Thursday, May 17, 2018

He's "Appalled" - What in Hell Does That Mean?

Justin Trudeau, the prime minister of Canada, says he's "appalled" at the massacre of protesting Palestinians by Israeli army snipers inside the gulag that is Gaza. Somebody apparently slipped JT a note that one of the guys shot was a Canadian, a doctor at that, Tarek Loubani. Not only was Loubani shot, along with 18 other medical workers plainly targeted by Israel's snipers - bright reflective vests, that sort of thing, really stand out from the crowd - but he's also something of a hero, having brought 3D printing into play to produce the stuff Palestinians can't get due to the Israeli blockade, stuff like stethoscopes and tourniquets which are kind of handy when those snipers start putting bullet holes in demonstrators - by the hundreds, many hundreds.

But haven't we heard very sincere pleas from Justin before only to find out he was just messin' with us? Of course we have, many times. How do we know whether he's being straight with us this time?

When you're dealing with someone of sullied credibility you can always see how the plaintive words match up with his deeds. That's a pretty good litmus test. So, what deeds can we look at? I know, let's look at the UN General Assembly. The General Assembly periodically votes on resolutions pertaining to Israel and Palestine. They're usually massively approved and invariably quashed by an American veto when they reach the Security Council.

Under the Harper regime, Canada's votes in the General Assembly were predictably pro-Israel and anti-Palestine, every time without fail. You expected as much from Harper. That guy was a dick. But there's a new sheriff in town, Justin. So, how has Canada's voting record in the General Assembly changed since Harper was cashiered?

I won't keep you in suspense and I won't bore you with statistics either. Here, this is from The Globe a week ago:

For all the talk about Mr. Trudeau wanting to re-establish Canada’s multilateralist and honest-broker bona fides, the evidence suggests he is our most unequivocally pro-Israel prime minister since, well, Stephen Harper.

“Whatever the reasons, Trudeau has, like his Liberal predecessors, sought to support both UN multilateralism and Israel, but his policy toward Israel has also borrowed heavily from the Harper playbook,” Dalhousie University professor Steven Seligman argues in a new paper published in the American Review of Canadian Studies. “Overall, Canada’s voting record at the UN under the Trudeau government thus far is among the most pro-Israel in the world and is markedly different than Canada’s voting record under [Jean] Chrétien and [Paul] Martin.” 
Indeed, the Trudeau government is near the opposite end of the continuum on Israel to the largely pro-Palestinian bent Canada adopted at the UN under Mr. Chrétien. As a member of the UN Security Council in 2000, Canada backed a resolution condemning Israel’s “excessive force against Palestinians” during the second intifada. Canada’s vote caused Mr. Chrétien considerable grief within in his own caucus – much, on the eve of a federal election, to the delight of the then-opposition Canadian Alliance. ...
Under Mr. Harper, Canada systematically voted against all UN resolutions on Israel. After all, Mr. Harper famously insisted he would never do the “easy thing” and “just get along and go along with this anti-Israel rhetoric.” Mr. Trudeau might not use quite the same words, but he has acted in sync with his predecessor
“The idea of using votes in the United Nations to isolate or condemn Israel … is not productive in international relations. And Canada avoids taking sides in that,” Mr. Trudeau said after Canada abstained on a UN resolution declaring Mr. Trump’s embassy decision “null and void.” 
In truth, Canada does take sides under Mr. Trudeau. During the two regular sessions of the UN General Assembly after he became Prime Minister, Prof. Seligman notes, Canada voted against 18 resolutions on Israel and abstained on only two.
And let's remember that Trudeau's government hardly avoided "taking sides" when, in February, 2016, the Liberal caucus overwhelmingly supported the Conservative motion to "condemn" fair-minded Canadians who supported the BDS, Boycott/Divest/Sanction movement. Condemning us for having the "wrong opinion." We stand condemned by our own government for exercising our conscience while it persistently chose to look the other way. That was certainly appalling.

You see, out here on the west coast, perhaps more than in other parts of the country, we've been taught the lesson that Trudeau is a sketchy little f#cker. Like Trump it's best to ignore his words and judge him by his deeds because, far too often, one proves to have no relation to the other.

Pierre Trudeau's motto was said to be "reason over passion." Judging by what he's shown us so far, Justin's could fairly be "political opportunism over principle - each time, every time."

Now I'm sorry if this gets under anyone's skirts but res ipsa loquitor, the thing speaks for itself.


Lorne said...

I can only hope, Mound, that people are starting to open their eyes to the real nature of the man and his team we elected. For someone to show such promise (well, as we have come to see, talk is cheap) and the betray any semblance of principle, should appall all who have more than a minimal engagement with the issues we confront today.

I can only infer that people like Trudeau (and Morneau, for that matter, especially given his supine performance yesterday over Kinder Morgan) count on an enabling level of electoral ignorance to get away with the kinds of crap they are pulling.

KFB said...

"Trudeau is a sketchy little fucker" say the least. An overblown brain dead drama teacher with curly hair having his strings pulled by the Lieberal back room cadre.
Liberals or Conservative, no difference, turn them upside-down and they look the same.

Anonymous said...

It has indeed gotten under someone's skirt. A certain Trudeau sympathizer associated with Progressive Bloggers. Apparently we're not allowed to criticize the little prince...

The Mound of Sound said...

Yes, Anon, I'm sure I know to whom you refer. Facts tend to get him in a tizzy. I stopped paying attention to him a long time ago.

the salamander said...

.. lovin the 'sketchy little f'er' quote plus the 'gettin under the skirts' parts.. As always, I remain completely non partisan. Do some good, I bow to you.. fail, I turn my back.. Again I expect blowback - ie being labeled (the horror) anti semetic.. Well I can take it.. There is nothing Israel is doing re Palestine that is defensible.. nothing.. unless the killing of civilians is now acceptable .. and if Justin Trudeau can't step up to the plate, because he can't afford to lose the jewish vote and related ridings & related $ donations .. well what can I say.. (puny voice from the upper balcony back row) That's 'public service' ? That was an election promise? A pre election policy position..? I call 'bullshit'

Anonymous said...

After all the comments on this blog and the blog itself, and also being a non-partisan, who is there to vote for in the coming election? How about this.....According to the law, voters who submit unmarked ballots will have their choice counted as "declined," and it will count towards the tally of voters who chose not to support any candidate at all The declined ballots are counted separately from those that have been "spoiled" with an illegible or otherwise unclear mark. For a ballot to be declined, a voter must leave the ballot completely blank. Declined ballots are often considered protest votes, sending a message to politicians that voters are unhappy either with politicians' behaviour, or with the options available. Anyong