeline will come through Nebraska and be situated directly over the Ogallala Aquifer. This aquifer provides water to farmers and ranchers of Nebraska to raise livestock and grow crops.” … “Nebraskans are concerned that the proposed pipeline route could contaminate the Ogallala Aquifer and I share that concern.” In the letter dated Oct. 12, he asks for a thorough review and for the State Dept. to ensure that it is “properly constructed, carefully operated, and well maintatined so that Nebraska’s natural resources are protected.” The letter was obtained by the National Wildlife Federation.

Heineman is a Republican who is running for reelection on Nov. 2. (His seat is considered safe.) He recently gave back a $2,500 campaign donation from TransCanada because donations from foreigners are banned under US election finance laws. Nonetheless, the Nebraska Democratic Party is now calling for an investigation.

Secret Service nearly shot LBJ in 1963

By macleans.ca - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 2:43 PM - 0 Comments

A former Secret Service agent says he nearly accidentally shot Lyndon Johnson in the hours that followed the assassination of John F. Kennedy. In The Kennedy Detail, Gerald Blaine says he’d been assigned to protect LBJ’s home the night after the Kennedy assassination when he heard someone approaching him, prompting Blaine to activate the bolt on the top of his submachine gun. “The next instant there was a face to go with the footsteps,” according to the third-person account in The Kennedy Detail. “The new president of the United States, Lyndon Baines Johnson, had just rounded the corner, and Blaine had the gun pointed directly at the man’s chest … A split second later, Blaine would have pulled the trigger.”

USA Today

Public Sector Integrity Commissioner resigns

By macleans.ca - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 2:33 PM - 0 Comments

The federal government’s Public Sector Integrity Commissioner, Christiane Ouimet, announced her resignation (effective two days ago) just as it was revealed her office is being audited by the Auditor General’s office. According to a statement from the Auditor General’s office, there were “complaints against the “Commissioner of Public Sector Integrity and we are conducting an audit. However, we are not providing any further details about this.” The commissioner’s position was created by the Conservative government in 2007 to provide civil servants and members of the public an outlet to complain about wrongdoing in the public sector. Over the past four years, Ouimet’s annual reports have contained no findings wrongdoing.

CBC News

Nationwide protests in France continue

By macleans.ca - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 1:47 PM - 0 Comments

Protests in France broke out again early Wednesday morning as France’s 12 oil refineries went into the seventh day of a general strike, the New York Times reports. Crowds of union protesters and students blocked road tunnels in Marseille and airports in Toulouse and Clermont-Ferrand. In Paris, masked youths set cars ablaze and clashed with police, while Lyon saw lootings and car burnings. Police have reopened three fuel depots after President Nicolas Sarkozy ordered the break up blockades that left one third of the country’s gas stations dry. Mr. Sarkozy said in a statement that weeks of demonstrations and protests will not deter him from pursuing his plan to raise the minimum retirement age from 60 to 62. The final parliamentary vote on the plan is expected to occur before the weekend or early next week.

New York Times

Bloomberg

Jennifer Pozner in conversation

By Anne Kingston - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 1:20 PM - 0 Comments

PHOTOGRAPH BY STEVE SIMON

Jennifer Pozner is the director of Women In Media & News in New York City and the author of Reality Bites Back: The Troubling Truth About Guilty Pleasure TV.

Q: Why do you say it’s “bulls–t” that viewer demand has created the deluge of reality TV?
A: Michael Hirschorn, the brain trust behind VH1’s Flavor of Love and Flavor of Love: Charm School and basically the guy who is responsible for bringing the modern minstrel show to television, has said in an interview that – this is the quote, “If women don’t want those shows they wouldn’t get made,” That’s what I call bulls–t, because what reality producers and what the entertainment press sells us is this notion that we, the public, have just demanded via massive ratings that they give us this bottom-feeder low-quality reality TV fare, and this is just a big lie. It’s true that some reality shows—American Idol, The Bachelor—have gotten high ratings, but many others languish with paltry ratings and they get to stay [on air] because these shows are really cheap to produce. It can cost about 50 per cent less—sometimes even 75 per cent less—to make a reality show than to make a quality scripted program.

Q: And they can also get advertisers to pay big money for stealth product placement.
A: People think that product placement is just a Coke can or a Coke cup on the desk at American Idol. But advertisers can pay millions of dollars per episode to integrate their products into the casting choices, the plot development, the dialogue, the scenery, the “challenges” of shows. Take The Apprentice, which has gotten upwards of $2 million per episode from a variety of Fortune 500 type companies to integrate into the challenges, so every episode is basically one long infomercial for Sony and Chrysler and candy bars and cars and sneakers. Some seasons The Apprentice has done very well in the ratings, and other seasons it’s done so poorly that NBC cancelled it. But then they hired a new entertainment division president, Ben Silverman, and he happened to be a former reality TV producer. He was one of the people responsible for producing a show called The Restaurant. NBC paid not one dime to create that show, it was created by a reality TV production company that works with advertisers to create content that advertisers want people to see, and then they gave that show, for free, to NBC. So NBC didn’t invest anything; they were just able to sell commercials. So Ben Silverman gets to NBC, realizes that The Apprentice was a cash cow even though the ratings had plummeted, reversed the decision to cancel The Apprentice, and then turned it into The Celebrity Apprentice, sprinkled D-list fairy dust on it and brought it back. Was it because people, the public, really wanted that show? No, it was plummeting in the ratings every single season since it debuted. Now it’s back because Silverman, a reality TV stealth advertising fan, decided that it was too cheap and too lucrative to let go.

Q: Do most people understand that what they’re watching is completely manufactured?
A: If you ask most people, “Do you think reality TV is real?” they’ll say, “Oh, no, no, I know it’s fake”—but in the next breath they’ll say, “Oh, but that bitch needed to get eliminated,” or, “Oh, but that guy was such a douchebag.” Well, if you think you know anything about any of the people you’ve seen on reality shows, you don’t know that the shows are not real. These shows aren’t any more real than Mad Men, without the cool clothes. But Mad Men, at least, is intentionally scripted to have a running critical commentary about the sexism and racism of the ’50s and early ’60s within the advertising industry.

Q: You argue that we need to readjust our definition of “scripted.”
A: Scripting doesn’t happen in the traditional sense of actors being given a 30-page manifesto to memorize. It starts with casting. Producers find people with addiction problems or anger problems, and think, “This will make great TV.” Women who are Mensa members or high achievers tend not to be cast. Women who are either sincerely “looking for their Prince Charming” or sincerely feeling down on their luck do. After casting, they then edit people into stock characters: the dumb bimbo, the catty bitch, the weepy loser who says, “I’m going to die alone if the bachelor doesn’t choose me!” For women of colour those stock characters are even more extreme. Editing is the predominant way that scripting happens. People don’t understand that for every 45 minutes of The Bachelor they see, more than 100 hours of film have been shot.

Q: You write about “Frankenbites,” the industry term for splicing various conversations together to create a fraudulent new one.
A: One of the most controversial scenes on any reality show was in Joe Millionaire. Viewers watched about five minutes of trees in the dark, nothingness. But what you heard were things like, “Do you think it would go better lying down?” And there were captions like “slurp” and “mmm.” Those bits of conversation were from an entirely different day. I’ll give you another example. One of the only Asian women who’d ever appeared on The Bachelor was a medical student named Tina Wu. She was recruited by the producers because the bachelor that year was a doctor, so they thought, “Oh, it would be good to have one person, at least, who has his medical stuff in common.” She hadn’t seen the show before, she thought, “Oh, maybe it’ll be a chance to have some fun vacation.” Well, she goes on the show, and she blogged about it in great, great detail—but she ripped that show to shreds. She talked about the psychologists they have behind the scenes who do all these intake interviews, so they knew that she had a very troubled relationship with her family, in particular her father. She hated being on the show, she said that it was filthy, there were rats running around the mansion, that there was very little food and constant alcohol. And she didn’t like the guy; she thought he was kind of boring. She would say on camera that she thought he didn’t really have a good since of humour, because at one point they’re out an a date where there’s big, huge yacht and he says something like, “Welcome to my yacht,” and she laughs about it because she knows that he can’t possibly afford that. She’s like, “Oh, you mean this is your yacht?” in this very kind of ha-ha way, calling attention to the product placement. Then they edit that to make her seem like she’s a dumb-ass and she really believes that this is, you know, “This is your yacht!”

She was edited into the girl who was too closed off, who wouldn’t open up, and that became the thing he would always say to her and other women would always say, “Why aren’t you opening up? You’re too cold.” So at one point she says to the producers on camera: “I’m not opening up because I’m not really interested in him, but being on this show, agreeing to do this show, was the thing I regret most in my life.”

Well, eventually, way, way, way longer into the show than she would have preferred, she eventually gets eliminated. When she finally got eliminated it was about 1:00 or 2:00 in the morning, she said, and she was grinning ear to ear, she was happy to go home. That didn’t play well with producers, and they kept saying to her, “We need you to cry,” and she wasn’t interested in crying, she wasn’t heart-broken. And they told her: “If you don’t show some real emotion here you’re just going to be edited into being, you know, the cold bitch.” And she was happy; she was going home, she didn’t want to cry. So they poke at her and poke at her and poke at her, and she’s still not giving them the tears that they want, so finally… now, imagine you’ve been up since, like, 7:00 in the morning, you’ve been in this high-pressure environment all day, and the producer is saying to you, “Don’t you think your father would be disappointed in you?” or things about your family. That’s where she cried. She felt betrayed that they would exploit her personal back story that way. And so what we saw as viewers was after she gets eliminated we hear her say, “I didn’t open up to the bachelor. This was the biggest regret of my life,” and then she cries. That’s a frankenbite.

Q: Have any contestants taken producers to task for misappropriating what they’ve said?
A: They sign away their rights to do so. In these very draconian contracts it says: “We can make a fiction out of you and we most likely will.” It says that in legal language but that’s basically the long and short of it. Not only do people sign away their rights to speak to the press negatively about the shows, they sign away their rights to own the intellectual property of things they create on shows like Project Runway or on American Idol, they sign away their rights to sue if they get injured or even killed on these shows. What these contracts do is they cause a chilling effect, because most people who show up on reality TV shows do so because they are hoping for some sort of big pay-day to change their life, right, so they’re not going to be people who have the kinds of resources to go up against Goliath, so they just don’t say all of the things that have seen happen behind the scenes. You know, they’ll maybe critique, “Oh, I didn’t like the way I was edited on the show,” to Entertainment Weekly or TV Guide, but they won’t say, “Here exactly is how they manipulate reality so that what you’re seeing is absolutely not real.”

Q: Reality shows appear to exist in a bubble, completely disconnected from social reality.
A: Absolutely. At the same time you have a housing bubble in America and the highest unemployment rate since the Depression, you’re seeing television shows encouraging us to root for massive profits for real estate speculators and house-flippers on shows like Million Dollar Listing and Flip that House. And at the same time as women are making great strides in politics, in business, and redefining personal relationships within the family, within parenting, within sexual communication and relationships, on television, in the guise of reality, producers have expected us to believe that women have no ambition, they want us to believe that women not only have no real choices, they don’t even want any. So in that way, with shows like Wife Swap in which every woman who works outside the home is pitted against a stay-at-home mom, or pitted against a woman who may work outside the home but doesn’t really want to, only has to, and all the women who actually like their careers are considered bad mothers, and all the women who stay at home are considered doormats. What I want people to understand is that this massive stereotyping, the massive regressive depictions of womanhood, of women being stupid, of women being less competent than men, of women being catty, vindictive and not to be trusted especially by other women, of women being gold diggers, all of these ideas are very much a product of reality TV producers and networks wanting to revive 1950s ideology for the contemporary age. These shows aren’t any more real than Mad Men, without the cool clothes, but Mad Men, at least, is intentionally scripted to have a running critical commentary about the sexism and racism of the ’50s and early ’60s within the advertising industry.

Reality TV is showing us the same kind of misogyny but they’re glorifying it and they’re pretending that it’s real. What we see in reality television is the remarkable success of reality TV producers creating a fictitious world and packaging it to us as if it’s reality, a world that the most ardent fundamentalists have always tried to achieve, one in which women’s rightful place is in the home, and women who have independence are scorned and will die alone, and in which the only role for fathers is financial provision and if they are stay-at-home parents they’re wimps and sissies and not real men, a world in which people of colour exist only as male buffoons, thugs and pimps, and female whores and the Jezebel and Sapphire stereotypes. That world is not real, but through all of this frankenbite editing and pick-and-choose and advertisers’ influence over content, we get to see what networks want us to believe about ourselves at the turn of the century: they want us to believe that the women’s movement, the civil rights movement, the gay rights movement, never existed. We see no traces of that in reality TV. So just at the same time as women are winning and setting world records in any number of Olympic sports, America’s Next Top Model debuts to tell women that their bodies are specifically here just to be decorative, and the thinner and weaker the better. At the same time as Condoleezza Rice is becoming national security advisor, Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire is telling us that the biggest ambition that we can have is to be chosen in a sort of mail-order-bride/Miss America parade to get married to somebody we don’t even know in a network-arranged marriage. And that’s just not what life is like in America anymore. The age of first marriage keeps rising, people are staying single longer, the number of two-parent families where both parents work is rising because of economic conditions. The ideology of this world that we see on television is very specifically political, it’s very regressive, and it’s very intentional.

Q: You give the example of a black woman being axed from Real Housewives of Atlanta because she didn’t fit producers’ stereotypes.
A: What’s interesting with The Real Housewives of Atlanta is when you see how reality producers tweak formulas to reinforce ethnic stereotypes. The original real housewives were of Orange County, and they were depicted as blondes, bimbos, elite wealthy snob elitists. And then it went to New York where they still had a lot of the snobbery but there was a bit more of a sort of east coast flair to it, and then we have Atlanta where all of a sudden the notion is because it’s black women all of a sudden there are physical fist fights, and there’s intimidation, and people are scared of one another, and there’s consent screaming and altercations. The running subtext is “these people” are low class and no amount of money can change their inherent nature.”

That first season, DeShawn Snow, was a divinity student, she was studying for, I believe, a Ph.D., she headed a foundation for girls’ empowerment, But we never saw her studying. The fact that this was a studious, intelligent woman who was a religious person, who wanted to empower young girls, especially girls of colour, the only thing we ever saw about her foundation was as an excuse for her to have problems throwing a party and people being snubbed because they weren’t invited to the party. And the reason we didn’t get to see her cracking open the books and studying is because that would interrupt the narrative they wanted to present about black women, that narrative being that black women are ignorant and illiterate. For example, they didn’t show us DeShawn studying but they did show us NeNe Leakes not being able to help her son with math and having to get her husband to tutor him because she doesn’t know which is bigger, a third of a half . When they dropped her from the series it was because—they specifically told her—“You don’t fly off the handle the way we need you to. Next season we’re going to be amping up the drama even more and we just don’t think you have it in you.” So then the next season she was out, and who did they bring in? A woman who they edited – a hip-hop star – who they edited as basically ‘ghetto,’ and they called her ghetto over and over and over, and then they spent a lot of time on her relationship with her fiancé who had numerous kids from different mothers.

Q: A catfight does generate more interest.
A: By no means am I saying that these shows aren’t compelling. They are. They basically offer all of the sniping and gossip and voyeurism of high school cliques and office gossip without feeling like we’re affecting any real people. And if we’re questioning whether or not we’re being the best parents we can be, well, at least our families aren’t self-destructing like Jon and Kate’s. But [the appeal is] not just schadenfreude—there’s a lot of humour. That’s the biggest draw of Jersey Shore, that people behave ridiculously and it’s funny to watch. The bigger question is why there’s such a huge appetite for this prurient kind of thing. When this genre burst onto the scene with Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire?, there was the hugest public outcry: “Oh my God, this is so regressive.” Ten years later it’s a very different climate. News outlets basically just repeat the same big lies that reality TV producers sell.

Q: And now Jon and Kate are “news,” the argument being that people are interested.
A: Why do you have pictures of Snooki and Bachelorette Ali Fedotowsky and Kate Gosselin on the covers of all the tabloids? Well, because it’s so much cheaper. I’ve already talked about how much cheaper it is to run an unscripted show versus a scripted show, but think about the tabloid level: If you pay a paparazzi for a photo of Snooki you’re paying only a few bucks. If you pay a paparazzi for a photo of Angelina Jolie—and it’s a good photo—that’s a very pricy picture. It goes back to money. Same reason why CNN can run endless amounts of, “What’s wrong with Lindsay Lohan? Should she get help? Is she ever going to beat her drug addiction?” stories ad nauseam, because you pay some guy to videotape Lindsay walking around or getting in and out of her car, tape Paris Hilton getting in and out of her car and hopefully catching a crotch shot, you pay them a few hundred bucks and you’ve got your story for the entire day, and maybe even repeatedly through the entire week.

That is much cheaper than stationing, for example, a whole foreign bureau in Afghanistan to make sure that you’ve got, every single day, new coverage of civilian deaths or of whatever the new battle is. You don’t have to pay translators, you don’t have to pay videographers, you don’t have to pay numerous reporters, you don’t have to pay security personnel to keep them safe, you don’t have to pay their lodging and their travel, you just have to throw a few hundred bucks to a paparazzi who maybe gets Lindsay looking dazed or Paris without underwear and then you’ve got your CNN or your Fox story for the next half hour or for the next five days. Same thing for the tabloids, right? So again they will say, “This is what we want,” and it’s not that people won’t buy it. That’s key. People are buying it, I’m not saying nobody wants it, I’m saying people would also want quality, funny, interesting programming if we were given that option. A lot of the reason people aren’t watching scripted shows that are quality options is because those shows get yanked off the air before they can develop an audience. A show like Cheers, longest-running sit-com, would not get the chance to develop in today’s market.

There’s often a massively financed campaign to get us to believe in the appearance of spontaneous collective interest. For example, Survivor existed to test the new Infinity-Viacom-CBS merger, to test the power of cross-platform promotion. So for months before that show appeared, shock jocks on FM stations would wake people up with, “There’s going to be this show with cute chicks in bikinis eating bugs. You gotta check it out.” And then you could turn to your news station and find Mark Burnett being interviewed about a new format in which advertisers and networks work together to bring us unscripted content, and then when you get home, 60 Minutes was talking about it. Nobody was talking about that show who wasn’t on CBS’s, Viacom’s and Infinity’s payroll. And then there were embedded sponsors, the Survivor logo on Doritos, so it seemed like if you were not watching Survivor, you were missing out on a massive cultural phenomenon.

Q: You watched a thousand hours of reality TV to do this book and you write that not everything is odious. Shows shows like Project Runway or Amazing Race, for instance you, like.
A: I’m really glad that you asked that. People make the mistake of thinking that what I’m saying is that they should absolutely turn the TV off, that they shouldn’t watch any reality shows if they don’t want to be brainwashed, or that they’re bad people if they watch reality TV, and that’s not at all what I’m saying. The problem with reality TV is not the format. You can do interesting, compelling, and non-bigoted things with the format of unscripted television, but that requires intentionality. There are a few shows here and there that have been actually quite edifying, a show like Project Runway that focuses mostly on talent, that focuses on people creating something out of nothing under tight deadlines with very few limited resources and odd materials. I think I call it in the book “Macgyver meets Milan.” That show tends to celebrate people’s differences as opposed to pitting people against each other based on difference, and that is an intentional part of their narrative. But people were wondering why this season of Project Runway seems to feature so much more back-biting and arguing and—to some degree—stereotyping than we’ve seen on many seasons before.

I was not surprised by this at all because now that it’s on Lifetime it’s a different set of producers: it’s Bunim/Murray Productions who created The Real World. I was worried as soon as I heard that Bunim Murray was going to take over Project Runway that the narrative would shift. And they know they can’t shift it too much because it’s a success based on this talent-over-everything-else mould that has been created by Bravo over the years for that show, but they have built in more stereotyping this season; they have built in more arguing and more contestants yelling at each other, etc. And so again when you see the differences there you realize producers really decide how people are going to behave and what kinds of narratives occur. But in general, the reason so many people love Project Runway is because it’s not based on humiliation, it’s based on validating artistic endeavour.

Q: Explain why you see a link between the [U.S.] Telecommunications Act of 1996 and the shrinking size of actresses.
A: Telecom ’96 happens [and] media companies merge at a much faster rate than ever before, and we see the introduction of really cheap-to-produce tabloids, both print and TV, that do very little more than follow celebrity women around shaming them about their bodies. All of these “Baby Bump?” arrows pointing at bellies, when somebody basically ate a bagel that day. This was not the case when media companies cared about profit but also, in a measured way, about the quality of their content. So in the ’80s you had shows like Beverly Hills 90210, in which the girls basically looked like thin but healthy young women. Fast forward after Telecom ’96 to the current show 90210—almost every single girl looks unhealthily skinny.

Q: Why do you say violence against women is part of the subtext and text of reality shows?
A: Violence against women has always been part of the subtext and also part of the text of reality TV on networks, since 2000. That first show, Who Wants to Marry a Multi-Millionaire, the guy who was considered the crown prince had a restraining order against him. Flavor Flav [of The Flavor of Love] has had charges against him for domestic violence, and yet he gets three seasons of a dating show. And then you have shows like America’s Next Top Model, which in the long and storied tradition of fashion and beauty advertisers have repeatedly used images of women in fear, in pain, and even in coffins, and in beautiful corpse challenges in which they’re supposed to pose as gorgeous, glamorous dead girls, murder victims, while judges say things like, “Beautiful, gorgeous! You look great dead.” So what are we to make of season after season after season of beautiful corpses and Tyra Banks telling girls, “Pose as if you’re in pain. Think pain but beauty.” You remember, I’m sure: in Canada this was a big thing—two summers ago where Ryan Jenkins got voted off the show Megan Wants a Millionaire, went home—where he was positioned, by the way, on that show as great boyfriend relationship material—went home, married his ex-girlfriend, Jasmine Fiore—she was a model—married her, and then allegedly killed her and mutilated her body so badly that she was only able to be identified through the serial numbers on her breast implants, and then killed himself. People at that time called me, lots of reporters called me and said, “Has reality TV created a monster?” No, they did not create a monster, they cast a monster, and they should have known that they were casting a monster because he had a record for domestic violence.

And the thing that that says is that reality producers tend to rank women’s safety lower on their priority list than lighting and the provision of alcohol and set design. And the idea to women at home that these people are princes among men, that these people are worthy of being fought over, says basically as long as a guy has a firm ass and a firm financial portfolio he doesn’t need to be respectful, he doesn’t need to be smart, he doesn’t need to be loyal, he doesn’t need to be funny, he doesn’t need to be a good partner, and even at the baseline he doesn’t need to treat you with any kind of physical dignity, he can be a batterer, and you should still fight over him because he can bring you the bling.

Q: Is reality programming the new reality?
A: If we continue to allow media companies to let market forces define everything to the point where quality means nothing and the economics behind production is 100 per cent of the priority, then every season will have more provocative, more bigoted fare. For example, Bridalplasty is about to debut: cosmetic surgery given to brides who compete to get procedures while they plan their wedding. We’ve had Extreme Makeover, The Swan. So what can they do to make it even more disgusting? Oh, let’s merge the wedding-industrial-complex shows with the cosmetic-surgery-is-liberating-for-women shows. They have to go further and further, more racist, more misogynistic, more over-the-top. We will see more of that if we don’t become very critical very quickly.

Let the people ask

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 1:18 PM - 0 Comments

Michael Ignatieff’s relating yesterday of a question from a young man named Derek harkens somewhat to a program the Reform party attempted upon arriving in Ottawa in 1994.

In ye olden days, during those dreary days before electronic mail, Preston Manning’s side set up phone and fax lines to receive questions from average Canadians that could then be put to the government of the day during QP. Manning’s second question of Prime Minister Jean Chretien, in fact, was asked on behalf of Dr. Dean P. Eyre of Ottawa.

A week later, Reform MP Randy White attempted to relate a question from Raymond Watts of Surrey, but was admonished by the speaker of the day, Gilbert Parent, on procedural grounds. It’s unclear, at least to me, how much longer the program lasted. Its existence was still being boasted about a month later, but by the end of that year, the Reform side had more or less abandoned its larger goal of turning QP into a genteel exchange of relevant information.

The general notion though of constituent questions is quite central to Michael Chong’s hopes for QP reform. Continue…

Britain cuts welfare, axes 490,000 jobs, and raises retirement to 66

By macleans.ca - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 1:00 PM - 0 Comments

Britain’s finance minister George Osborne has unveiled how he plans to cut $130-billion out of Britain’s budget over the next four years. Most government budgets will be cut by about 19 per cent, which is less than the 25 per cent cut many had predicted. The savings will partially be achieved through the end of 490,000 civil service jobs. There will be significant cuts to public housing and welfare, though things like free eye tests, winter fuel subsidies, TV licenses, and bus service remain intact. The government will also save money by gradually raising the age to collect a pension from 65 to 66, by 2020. The National Health Service’s budget remains untouched, though it was told to find efficiencies in order to pay for rapidly rising drug costs. The schooling budget was the only significant increase. Britain’s deficit is currently $177-billion, which is 11 per cent its GDP and the largest in the G8.

The Independent

Men most likely to support decriminalizing prostitution

By macleans.ca - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 12:53 PM - 0 Comments

A new poll for QMI Media found that 60 per cent of Canadian men approve of decriminalizing prostitution, compared to just 38 per cent of women. The survey also found support for legal prostitution was higher among all Canadians over the age of 35, with 50 per cent support, compared to just 39 per cent support among 18-34 year-olds. Mario Canseco of Angus Reid told QMI that while the gender divide on the issue was known, but the age divide was a surprise. Support for prostitution was highest in Quebec (54 per cent) and lowest in Saskatchewan and Manitoba (23 per cent). The federal government plans to appeal the Ontario court ruling that struck down Canada’s prostitution laws.

Toronto Sun

Hillary Clinton: "inclined to" okay Keystone XL pipeline

By Luiza Ch. Savage - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 11:25 AM - 0 Comments

Secretary of State Hillary Clinton spoke to the Commonwealth Club of San Francisco on Friday and a questioner asked about the Clipper pipeline, but in her answer, Clinton appears to be talking about the proposed Keystone XL pipeline, which is going through a State Dept. approval process, and appeared bogged down as Democratic lawmakers have been asking for it to be slowed down or stopped in the wake of the BP disaster. But she said the State Dept. is “inclined to sign off on it.”

Question: Another international issue that you signed in on last year was the Alberta Clipper, a pipeline from Alberta that brings tar sands, oil sands directly into Wisconsin to the U.S. Midwest. This is some of the dirtiest fuel in the world. And how can the U.S. be saying climate change is a priority when we’re mainlining some of the dirtiest fuel that exists. (Applause.)

Secretary Clinton: Well, there hasn’t been a final decision made. It is -

Question: Are you willing to reconsider it?

Secretary Clinton: Probably not. (Laughter.) And we – but we haven’t finish all of the analysis. So as I say, we’ve not yet signed off on it. But we are inclined to do so and we are for several reasons – going back to one of your original questions – we’re either going to be dependent on dirty oil from the Gulf or dirty oil from Canada. And until we can get our act together as a country and figure out that clean, renewable energy is in both our economic interests and the interests of our planet – (applause) – I mean, I don’t think it will come as a surprise to anyone how deeply disappointed the President and I are about our inability to get the kind of legislation through the Senate that the United States was seeking.

Continue…

Happy World Statistics Day

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 10:55 AM - 0 Comments

Statistics Canada sets out what it expects from the voluntary census.

Statistics Canada also said the estimated response rate means the NHS is likely to have a sampling error that is “slightly higher (worse) than would have been achieved from a mandatory long-form census,” and certain subpopulation groups “are particularly at risk” of seeing fluctuations in the error rate.

More worrisome, however, is the non-response bias, which can skew survey results. According to the federal agency, the risk of non-response bias in a survey goes up as the response rate goes down. ”This is because, in general, non-respondents tend to have characteristics that are different than those of the respondents and thus the results are not representative of the true population,” Statistics Canada says on its website. “Given that the National Household Survey is anticipated to achieve a response rate of only 50 per cent, there is a substantial risk of non-response bias.”

Liveblog: Col. Russell Williams hearing, day 3

By Cathy Gulli - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 9:20 AM - 0 Comments

WARNING: The following contains graphic testimony that readers may find disturbing.

For more on the first day of Russell Williams’s hearing go to: The dark, depraved side of Russell Williams revealed in court

[4:13 PM]

The judge gives his condolences again, and thanks those who spoke.

Court is adjourned.

[4:01 PM]

Roxanne Lloyd, Jessica’s mother takes the stand.

“I am Jessica’s mother.” She says her daughter’s full name, birth date, and date of death. She pauses, holding back tears.

She speaks quickly, firmly. Because of Williams, she says, she can never hug her daughter again or be hugged by her, tell her she loves her, get a phone call or email from her, go shopping or on trips with her.

“I feel like my heart has been ripped right out of my chest. I loved her from the moment I realized I was pregant. … I will continue to love her for the rest of my years on Earth, and even after I die.”

“I can’t even begin to imagine what Christmas will be like without her. It will be unbearable.”

“So many dreams I had for my daughter and myself have been destroyed.” She won’t hear Jessica tell her she’s fallen in love. She can’t help her plan her wedding. She can’t share the joy of becoming a mother, and she can’t become a grandmother.

“I have been put through sheer agony. No mother should go through what this has put me through.” Searching for her daughter, then finding out she’d been murdered, then finding out how she had been degraded and traumatized. “How could he do those horrible things to her, and then drive by her house twice a day knowing her family was searching for her?”

“I had to see my daughter in a casket. I had to see that it was all true. I prayed some big mistake had been made. But when I saw her in that casket I knew my hopes and dreams were over.”

“I never believed I would outlive my child. I wrote the eulogy for her funeral.”

She has never been one for medication, but she is now on sleep drugs and antidepressants.

“I can’t help wondering and asking why? How could he do this to my … wonderful, witty, thoughtful daughter?”

“Why did he do this to me too? Now I am a broken woman. I will never be the same.”

“The only good thing to come from this is he can never do this again. And it’s because of my Jessica that he has been stopped.”

She continues: “I’ve heard people should be forgiven. I can never, ever, ever forgive him. How am I supposed to live the rest of my life without Jessica? I can honestly say I hate Russell Williams.”

“I now wear her jewelry. I am wearing this necklace. It’s a mother and child. Jessica always preferred silver. I also wear a silver teardrop with Jessica’s ashes.” Andy wears a bracelet with her ashes in it.

“No amount of suffering Russell Williams feels today compares the suffering we have felt.”

Lloyd’s mother wishes she could bring her daughter back. “I would gladly take her place. I would die for her. Since that is not possible, I am here to today to make sure that Russell Williams is properly sentenced and that we get justice for Jessica.”

She finishes speaking, and loud applauds erupt in the courtroom.

[3:52 PM]

Andy Lloyd takes the stand. The judge gives him the courtroom’s respects.

He says it has been difficult to process his grief in the public spotlight.

“My sister and I were always close, especially after our dad died,” he stops, crying. He takes several sips of water.

They shared friends, and spent a lot of time together. “We were not only siblings, but friends.”

“I am a very proud supporter of the Canadian Armed Forces.” He speaks of the honorable service of his father, and how he would be horrified to know what Williams did to his daughter.

“Every day is a struggle to get through. I miss her so much. Special occasions are especially tough. Like Victoria Day weekend, which is one of her favourites.” Her birthday always fell on that weekend. “This year, like always, I had my annual party, but it wasn’t the same because she wasn’t there.”

He and his mother had a hard time on their August birthdays and Thanksgiving. “Looking ahead I can’t even imagine what Christmas will be like.” He sighs heavily.

“I was looking forward to being an uncle almost as much as I was looking forward to being a father. That won’t happen now. No big brother should have to go through what I went through. Searching for her, then learning she’d been murdered.”

“What did Williams think seeing me on every major media outlet,” he says of the pleas he made for help during the search for Jessica. “I can’t help but think he laughed at me, thinking, ‘She’s in my garage.’ ”

He can’t sleep, he is on multiple medications. “All I want is my life to go back to the way it was before.”

The only good thing now is that Williams has been caught, “and it’s because of my sister. My sister and the community think of her as a hero for stopping this from happening to another woman.”

“The media attention has been overwhelming.” He says he spoke with reporters because he wanted to make sure that this story is about his amazing sister, not about “the colonel—ex-colonel.”

He doesn’t understand why fate or God could let anything like this happen to such a good person.

He steps down. Claps erupt.

[3:51 PM]

In closing the aunt says: “Many people say that it took our little angel to take Russell Williams down.”

Lloyd gave her gift once that read, “The love in our family flows strong and deep. Leaving us special memories to treasure and keep.” She says, “Those memories will remain in our hearts forever.

[3:48 PM]

Lloyd’s aunt continues: “We all planned on seeing her get married, and have babies.” She says it is so painful to see Jessica’s mother suffer so much. “She wants her daughter back. Something none of us can do for her.”

“What gave him the right to take someone else’s child?”

“He has no idea what love means. He couldn’t have loved his own family because now they have to live with this too.”

[3:36 PM]

Court resumes. Williams is not hunched over, with his head tilted down, but it’s unclear if he is looking at the speakers giving their victim impact statements.

Next person is another aunt of Lloyd.

“We are a very close family. When one member is hurting, everyone feels the pain.”

She remembers Lloyd as a beautiful baby. Full of smiles, and “those huge green eyes just sparkled.”

“Jessica’s father was military, and so very proud of it, as we were of him.”

Lloyd’s aunt describes the happy times the family had together before Lloyd’s murder. “Then our world fell apart. I have never in life felt more pain, sadness and anger than I have these past several months.”

She doesn’t believe Williams took into consideration the love Lloyd had for her. She remembers being with Jessica’s mother, looking out Jessica’s picture window waiting for her to come home. Initially they were optimistic. “Then we went from fearing the worst, to living the worst.”

Her son told her their lives will never be the same. “You want to know how this has impacted my life? How hasn’t it?”

A six-year-old relative says he wants to be police officer so he can catch bad men like the one who hurt Jessica.

[3:10 PM]

Break. Many tears in the courtroom.

[3:04 PM]

A cousin and best friend of Lloyd’s take the stand. She talked to her multiple times a day, and saw her at least once a week.

“I have come to grips with the why questions never being answered,” she says. About the lurid details of the attack and murder against Lloyd, she says, “I knew her so well that those mental images will continue to break me everyday of my life.”

“I’m going to learn to appreciate life again know that I can still walk around on this Earth.” She says she believes that what goes around comes around, and that she can’t wait for fate to play out.

[3:01 PM]

Lloyd’s aunt continues: “Jessica did not have to die. She did not have to die this way. … I will never forgive Russell Williams.” While searching for Lloyd “We suffered each and every day while he continued on as if nothing had happened,” she say.

“What tears me apart that after everything he did to her,” the aunts contiues, “he ended her life, and then he dumped Jessica on the side of the road like a bag of trash.”

She pauses, crying. “We love you Jessica, we miss you everyday, and you will live in our hearts forever.”

[2:54 PM]

Lloyd’s aunt, fighting tears, says that Lloyd had said that she wasn’t afraid living alone, but that she was feeling uncomfortable about the “Tweed creeper.” Thirteen days later, Williams attacked and murdered her.

Lloyd’s aunt remembers standing outside with Lloyd’s mother and begging God that Jessica was safe and not cold.

Lloyd’s mother was devastated: “When your child is murdered, you just can’t accept it. There are so many whys?”

She remembers the call Lloyd’s mother had to make to Bell to disconnect her daughter’s phone line. It last more than an hour. She had to keep repeating that her daughter had been murdered. “How cruel.”

Lloyd’s aunt can find no peace. “Why did her attacker choose her, and why didn’t he let her live? What if she had stayed at a friend’s house, or a friend had stayed at her house? What if she had an alarm system or a dog? What if? What if? What if?”

[2:52 PM]

Multiple people have said the Lloyd wanted to have children, and mourn that her mother will never get to hold a grandchild. Lloyd said she would have named her son Tie, after her favourite Maple Leaf player, Tie Domi.

[2:45 PM]

Jessica’s aunt takes the stand. Starts to cry. She composes herself and begins in a steady voice. “Our family will never be truly happy again.” She says, speaking directly to Williams, “Since Jan. 29, when you selfishly took Jessica from us, we are all scarred for life.”

[2:30 PM]

Another woman takes the stand. “Russell Williams murdered my best friend,” she says. She grew up on the belief that you should look for the best in people and situations. Speaking to Williams, she says, “The only beauty I see in you is that you’re caught.”

After Lloyd’s father died of cancer, she made a promise to herself that she would take care of Lloyd. “I failed.”

“My life was almost perfect. I bought my first home and I had a career I thought I could only dream of.” At Christmas she and Lloyd gave each other a hug that lasted so long it was like it “foreshadowed what was to come.” They didn’t want to let go of each other. “That was the last face-to-face time I had with Lloyd.” Later, she says she “cried going to pick up my second set of keys because Jessica would never use that set.”

“I spent days and nights waiting to hear something, anything. There was one day when I received a call from my colleagues. I told them I knew Lloyd was gone. After my heart told me she was gone, I turned to hoping her body would be found. I knew she was outside. I hoped she was wearing clothing, it was cold.” She continues, “I hoped for a miracle. My miracle didn’t happen. Life as I knew it would never be the same. I lost my best friend forever. I didn’t get to say goodbye. He took that from me. I didn’t get to tell her I love her, or hug her. Russell Williams stole that from me. He was above the law until he met Jessica Lloyd. He had no idea the love her family and friends had for her. If he had, he would have never stepped foot in that house.

I have survivor’s guilt. I am constantly considering the what ifs. If I had never left Belleville, maybe this wouldn’t have happened. I’m now filled with hate and anger, and I have no idea how to live a life with these emotions.

I think about what Jessica’s last thoughts were, but I already know the answer.” She thought of her mother and brother and the pain they would feel. She says she doesn’t want to partake in life as it now exists. “I tell my colleagues my puffy eyes are allergies, all the while I cry myself to sleep at night. I don’t fear life and death. I am not suicidal. I would never give Russell Williams the satisfaction. Instead I fear for my friends and family and hers. It’s come to the point that when I can’t get a hold of someone I think the worst. I can’t handle losing anyone else.”

The woman continues, “This year I didn’t want to have a 28th birthday, because Jessica didn’t get to celebrate hers. Christmas was one of Jessica’s favorite times of year; this year I will prefer to sleep through it. I hate Russell Williams. I will never forgive him. People say forgiveness heals all wounds. I guess my wounds will bleed until the day I die.

She says Williams used his power and authority to take advantage of the Canadian public.

Making this statement, she says, “brings me no closure or satisfaction. I’ll leave today and continue to live my nightmare. I’ll get through my days knowing that Jessica feels no pain and that she is in peace. There will be a day when I get to tell her that I love her most.”

[2:22 PM]

Next person, another woman, takes the stand. She is speaking as a friend of Lloyd, and the on behalf of friends of Lloyd.

One friend says she never viewed the world the same after Lloyd’s murder. She loved her like a sister. Williams destroyed her life by taking her away. She hopes he rots.

The woman then speaks for herself: “I have never known the word hate. I never knew how someone’s name could make me cringe or how seeing them could make me feel physically ill. I despise Russell Williams. How dare he. His selfishness has changed who I am. I resent that he doesn’t have the courage to look at me.” She looks at him, but Williams does not appear to look at her. “I hopes that man loses everything. I hate him.”

[2:18 PM]

A break-in victim takes the stand to the right of the judge. She spells her name.

She’s tried many times to write this statement, but didn’t know what to say. She has studied criminology and psychology. She thought about the perpetrator, and how much the person needed to get help. He had to be emotionally disturbed. But as months went by, the effects of of the break-in became apparent. Her family put bars on the windows, she changed her routine. She moved to another city, and she had her landlord put in an alarm and introduced herself to neighbors. Now that her physical needs were met, her emotions took over. The person took her “trust, security and emotional well-being.” She had panic attacks, and has trouble sleeping to this day. She saw a therapist and was prescribed medication. Although there are much more heinous crimes than the one she suffered, she says this experience has affected her life very negatively.

[2:15 PM]

The Crown notifies the courtroom that victim impact statements will be read.

The judge is thanking the victims for coming forward.

[2:14 PM]

Williams is led back into the courtroom. He is hunched over. The judge enters. All rise. For the first time since the court proceedings began the large TV screens showing Williams photographs and confession, among other evidence, are turned off and away from the people in the coutroom.

[1:22 PM]

The court made available letters that Williams wrote after making his confession: one to his wife, which references the family cat; another to Jessica Lloyd’s mother; a third to Marie-France Comeau’s father; one to Laurie Massicotte, one of the sexual assault victims; and one more to the other sexual assault victim. Scrawled on lined paper, they read as follows:

Dearest Mary Elizabeth, I love you, sweet [illegible]. I am so very sorry for having hurt you like this. I know you’ll take good care of sweet Rosie. I love you, Russ.

Mrs. Lloyd, You won’t believe me, I know, but I am sorry for having taken your daughter from you. Jessica was a beautiful, gentle young woman, as you know. I know she loved you very much—she told me so, again and again. I can tell that she did not suspect that the end was coming. Jessica was happy because she believed she was going home. I know you have already had a lot of pain in your life. I am sorry to have caused you so much more. RW

Mr. Comeau, I am sorry for having taken your daughter, Marie-France Comeau from you. … I know you won’t be able to believe me, but it is true. Marie-France has been deeply missed by all that knew her. RS

Laurie, I am sorry for having hurt you the way I did. I really hope that the discussion we had has helped you turn your life around a bit. You seem like a bright woman who could do much better for herself. I do hope that you find a way to succeed. RS

[Name censored], I apologize for having traumatized you the way I did. No doubt you’ll rest a bit easier now that I’ve been caught. RS

[1:04 PM]

Break.

[12:53 PM]

“I guess what’s on my mind now, Russ, is what made you decide to tell me this?” Smyth asks, referring to the confession.

“Mostly to make my wife’s life easier,” Williams says, looking down.

Smyth asks, “Is what you told me tonight the truth?” Williams replies, “Yeah.

Smyth asks Williams how he feels about what he’s done. Williams is slient. Finally, he responds: “Disappointed.”

Smyth asks if it hadn’t come to this point, does he think it would have happend again. “I was hoping not. I can’t answer the question,” says Williams.

Smyth says, “Okay,” stands up, and says he wants to cover off a few more details. Williams sits down again.

In Comeau’s basement there is a hole in the wall. Williams says doesn’t know why.

Smyth asks about clothes that were tied around a support pole in her basement. Williams says that was from when he tied her up shortly after he’d knocked her out. Smyth asks if her mouth is duct taped at that point. Williams replies that he can’t be sure, “but the pictures would show it.”

Williams then explains that the smashed photo in the bathroom was the results of a struggle he had with Comeau. She had run into the bathroom, and he subdued her again, and got her back in the bedroom “and regained control of her.”

Smyth asks about the  blood in the bedroom. “All of the blood was from when I was first trying to subdue her.”

Smyth asks why Comeau’s breasts were injurd. Williams doesn’t know. “I certainly touched her breasts, but I didn’t do anything to hurt her. But when I suffocated her she was on her front. So maybe there is something there. She was lying on the floor of the bedroom as I suffocated her, there was obviously a struggle, so maybe there’s something there.” Smyth asks what happened next. “Well, she died.” He took the tape off, and put her back on the bed.

Smyth says that there are a number of unsolved cases. Williams says “Before you do that can I go to the washroom?” Smyth obliges.

Courtroom footage ends.

The video proceeds with Williams being asked if he wants to write something to the victims or their families. The paper stays blank. Williams later describes the break and enters. He is invited to write again. He is left alone for an hour. Williams did write three letters. They will be submitted as exhibits. They are letters to victims, and one to his wife, Mary Elizabeth Harriman. There are others he wrote that he later scratched out, which police have in their possession.

Williams denies any connection to other crimes.

He requests to review with officers what can be found in his home so they can get taht quickly and leave his wife alone.

He then takes officers to Lloyd’s body.

[12:49 PM]

Williams describes the other sexual assault, saying it was similar to what he’d just outlined against Massicotte. He calls the victim “cute,” and tells Smyth that she had told him she had an eight-month old baby. He breathes deeply, leans forward.

Smyth asks why he put the underwear of the sexual assault victims with those of the murder victims. “I don’t know.”

He stretches his neck in the chair while describing where in the laundry room he has put the green military duffle bag containing women’s underwear. Smyth asks if there is anything else in the bag. “Just underwear.”

Williams sips water, gets up again, hands behind his back, paces, leans against the wall. He explains where photos of him wearing underwear were taken. “In Marie-France’s case, in her house. With the others, in my house.”

[12:42 PM]

“We’ve been through this,” he says to Smyth when asked what happened on the night of the assault. He goes through the familiar list: subdued her, assaulted her, took pictures, stole lingerie, left. He says he told her that there were other guys in the house to control her. Williams say, “She was worried she was going to be killed. I said, ‘I’m not going to kill anyone.’ ”

He says he used his one and only digital photo camera, and a video camera. Williams tells Smyth they are in Tweed. He is rubbing his left thigh. He tells Smyth he left Massicotte’s by telling her to “count or wait for a couple of minutes before she called the police. I left.” He went home. Smyth asks if he waited to see if the police showed up. “No.” Williams says he went to sleep. The next day he went to work.

[12:39 PM]

Williams is standing against the wall still. His left hand is resting on his neck.

Smyth asks how he targeted Massicotte, the sexual assault victim. He says he knew she lived alone. Williams sits down again. Crosses his arms. “I looked in the window, and she was alone.”  Williams says he knew she had a boyfriend, but “she told me they had been fighting. So.”

He had gone to Massicotte’s house before the night of the assault and “looked for signs of her boyfriend, and took two pieces of her underwear. That’s all.”

Williams got into the house through a window at the back of the house.

[12:36 PM]

Williams is trying to piece together a timeline again. This time sounds like he was at Comeau’s for more like five hours.

He left her home, and went straight to Ottawa on the 401 East. He had a meeting for a C17 acquisition project.

[12:28 PM]

The attack on Comeau lasted “an hour and a half, two hours,” says Williams. Then, he suffocated her using duct tape, he says, “as I described.”

Smyth asks why he did that. “Well, I had been taking pictures. As I described to you, it was going to be a pretty straight line to Tweed.”

Smyth asks why Williams used that method rather than another. Williams is silent, leaning forward, then back. “I had thought about strangling her earlier,” he says, and had tried, but it didn’t work. “Then I decided that I needed to suffocate her.” Smyth asks what footage exhists of him trying to strangle her. “Just me putting my hand on her throat, and her responding very aggressively.” He goes on to describe suffocating her.

Williams stands up again, grabs water, leans against the wall. Is trying to piece together how long he was in Comeau’s house. “I didn’t have a watch on so I’m not sure.” But roughly four hours.

Smyth asks what kinds of conversations he had with Comeau. He says none becuase he had taped her mouth. “She was quite aggressive.” He thought her screams would be “taking a chance.” She had screamed when she first saw him. “When she discovered me she was very vocal, screamed quite a bit, until I subdued her.”

He left through the back door, and left with some of her underwear.

Smyth asks if he did anything else to cover his tracks. “I turned off my Blackberry. Other than that, no.” Smyth asks if he destroyed evidence. “I took her sheets off the bed and ran them through the laundry in her house. I just put them in, put a bunch of bleach in, and let it go.”

[12:25 PM]

Williams says of Comeau: “She wasn’t wearing anything to start with. She had some shawl over her shoulder, which she dropped when she saw me.”

Smyth asks if she said anything to him when she saw him. Williams says: “She did. She called out, ‘You bastard!’ Then I subdued her as I described.”

He outlines the struggle they had, how he tied Comeau up, and carried her upstairs. “As I described, I put her on the bed and I raped her over a period of time. Just vaginal.” No condoms were used, he says.

[12:22 PM]

Williams is describing bringing in a green military duffle bag, which contained, among other things, a skull cap and head band. He says he was probably wearing running shoes because it hadn’t been snowing.

Williams describes hiding by the furnace in the basement, and waiting for Comeau to go to bed, “but she didn’t. She came downstairs looking for her cat. As I described, I subdued her with the flashlight.” Williams grabs his water. “Essentially wrestled her to the ground and tied her up.” Smyth asks with what. “Same rope, green rope.” He’s says it’s 20 ft. long, and in Tweed. Williams sits down, sips his water, puts it down, and crosses his arms again.

[12:19 PM]

Once Williams was in the house, he says he was “Just playing with her underwear.” Smyth asks what that means. Williams replies: “Wearing it.” He took a few clean pieces from her drawer, and left.

He went back another night. Got there at about 11 PM. Could hear her on the phone from the backyard. Williams stands up again, paces, puts his hands behind his back, leans against the wall, looks down. His white-socked feet are visible.

[12:16 PM]

Williams is describing how he parked far away from Comeau’s house, and then walked there. Says that the first time he went in, “looked around and made sure that she was living there alone.” He got in through the bottom side basement window. It was unlocked.

[12:15 PM]

Smyth turns to Comeau. He says he wants to understand why Williams targeted her specifically. Williams says, “I don’t know. Really. I went out there just to see where she lived.” He says he found her address through work.

[12:11 PM]

Williams explains to Smyth what he did over the next few days while in Ottawa.

When he returned to Tweed on Tuesday, Williams dropped Lloyd’s body off in the woods behind rocks. Smyth asks what prompted Williams to measure the distance to where he was dumping her body. “That’s just the way I am. Numbers.”

Williams says he cleaned and vacuumed when he went home.

[12:00 PM]

“Then we had a little lie down because she was obviously exhausted. Covered her, and went to sleep. Maybe for an hour or so. And I had told her ealrier that before I let her go i wanted to take some pictures of her in her underwear and, uh, have sex with her.” He pauses, chin in hand. “So after she had the rest for an hour or so, I had her put,” he pauses, “a number of different outfits she had.”

Looking for clarification, Smyth says “I’m sorry?”

Williams sighs, shifts, crosses arms. “A number of different panties and bras that she had.” He acknowledges that he is in some of these pictures. Smyth asks what kind. “Well, I’m with her. On the hard drives you’ll see there’s video as well. So there’s video of the, uh, yeah. Almost four hours, I guess.” He shifts, unfolds his arms, leans forward, left hand on knee. “Well, of initially of her place, me raping her.” He shifts again, crosses arms. “The video pretty much covers everything.”

He says he used video at Comeau’s as well. Smyth asks if the video contains “the same kind of stuff.” Williams says, “Yeah, but I didn’t have her put on any stuff.”

Then he got Lloyd dressed, fed  her—”fruit”—and as they were walking out, Williams struck her.

Smyth asks when he decided to do that. Williams is quiet. “Well, I was pretty sure I wasn’t going to let her leave. But, uh, the idea of striking her on the head was in the afternoon.” Smyth asks what the strike was supposed to accomplish. “I thought I would be able to knock her out, and then I was going to strangle her.”

When Williams did that, “Her skull gave way a little bit, and there was a lot of blood. She was immediately unconscious. And then I strangled her.” Smyth asks how. “Same rope, just put around her neck while she was unconscious.” He says he had taken the ziptie off of her neck “after she was killed.”

Smyth asks how he knew Lloyd was dead. “She,” he pauses, “her body stopped moving.”

He then bound her up in the fetal position. Long pause. He leans forward, sighs, puts his hands on his knees. “I put her in the garage. It was very cold. And drove to the base. Because I was flying early the next morning.”

[11:56 AM]

Smyth asks where the rest of the duct tape he used is. “It’s all gone. I used the rest of it to bind her body.”

He describes how they both slept for a couple of hours, but then says he isn’t sure if she slept. “We were up and down, up and down. So it was two hours in bed. But there wasn’t much sleep.”

Then, he says, “She had a seizure, actually. She felt it coming on. She’d had some before. Lasted quite a while. Got her dressed, into the family room, and, anyway. She recovered. Anyway. It was the stress. But, uh, yeah, probably went on for about 15 minutes.”

[11:54 AM]

Williams says they drove directly to Tweed, where they arrived between 4:30 AM and 5 AM.

His position has barely changed. He is still sitting back with his arms crossed. His voice is calm, quiet. He pauses between clipped phrases, looking down at the ground, nodding as he speaks.

He describes having her take a shower, and the tape he had put over her eyes.

[11:50 AM]

Williams admits he threatened Lloyd, and put a ziptie around her neck. He says he continued to rape her, had her put on lingerie, took pictures, then got her dressed and they left.

Smyth asks when Williams decided he was going to take Lloyd back to his home. “I’m not sure. That wasn’t necessarily always the plan. But at some point it was there for,” pauses, “I was there for three hours, three and a bit.” Stops.

Williams said Lloyd was “certainly cooperative. She just didn’t put up too much of a fuss.” He says, “I had told her that I would let her go later on.”

[11:45 AM]

While detailing how he got into Lloyd’s house the first time, he stands up, walks over the table, and puts something heavy and metal down, probably his keys. He leans against the wall with his water in hand, looking down, his ankles crossed. He details waiting for her to come home, and that when she was asleep he “snuck up to the side of her bed, expecting to try and knock her out. She woke up, but she did as I said. So I didn’t hit her.”

Smyth asks what he said. “Lie down on your tummy. She did. I tied her up. With some rope I’d brought.” Williams is scratching his head. He tells Smyth Lloyd was wearing “sweats.” He sits back down and says he took her clothes off. He sighs heavily. Looks at the wall. Smyth asks then what. “I raped her,” he says. Smyth says that can mean different things, to be specific. “Vaginal and oral.” Williams says no condoms were used.

[11:44 AM]

Williams believed that because Comeau was in the military “it would have been difficult for investigators to ignore that connection to him.”

[11:40 AM]

Smyth asks what kind of feelings Williams experienced when with Lloyd. “I thought she was very attractive.”

“I think I killed her because I knew that, uh,” he pauses, “that her story would be recognized.” He stops, looks to the ground. Smyth asks what he means. “Because she knew I was taking pictures. So because of the two stories in Tweed,” he believed he would have been an obvious suspect.

Williams says he doesn’t know what he would have done to Lloyd if he hadn’t taken pictures.

“The attention the first two got was very much focussed on obviously the pictures I took. So anybody else telling stories about pictures would ahve been a farily straight line.”

He looks down.

[11:37 AM]

“The first one I just spotted her. I got into the house while she was asleep. Noticed that she was alone. And hit her with my hand while she was sleeping. Subdued her. Mostly just by weight, on top her. Had her take off her pajamas, took some pictures, took some of her underwear and left.

Smyth asks about he otehr one. “SAme kind of deal. Went through the back of the house. She was sleeping by the TV. Vry much the same story.”

Smyth asks if there was anything different. “Not much. I did have the flashlight that time, I hit her with the flashlight to knock her out, and subdued her with my weight. took of her clothes, took some pictures and left.”

Smyth asks why these things happened. Williams is silent. Signs. Chin in hand, looking at ground. “I don’t know.” “But I don’t have any answers. And I’m pretty sure the answers don’t matter.

He says he didn’t know any of them, so it was not a matter of liking or disliking these women.

[11:35 AM]

Williams says he took underwaer from both of their houses, and they are in boxes in the furnace room near the wall. “Probably one is from the scanner. If you look through the boxes there, you’ll find it.

Smyth asks how many pieces are there. “Probably 60 pieces of theirs.” Whose? “Of Jessica and Marie-France,” he says, using a French enunciation of the latter’s name.

he says there are also underwearr from each other other two women—the sexual assault victims.

[11:29 AM]

Smyth says Comeau’s name. Williams says there was an open window in the basement when she wasn’t home. He returned another night when she was on the home. She distrubed me downstaris. She was trying to get the cat upstaris, but it was fixated on me. She came down toward me, I guess because she wanted to figure out what the cat was staring at.

When she spotted me, by the same flashlight i subdued her, tied her up, brought her upstairs. Pause. “And strangled her later on. Or suffocated her.” He shifts, sighs, “with some tape.”

Smyth asks how is subdued her. Williams says with the flashlight. “I hit her a couple of times around her head trying to knock her out. Didn’t. But she was bleeding a little bit. Eventually through a struggle subdued her.” He looks at the ground, arms crossed. Williams says he had been hiding behind the furnace, and she didn’t recognize him because he had stuff on his face.

He looks down, nods, then looks up at Smyth, who asks about the suffocation. Williams says he “put tape on her mouth, nose and held it there so she couldn’t breath.” Smyth asks what kind of tape. “duct tape.”

Williams says she never recognized him. He had “just a cover for my head. Just a sport, pullover, cap-type thing. And just a headband over my nose and mouth.”

He says the flashlight is at his home in Tweed. “It’s a red, double D. It’s like a big, I can’t remember what brand. It’s a bigger one.”

[11:25 AM]

Williams says he saw her on the treadmill one night. He noticed another time she wasn’t home. When she came back home, he went in through the back patio door. She was asleep, but he didn’t hit her. Pause. “Well, so I raped her in her thouse, and then i took her to the car, and I took erh to Tweed.” He is looking down. pauses, scratches his neck. He is speaking quietly. Now holding his neck. “Spent the day in Tweed. I hit her as we were walking. She thought we were leaving. I hit her on the back of the head.” Silence. He looks up at Smyth, sighs. “Do you want to know anything in particular?” he asks, taking his water cup in her hands. “I was surprised her skull gave way. She was immediately unconscious. So I strangled her.” He says he hit her with a flashlight inside the house near the fireplace. He says they’ll find signs of the hit, mainly blood on the tile floor. “I wiped it up. But I know it can be easily spotted. Science will show it, I’m sure.” He says she was dressed, and that she will be clothed when they find her body.

[11:11 AM]

Williams is back in the courtroom, and the proceedings resume.

In the video, Smyth tells Williams that investigators are looking up electronic evidence all the time. And that this investigation will cost at least $10 million, and that anything the investigators want or need will be granted, no question.

Williams signs, puts his the side of his face in his left hand, looks at the ground. He is silent.

Smyth says he’s put his best foot forward for him, and that he doesn’t know what else to do to make him feel the impact of what’s happening.

Williams sighs, shifts. Turns to the right away from Smyth, rests one arm on the back of the chair. He says, “I want ot minimize the impact on my wife. How do we do that?” he looks at Smyth, who says, “You start by telling the truth.”

Williams is silent. Signs. “Okay.”

Smyth says, “So where is she?” referring to Lloyd’s body.

Williams is silent. He looks up and says, “You gotta map?”

Smyth asks which town is she near. “I’m not sure but if you give me a map that covers [an inaudible area near Tweed], then I’ll show you where she is.”

Smyth pulls out a map. Williams says, “You need a real map. A detailed map of that area and I’ll show you where she is.” He says she is not buried.

Smyth asks if Williams wants water. He says sure. His face is out of view of the camera, as he is leaning forward.

He leans back and says that Lloyd has been there for about a week. And that she was in Tweed on Thursday and Friday. He says she was alive for “almost 24 hours.”

Smyth tells Williams he is doing the right thing. “Again, my interest is in my wife’s life. I’ll tell you everything, and where my SIM cards are.

He says they are in Ottawa, some are in the camera bag, some are in his office in a filing cabinet. In one of the top two drawers. He says there is plastic divider and inside there are two.

Williams says that the cards have been erased but that he suspects polic will be able to draw images of “Jessica and I”. Smyth asks about Comeau. Williams say, “There may be images on there as well.” And the two assaults? “yeah.”

he says there are two hard drives at the hosue in Ottawa. “I can draw you a littl epicture of where they are.”

Smyth gets him paper, and asks if he wants anything to eat.

Williams begins drawing, and says that he wants to continue talking to Smyth.

Smyth leaves the interview room. Williams continues drawing. He stops when Smyth re-enters the room. He takes a drink of water from a white styrofoam cup.

Smyth pulls out a better map. Williams says she is 40 ft. off the road. “She is on the surface. In a grey something or other.”

“This place that my wife is in, it’s been a dream for her. So they can take what they need and leave her alone.”

He says it doesn’t matter if they move forward or backwards. Smyth suggests starting with Lloyd.

[10:44 AM]

Break.

[10:40 AM]

Smyth asks Williams how it’s going to look when people learn that he had ordered his subordinates not to speak to the police.

Fast-forward. Williams says he is concerned about the impact this is going to have on his wife and the Canadian Forces.

Smyth asks if there is something he can do for Williams. He signs. “I’m struggling with how upset my wife is right now,” he says, sighing, shifting from arms crossed and leaning back to leaning forward and staring at the table of evidence again.

“I’m concerned that they’re tearing apart my wife’s new house.” Smyth says he is too, and that will only be worse if the police don’t know where to look for evidence.

[10:31 AM]

Smyth asks Williams, “What do you want to do? There is only one option.” Williams ask, “What is the option?” Smyth replies, “I don’t think you want the cold-blooded psychopath label. I don’t see that in your. Maybe I’m wrong. Maybe I’m fooled. I don’t know. This is over. You can have a bad ending, where Jessica’s parents continue to wonder where their daughter is lying. There is a huge search underway. It will continue.”

Williams can be heard sighing periodically. His arms are still crossed, he is looking at Smyth, who asks again, “What are we going to do?” Long pause. Williams barely moves. He sighs. Looks down, emotional. Smyth asks again. “Russell, what are we going to do?”

“Call me Russ please,” Williams says, rubbing his moth, grabbing his ncck, looking around, puts his face in his hand, looks to the ground. “What are we gong to do, Russ?” Smyth says. The he asks if Lloyd’s body is someplace locked up. Williams signs, silent, arms crossed again. Staring at the table of evidence. Silence persists. Smyth asks what Williams is struggling with.

Williams looks at him, silent. He rubs his face. Smyth asks again.Williams looks at the ground. He sighs heavily.Silence. Stillness. He signs again, leans back, crosses arms. Looks around the room. Waits. “It’s hard to believe this is happening,” he says. Smyth asks why. Williams pauses, still, sighs. Smyth asks again. Williams blinks, swallows hard. He is still. Leans forward, “It’s just hard to believe.”

[10:23 AM]

Crown stops footage to tell courtroom that now an officer will come in with Williams’ boots.

Smyth says at the beginning he talkd about how he’d treat Williams with respect, but that “the problem is that every time i walk out of this room there are issues that come up. They are not issues that point away from you. They point to you.”

He shows Williams the match between the footprints near Lloyd’s house, and a photocopy of his footprint, which he’d just given to the police.

Williams leans forward toward the table where Smyth has the evidence. he says they are identical. Williams is silent, but nods quickly and slightly.

Smyth says they need honesty because this is getting really out of control really, really fast. Williams sighs deeply. Shifts, continues leaning forward.

Smyth says we called you in to give you the benefit of the doubt. but you and I both know you were at Jessica Llody’s house. adn I need to know why.

Silence. Williams takes something in his hands out of camera view. Stares. “I don’t know what to say,” he says finally. Putting the evidence back on the table.

Smyth tells Williams that his wife now knows what’s going on becase his homes are being searched, ahd his SUV has been seized. He says that both of them know that evidence will be found before the evening is over. He tells this is his opportunity to take some control, and that his opportunity to offer some explanation is quickly expiring. That the cops are applying for a warrant to search his office.

Williams sigsn. Shift. Looks at something again, likely the prints. Pauses. Smyth calls his name twice. “Russell. Russell.” On the second time, Williams looks up, almost startled. “Huh?” Smyth says he knows that Williams’ mind is racing.

Williams looks at Smyth and encourages him to step up now, rather than wait for the evidence to come out after without him.

[10:18 AM]

Smyth shifts to Lloyd’s disappearance now. He asks if there was ever any reason why Williams would have driven off the road and into a field. Williams says no.

Smyth asks if it would surprise Williams to know that forensic officers they examined tire tracks near Lloyd’s home, and then identified those tires as the same on his Pathfinder. “Really?” he says, lifting his eyebrows. Smyth says yes. “Okay,” says Williams.

Smyth says witnesses saw a vehicle near Lloyd’s house that matched his. He nods, and frowns in surprise. Smyth tells him the tire tracks in the field are very similar to Williams. He asks again if Williams has any recollection of being off that road. Williams says no.

Smyth shifts to Comeau again. He asks if there is any reason why Comeau would have specifically referenced you in some of her writings. “Not at all,” he says. Smyth asks if there is anything that would suggest to him that Comeau might have thought about Williams. “Not at all. We had one flight together. I’d go back occasionally to talk. If that’s the case, that’s very surprising.”

[10:13 AM]

Smyth is running through when Williams used his work swipe card to figure out when he was where.

He asks Williams if he is sure that he was in Ottawa on Nov. 24, 2009. He says he thinks so.

Williams smiles, shifts forwards, puts his hand on his knees, then goes back into his armed crossed position.

He says had dinner with his wife after meetings, and then left. But he can’t remember what restaurant, just that it was near where their new home was being built. He can’t remember who paid or how either. The meeting ended between 3 and 4.

Smyth asks again if that’s when he went out with his wife. He says he thinks so. He says that afterwards he drove back to Tweed. Smyth asks if he is just guessing. Williams says no, he believes this is what happened, that he kissed his wife goodbye and headed back to Tweed.

[10:11 AM]

When asked, Williams tells Smyth that he has Toyo tires on his SUV. These are the second version of those tires on his vehicle. They were put on in the fall. The dealership in Ottawa says these tires are very popular for Pathfinders, he points out.

[10:10 AM]

Smyth says that sometimes when people get stopped in a vehicle canvas about a crime, they get nervous and say things they didn’t mean. He says if Williams did that when he was stoppped last week regarding the disappearance of Lloyd, that he shouldn’t feel bound to that.

[10:09 AM]

Smyth goes through each victim by name and asks again, did he ever go to their house? Williams insists no. He says he hadn’t even heard Lloyd’s name until he heard it on the news.

[10:07 AM]

Smyth asks Williams if he has had any contact with any of the four victims (two sexual assaults, two murders) that would explain why his DNA tests might be found in their residences, but that he might not be telling the cops because he doesn’t want his wife to know about an affair or something. Williams is uneqivolcal: “Absolutely not.”

Smyth asks “Is there any reason why we’d find your DNA in those residences?

Williams says Laurie, he doesn’t know her last name, lives three doors down. That he’s never been in her house, but met her once.

[10:01 AM]

Fast-forward. Smyth asks if the police were to do an investigation of his background whether anyone would say Russell Williams did this.

He says no. “It would be very boring.”

Smyth asks straight out: Do you watch TV shows like CSI? Williams says he prefers Law & Order, but he does watch CSI.

When Smyth asks what forensic evidence Williams is willing to give. Williams asks what he needs. Smyth says footprints, fingernail samples, blood samples. Williams says sure, that he can provide that.

Crown is pointing out the shift in body language. Already Williams has gone from sitting back, hands between his legs, to arms crossed.

Williams asks Smyth: “Are you going to be discrete? Because this could have a very significant impact on the base if it comes out that I did this.” He says this stuff will go through “the rumor mill.”

He gives a saliva sample, and also hands over his boots for the imprint analysis.

Smyth asks Williams if he is concerned about the tests he’s doing. He says the investigation is significant. Williams nods, stares at Smyth.

[10:00 AM]

Williams says that when he got the email about Comeau’s death he was at home in Tweed. He says he had been in Ottawa earlier in the week for some meetings. “I seem to remember that I got this word shortly after coming back from Ottawa.”

[9:56 AM]

Williams said he met Comeau once before. He is describing the hectic flight schedule he has. He and Comeau were on the same flight crew once. It was around August or September 2009, he says.

[9:52 AM]

Williams says that on Friday after Lloyd was last heard from he was home most of the day. Previously had head that he said he had the stomach flu. He says he left Tweed to sleep at the air force base just before bedtime. He says he’d been in Tweed all week. “Yeah, I think that’s the case. Flew Saturday. Headed to Ottawa that night.”

Thursday night he slept in Tweed. During that day he was at the base, he says. “I think it was a fairly standard day.”

He says he left the base, pauses, “I don’t remember anything peculiar, so I would say seven to nine, somewhere in that range.

[9:49 AM]

Williams acknowledges that Comeau was one of his subordinates when Smyth is outlining the crimes.

He acknowledges that he had heard about some of the crimes.

Williams agrees that there is a connection between where he lives and works and the crimes—he lived near some of the places where crime occurred, and worked where Comeau did.

[9:46 AM]

Smyth tells Williams that police are investigating four occurrences—the two sexual assaults, and the two murders.

Williams, nods, chews his gum, grunts in acknowledgement, and says “yes, yeah, yeah,” as Smyth outlines those crimes.

Smyth tells him the charges that police are looking at laying, whether it’s him or somebody else. That’s why he wants to make sure that Williams feels he can speak to a lawyer whenever he wants.

Smyth asks if Williams if he has a lawyer. Williams says he has a realty lawyer. He says there is no reason he wants to call a lawyer now.

[9:42 AM]

The video footage begins. Williams is wearing a yellow and black snow jacket, jeans, and a blue and white-striped polo.

He chewing gum, and when asked by the detective if he has ever been questioned before, he says never, and smiles up to the camera.

The crown reiterates that Williams said that he was glad the police were doing such thorough checks. He is calm.

Smyth says he hopes Williams can appreciate there is a lot of big news, and that’s why the police are fast-forwarding the investigation. He tells Williams the interview is going to be thorough for efficiency’s sake.

When  asked, Williams says he is a coffee guy, and that he appreciates the offer for some.

Smyth reads Williams his rights.

[9:40 AM]

Crown Lee Burgess sets up what the court will hear and see today: In the afternoon of Feb. 7, 2010 Williams was invited to the Ottawa police station to speak with Det. Sgt. Jim Smyth. Williams had spent the morning photographing the items he’d stolen and preparing to discard some of them.

Williams arrived just after 3PM. He confessed around 7 PM, and that continued on until about 1 AM. At that point he took police to Jessica Lloyd’s body.

[9:37 AM]

Williams is led into the court. Like yesterday, his lawyers whispers something to him, he nodds, sits down.

Judge enters. All rise.

He clarifies that at the conclusion of yesterday he found Williams guilty of murders, break and enters, confinement and sexual assaults.

[9:32 AM]

Routine announcement by officer that the proceedings are about to begin, and warning not to video record or take photos of evidence.

[9:26 AM]

Today the court will be hearing the confession made by Russell Williams to Ottawa police in February. There will also be video footage shown of the confession.

The lawyers have filed in court. Still many reporters and members of the public jammed in too.

No judge. No Williams. Yet.

The Layton doctrine

By Aaron Wherry - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 9:07 AM - 0 Comments

Four years after the NDP leader was mocked by nearly everyone for suggesting as much, the makings of a comprehensive peace process in Afghanistan are now being facilitated by NATO.

Talks to end the war in Afghanistan involve extensive, face-to-face discussions with Taliban commanders from the highest levels of the group’s leadership, who are secretly leaving their sanctuaries in Pakistan with the help of NATO troops, officials here say…

The Taliban leaders coming into Afghanistan for talks have left their havens in Pakistan on the explicit assurance that they will not be attacked or arrested by NATO forces, Afghans familiar with the talks say. Many top Taliban leaders reside in Pakistan, where they are believed to enjoy at least some official protection.

In at least one case, Taliban leaders crossed the border and boarded a NATO aircraft bound for Kabul, according to an Afghan with knowledge of the talks. In other cases, NATO troops have secured roads to allow Taliban officials to reach Afghan- and NATO-controlled areas so they can take part in discussions.

The coordinator of the UN’s Al-Qaeda-Taliban monitoring team considers the way forward.

Chilean miners, miracle men (PHOTOS)

By macleans.ca - Wednesday, October 20, 2010 at 9:00 AM - 0 Comments

0

Chilean miners, miracle men (PHOTOS)

Prev

Next

APTOPIX Chile Mine Collapse cpgal

Roxana Gomez, daughter of rescued miner Mario Gomez, cries as she watches on a TV screen the rescue operation of her father at the relatives camp outside the San Jose mine near Copiapo, Chile, Wednesday, Oct. 13, 2010. Gomez was the ninth of 33 miners who was rescued from the San Jose mine after more than 2 months trapped underground. (AP Photo/Natacha Pisarenko)

1 of 12 Photos

Next Chile Mine Collapse

Tags

The Commons: Derek from Toronto and other expressions of democracy

By Aaron Wherry - Tuesday, October 19, 2010 at 6:33 PM - 0 Comments

The Scene. Michael Ignatieff, attempting to combine his day job as a politician and his after-hours work as host of a late night phone-in radio show, surrendered the floor this afternoon to Derek from Toronto.

“My question relates to the fiscal waste and mismanagement that this government is doing,” Mr. Ignatieff said Derek said.

“They emptied the cupboard. Their spending is a hodge-podge with no real vision or direction. Why is the Prime Minister throwing away my generation’s money in such a reckless, incompetent and visionless way?” Derek begged by way of the Liberal leader. “Why?”

The Liberals stood here to applaud Derek, or Mr. Ignatieff, or Mr. Ignatieff’s relating of Derek’s concern, or perhaps all of the above. And obviously quite moved by this expression of concern from a real person, the Prime Minister came up quick to respond.

“Mr. Speaker,” he said, “actually nothing could be further from the truth.”

Continue…

“Democracy demands accountability and rights require responsibility”

By Paul Wells - Tuesday, October 19, 2010 at 6:22 PM - 0 Comments

Those aren’t my words. But I endorse them completely and we are gathered here today to see that they are fulfilled at last.

They are the words attributed to Jacques Gauthier, who was the interim president of the Montreal agency Rights and Democracy when he announced it had engaged Samson Belair/ Deloitte & Touche to conduct a forensic audit of the organization’s financial transactions from 2005 to 2009. Jacques Gauthier is still a member of the R&D board, which is gathering in Montreal for a board meeting this Thursday, Oct. 21. The agency has the Deloitte report in hand and has had it since at least late August. This will be the week R&D makes the audit public.

Right?

That is, after all, what they promised eight months ago. Continue…

Strikes grip France for sixth day

By macleans.ca - Tuesday, October 19, 2010 at 5:34 PM - 0 Comments

Protests gripped France again on Tuesday as 3.5 million people marched against President Nicolas Sarkozy’s pension reform, which would raise the retirement age from 60 to 62 by 2018. This marks the sixth day of national action since early September. The chaos in France’s streets has been accompanied by strikes in the transport and education sectors. Thousands of gas stations have run dry, as a strike at France’s oil refineries went into a seventh day. Meanwhile, protesters have seen their share of violence. A middle school in the city of Le Mans burned down overnight and police suspect arson. Shops were looted in Lyon, and cars were set on fire in a Paris suburb. There have been clashes between police and protesting youths in a number of cities, and several police officers and a news photographer were injured in the skirmishes. A strike of railway workers also hit day seven, so about one-half of all scheduled trains were not operating.

Toronto Star

Mordecai's last words

By Charles Foran - Tuesday, October 19, 2010 at 4:00 PM - 0 Comments

Ulf Andersen/Getty Images/ Tedd Church/Toronto Star/CP

March 2001. He’d had a notion for an 11th novel as far back as fall 1999. Starting then, he had asked [his wife] Florence to help find and clip newspaper articles of an unusually dark hue.

“More body parts found in Toronto park” was a headline from Dec. 9, 1999, that interested him. The same was true for “Affair with youth led to axe killing,” from a February 2000 edition of the Daily Telegraph, which opened with the line: “A father beheaded his neighbour with an axe after she gave birth to his teenage son’s baby, Birmingham crown court was told yesterday.” On March 27 he was fascinated enough by a Times piece about a man who killed a transsexual married to his daughter, and then “tied the body in chains and padlocks and weighed it down with dumbbells before pushing it out to sea on an airbed at Covehithe, Suffolk” to add it to the file. Florence knew better than to ask his reasons, but she had noted his deepening fascination with plastic surgery in recent years. An old friend who had had a facelift had approached him at a hotel, and he hadn’t recognized her at first. Another time, greeting the wife of a prominent film agent—a woman straining to look half her age through successive cosmetic procedures—Florence observed him kissing the waxy cheeks with clinical attention. Her suspicions were confirmed when he asked if she would ever consider having work done. She said no, and when he added, questioningly, “Why alter yourself?” she was fairly certain that he was indeed “novelizing,” as he had told [his editor] Louise Dennys. But then On Snooker came along, costing him nearly a year.

Continue…