The Portnoys of Marystown are living in hell on earth hounded by the Canadian authorities. There are of course two sides to every story but nothing in the past of The Portnoy's can justify what the Canadians have done to this family. It is entirely unacceptable in a country that prides itself on being an example of democracy and humanitarianism for the globe.
The essense of the argument for or against deporting the Portnoys have been bandied about to exhaustion. The primary question is a simple one. Are the Portnoys entitled to live in Canada? The Canadian Government has to decide based on its pre-formed heuristic if this family can stay. They have decided that cannot. It would be quick and easy to end the discussion at that point. They've made their decision -end of story... ?!
In the case of the Portnoys though it becomes important to investigate the very process of government itself. Can we have confidence that the federal government has made the right decision on behalf of 30 million Canadians, and especially 1/2 million Newfoundlanders and Labradorians. Can we have confidence that the best decision was made? For that we need to look beyond the paper work and consider the human interests in this story. We have our answer based on running an application through a machine... now let's run some facts through the people of Canada and let them decide.
The Portnoys are not two Israeli's and their Kids. We are in Newfoundland and Labrador, Canada - The Portnoys are three Canadian Children, two of them are Newfoundland and Labradorians, with their siblings and parents.
This is a family that has the support of the community in which they live. The Portnoys are from Marystown.
This is a family who have a great deal of support in this Newfoundland and Labrador. The Portnoys are Newfoundland and Labradorian.
As Canadians we have to ask ourselves what has happened to lead up to this terrible situation for this Newfoundland and Labrador family, and what do we do as a civilized community to rectify the situation?
The situation was caused by a bureaucracy that made the final decision. It is the result of a decision made by a group who do not live in Marystown, they do not even live in Newfoundland and Labrador - but they make decisions for us. There is a fundamental flaw in this federation when a Newfoundlander or Labradorian has absolutely no say into who their neighbour is. To the question of who is a Newfoundlander, who is a Labradorian... that decision is made elsewhere. That is fundamentally wrong!
The situation with the Portnoys is the result of this inept bureaucracy. A federal department and it's arms length committees that take a decade to stamp an application. A decade passes. A decade in our life, a lifetime in the five Portnoy children. They are Newfoundlanders and Labradorians, they go to school with our kids, they contribute to the youth culture of the community... Then a small minded ineffective bureaucratic organization reaches down from another land and turns the only world they've known upside down. A faceless bogeyman who snatches their father while he is running a errand to help a friend. A monster who threatens daily to steal away their mother if she should step into the daylight.
So we humbly look to the scales of justice:
On one side of the scale, the argument to deport the Portnoys. The weak accusation against Alexi that refers to a petty crime as a youth. An accusation which has been adequately explained.
On the opposite side of the scale we have the inefficiency of the immigration committees. Add to that the children who are born and bred Canadian, and their rights as Canadians. Consider the children who were born in Marystown and are members of that community for the entire duration of their young lives. Add to that the tremendous support of the community in Marystown. Add to that the tremendous support of Newfoundlanders and Labradorians all over this island and in the Big Land. Add to that the health and welfare of two of the children who receive specialized attention in their community.
Now make your decision.
But wait, there is one more consideration. The immigration committee has made it's decision. There is a strong defensive stance that says that the immigration committee has to have it's own autonomy. It has to have it's own integrity, it has to be immune to criticisms from mere mortals. That bull-headed self preservation has to be a factor. Place that on our scales of justice. This one is very heavy because it goes to government power and bureaucratic self-preservation.
This is now very much a decision in the public arena. The immigration authourities need either to give us the solid reasoning behind its ineffective, inhumane, inept, and weak arguments or it's time for them to listen to the many voices from "down-east"
They have a lot to answer to. Better late than never.
---
The Portnoy Family Website
Friday, October 26, 2007
Monday, October 15, 2007
The Funny Thing About Clowns
Two cannibals are eating a clown when one turns to the other and says - "does this taste funny to you?"
On October 11 newfoundlandincanada posted a graphic suggesting the Premier of Nova Scotia as a clown. There were hits from the national media looking at that post. The funny thing is that today on October 15 the National Post publishes the editorial below. (re-electing a clown)
So Newfoundlandincanada thinks Rodney MacDonald is a clown for signing Harper's contract, and the National Post thinks Danny is a clown for refusing it.
... so two premiers are reading a contract on equalization when the Newfoundland and Labrador premier says "Does this seem funny to you". (The other premier was to busy signing to reply.)
I'm not a partisan person but I'll wear the over-sized novelty shoes and suggest that Harper, MacDonald and the mainland media stuff it up their collective ass. I'd rather have a big red nose than a brown one.
__
Re-electing a clown
REPRINTED FROM OCT 15 NATIONAL POST
And to think that in the early days of his government back in 2003, we fairly gushed over the prospects of Danny Williams transforming Newfoundland and Labrador into a “have” province. Back then, though, he was pledging to wean his province off dependence on federal welfare. Instead, Mr. Williams has chosen bombast and continued addiction to Ottawa’s handouts. While his militant schtick has proven wildly popular in Newfoundland — he won re-election on Tuesday with nearly 70% of the total vote — it will prove toxic to his province in the long run.
Almost from the start, Mr. Williams showed himself to be a tub-thumping populist from the Huey Long school. He stormed out of a first minsters’ meeting on equalization when then-prime minister Paul Martin dared suggest equalization to have-not provinces should begin to go down once they’ve reached “have” status. Later, Mr. Williams ordered all Canadian flags pulled down from above Newfoundland’s provincial buildings. After Stephen Harper and his Conservatives took over in 2006, Mr. Williams ran national newspaper ads against the federal government, urging people to vote “ABC” — Anybody but Conservatives.
The Premier also likes to talk tough with the oil companies looking to develop his province’s Hibernia South and Hebron offshore oil fields. This, too, has proven itself popular with voters but has cost the provincial economy hundreds of millions —if not billions — of dollars.
Thanks to Mr. Williams’ demands for “superroyalties” from the oil companies, the Hibernia field has been shelved for the foreseeable future and the Hebron field will now go ahead only because Mr. Williams swallowed his pride and made major concessions.
Like all demagogues, Mr. Williams is fond of the pronoun “I” — as in I won the deal with the oil companies through my personal “determination and strength of conviction.” If “ I’ve accomplished anything here, I just think it’s that: Pride in Newfoundland and Labrador.” Only I can back down Stephen Harper. His victory speech on Tuesday evening barely acknowledged that he had a caucus and party around him.
Meanwhile, while Mr. Williams was huffing and puffing his way to victory, Nova Scotia Premier Rodney MacDonald was quietly negotiating a settlement in the Ottawa-Atlantic equalization skirmish. Under terms of his deal with the Harper government, Nova Scotia may accept the new equalization formula offered in last spring’s budget, or it may opt for the old formula any time it feels the new one is shortchanging the province.
The same deal is open to Mr. Williams, but he has painted himself into such a rhetorical corner to win re-election, it’s hard to see how he could agree — even though it is a better deal for his province than the one it currently has.
Mr. Williams is a character. Of that there is no doubt. But his outsized ego and inflammatory stunts are hurting the people who voted him into office.
On October 11 newfoundlandincanada posted a graphic suggesting the Premier of Nova Scotia as a clown. There were hits from the national media looking at that post. The funny thing is that today on October 15 the National Post publishes the editorial below. (re-electing a clown)
So Newfoundlandincanada thinks Rodney MacDonald is a clown for signing Harper's contract, and the National Post thinks Danny is a clown for refusing it.
... so two premiers are reading a contract on equalization when the Newfoundland and Labrador premier says "Does this seem funny to you". (The other premier was to busy signing to reply.)
I'm not a partisan person but I'll wear the over-sized novelty shoes and suggest that Harper, MacDonald and the mainland media stuff it up their collective ass. I'd rather have a big red nose than a brown one.
__
Re-electing a clown
REPRINTED FROM OCT 15 NATIONAL POST
And to think that in the early days of his government back in 2003, we fairly gushed over the prospects of Danny Williams transforming Newfoundland and Labrador into a “have” province. Back then, though, he was pledging to wean his province off dependence on federal welfare. Instead, Mr. Williams has chosen bombast and continued addiction to Ottawa’s handouts. While his militant schtick has proven wildly popular in Newfoundland — he won re-election on Tuesday with nearly 70% of the total vote — it will prove toxic to his province in the long run.
Almost from the start, Mr. Williams showed himself to be a tub-thumping populist from the Huey Long school. He stormed out of a first minsters’ meeting on equalization when then-prime minister Paul Martin dared suggest equalization to have-not provinces should begin to go down once they’ve reached “have” status. Later, Mr. Williams ordered all Canadian flags pulled down from above Newfoundland’s provincial buildings. After Stephen Harper and his Conservatives took over in 2006, Mr. Williams ran national newspaper ads against the federal government, urging people to vote “ABC” — Anybody but Conservatives.
The Premier also likes to talk tough with the oil companies looking to develop his province’s Hibernia South and Hebron offshore oil fields. This, too, has proven itself popular with voters but has cost the provincial economy hundreds of millions —if not billions — of dollars.
Thanks to Mr. Williams’ demands for “superroyalties” from the oil companies, the Hibernia field has been shelved for the foreseeable future and the Hebron field will now go ahead only because Mr. Williams swallowed his pride and made major concessions.
Like all demagogues, Mr. Williams is fond of the pronoun “I” — as in I won the deal with the oil companies through my personal “determination and strength of conviction.” If “ I’ve accomplished anything here, I just think it’s that: Pride in Newfoundland and Labrador.” Only I can back down Stephen Harper. His victory speech on Tuesday evening barely acknowledged that he had a caucus and party around him.
Meanwhile, while Mr. Williams was huffing and puffing his way to victory, Nova Scotia Premier Rodney MacDonald was quietly negotiating a settlement in the Ottawa-Atlantic equalization skirmish. Under terms of his deal with the Harper government, Nova Scotia may accept the new equalization formula offered in last spring’s budget, or it may opt for the old formula any time it feels the new one is shortchanging the province.
The same deal is open to Mr. Williams, but he has painted himself into such a rhetorical corner to win re-election, it’s hard to see how he could agree — even though it is a better deal for his province than the one it currently has.
Mr. Williams is a character. Of that there is no doubt. But his outsized ego and inflammatory stunts are hurting the people who voted him into office.
Thursday, October 11, 2007
Wednesday, October 10, 2007
I Spy with my Little Eye, Something that is Blue
Consequences of Last Night's Election:
* Giant novelty cheques for expectant mothers.
* Giant electrical outlet for Red Bay. Giant extension cord for St. Anthony.
* Fiber Optic fed for everyone!
* Have Status in two years – Canada seeks new scapegoat.
* Out-port Newfoundland and Labrador now called “cottage country”
* One step closer to Danny acquiring The Bomb. Steven Harper is spied at Home Depot buying new locks, batteries and candles.
* Opposition meets at Tim Horton’s.
* New NDP Slogan: "From Nun to One"
* New Tory Slogan: "Four Seats to a Dictatorship"
* New Liberal Slogan: "F%$K ya we tried!"
* In Gambo: “Joey’s Lookout” to be renamed “Joey, Look out!”
* Seeking funds, the Liberal Party of Newfoundland and Labrador changes its name to “Pepsi, The Choice of a New Generation Party of Newfoundland and Labrador”
* Giant novelty cheques for expectant mothers.
* Giant electrical outlet for Red Bay. Giant extension cord for St. Anthony.
* Fiber Optic fed for everyone!
* Have Status in two years – Canada seeks new scapegoat.
* Out-port Newfoundland and Labrador now called “cottage country”
* One step closer to Danny acquiring The Bomb. Steven Harper is spied at Home Depot buying new locks, batteries and candles.
* Opposition meets at Tim Horton’s.
* New NDP Slogan: "From Nun to One"
* New Tory Slogan: "Four Seats to a Dictatorship"
* New Liberal Slogan: "F%$K ya we tried!"
* In Gambo: “Joey’s Lookout” to be renamed “Joey, Look out!”
* Seeking funds, the Liberal Party of Newfoundland and Labrador changes its name to “Pepsi, The Choice of a New Generation Party of Newfoundland and Labrador”
Monday, October 01, 2007
Rage Against the Machine II
I've had this one in the line-up for a while trying to decide if I should post it. the first "Rage" generated so much venum it made me a little weary of snakes. In the end though free speech has a value in our Newfoundland and Labrador...
The first "Rage Against the Machine" asked: When I read blogs and the like am I reading an opinion, or an advertisement? I did not really expect an answer. It was mostly rhetoric, and rhetorical questions by their nature don't demand an answer.
But I did receive a response. Veiled threats, articles on "Libel" and blogging. Promises that I would be revealed to the world, "my pants lowered and my forked tail exposed". (Even a cowardly anonymous e-mail apparently written by a nine year old.)
I can be faulted for one thing. I specifically stated being paid as the reason a bias would exists. That was wrong and I duly apologised for the implication. There are other rewards beyond the simple exchange of cash. Not that any of these apply to our local newspapers, radio and bloggers...
So, gagged as I am from speaking freely by those with "asbestos suits" and "lawyer friends". I will speak in vague terms and use an example that is not as locally relevent. Is there indeed a media machine that feds us redigested tripe? Take for example this article "Brain Injury, Not Steroids, Seen in Wrestler Death". As the title implies "Brain injury, not steroids" were the reason that Pro Wrestler Chris Benoit lost faculty of his senses killeding his family and himself. The article was sent to the news feeds by the "Sports Legacy Institute". But here is were that swallowed Red Pill causes trouble. Google that name... who is the SPI? Ex-WWE wrestler, some brain surgents and lawyers.
... and there I go opening myself up again to the accusation of being a perveyor of conspiracy. Am I the only one who would question the legitimacy of an article written by associates and lawyers of the WWE? Does that make me paranoid and delusional as I have been accused of by my own peers - or does it in fact offer a look at the paint beneath? These are of course baseless questions about motivation, offering only speculation, no evidence is provided or produced. For conspiracy theory none are needed. Condemnation through quiet implication. This is Newfoundland and Labrador after all, none of that here... (he whispers)
We need to be better sheep spouting the words we have read verbatum as if they are gospel. Selling the latest political candidate, or flavour of Coke. We are safe to adopt the opinion as our own because it has come from such learned blokes: I know its true, because I saw it on TV. When someone boasts they are in the "persuasion business" we should sip our Pepsi and Screetch ignoring the elephant in the room.
For those who are not registered lobbyists, opinions from regular Joes and Joannes like myself are like arseholes - everyone has one but no one wants to hear yours. No odds. Just an opinion. Fortunately we are the masterless men, we no longer bow to the elite. Those who in their income, politics and acedemics would close our minds.
I've said too much, my tinfoil hat has fallen loose and I fear they will be banging on my bunker door. Unfortunately for those of us who have swallowed the Red Pill, we'll always be prone to look for the underpainting. We scratch the surface and let the light in, even as the paint is still being applied.
Humbly yours,
Self-embarassing fork-tailed conspiracy theorist pseudonom sock puppet
The first "Rage Against the Machine" asked: When I read blogs and the like am I reading an opinion, or an advertisement? I did not really expect an answer. It was mostly rhetoric, and rhetorical questions by their nature don't demand an answer.
But I did receive a response. Veiled threats, articles on "Libel" and blogging. Promises that I would be revealed to the world, "my pants lowered and my forked tail exposed". (Even a cowardly anonymous e-mail apparently written by a nine year old.)
I can be faulted for one thing. I specifically stated being paid as the reason a bias would exists. That was wrong and I duly apologised for the implication. There are other rewards beyond the simple exchange of cash. Not that any of these apply to our local newspapers, radio and bloggers...
So, gagged as I am from speaking freely by those with "asbestos suits" and "lawyer friends". I will speak in vague terms and use an example that is not as locally relevent. Is there indeed a media machine that feds us redigested tripe? Take for example this article "Brain Injury, Not Steroids, Seen in Wrestler Death". As the title implies "Brain injury, not steroids" were the reason that Pro Wrestler Chris Benoit lost faculty of his senses killeding his family and himself. The article was sent to the news feeds by the "Sports Legacy Institute". But here is were that swallowed Red Pill causes trouble. Google that name... who is the SPI? Ex-WWE wrestler, some brain surgents and lawyers.
... and there I go opening myself up again to the accusation of being a perveyor of conspiracy. Am I the only one who would question the legitimacy of an article written by associates and lawyers of the WWE? Does that make me paranoid and delusional as I have been accused of by my own peers - or does it in fact offer a look at the paint beneath? These are of course baseless questions about motivation, offering only speculation, no evidence is provided or produced. For conspiracy theory none are needed. Condemnation through quiet implication. This is Newfoundland and Labrador after all, none of that here... (he whispers)
We need to be better sheep spouting the words we have read verbatum as if they are gospel. Selling the latest political candidate, or flavour of Coke. We are safe to adopt the opinion as our own because it has come from such learned blokes: I know its true, because I saw it on TV. When someone boasts they are in the "persuasion business" we should sip our Pepsi and Screetch ignoring the elephant in the room.
For those who are not registered lobbyists, opinions from regular Joes and Joannes like myself are like arseholes - everyone has one but no one wants to hear yours. No odds. Just an opinion. Fortunately we are the masterless men, we no longer bow to the elite. Those who in their income, politics and acedemics would close our minds.
I've said too much, my tinfoil hat has fallen loose and I fear they will be banging on my bunker door. Unfortunately for those of us who have swallowed the Red Pill, we'll always be prone to look for the underpainting. We scratch the surface and let the light in, even as the paint is still being applied.
Humbly yours,
Self-embarassing fork-tailed conspiracy theorist pseudonom sock puppet
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)