MACHO

 As in Clint Eastwood's recent movie release entitled Cry Macho.

Let me say at the outset that I was disappointed with the Movie but thought that would be the case even before I watched it earlier this week with my two good friends Mark and Dave.  I will simply say that at 91 Eastwood is passed his prime which is totally understandable - I am 20 years younger than he and would not attempt to do what he does in the film. The main reason I went to see the show was that it could possibly be his last.

But I did find that his Movie had a deeper meaning.  It provided a telling Allegory on how life has changed in the United States virtually over the course of Eastwood's life.  When he was born, America was still essentially a Macho country where the majority of its citizens wanted Government to get out of their way so they could excel based on their own merits and abilities. This is best exemplified by the writings of Horatio Alger who died at end of the 19th Century.  

Alger wrote novels of young adults and impoverished boys and their rise from humble backgrounds to lives of middle-class security and comfort through good works. His writings were characterized by the "rags-to-riches" narrative, which had a formative effect on the United States during the Gilded Age.

Eastwood's career paralleled this philosophy ...he was a loner, who did good works and did not take guff off a bad guy.

'Macho', in his movie, is a Rooster - that fight's other roosters and it too does not give any quarter to his opponents.  That it is a Mexican Rooster complicates my theory somewhat but maybe Eastwood is simply trying to suggest that the sagging fortunes of America over the last 50 years can be reversed with the help of Mexicans who have been entering the United States by the thousands and thousands in recent years.  I do not know if this is what was intended but it makes alot of sense.

But back to my original premise ...America as in all Democracies, are becoming less and less Macho.  Comparisons with pre World War Two abound.  More and More of Us have succumbed to the Progressive Way of Life where the majority now believes that Government is the answer and their demands upon it are infinite. As Margaret Thatcher is so famous for saying - Socialism works very well up until the time the Government runs out of Other Peoples' Money to spend. 

But it is not just the Progressive Demands on Government that are so threatening to our Way of Life. We are becoming paralyzed in our ability to improve our lot in life.  During the height of Covid, China built a Hospital from scratch... within 10 days.  It would take years for a Western Democracy to accomplish the same.  One of Canada's Pipelines was on the drawing papers for over 40 years and in the end the decision was made to not proceed.  Just imagine how fast China could have accomplished a  similar project.

Unlike our esteemed Prime Minister I have no love or respect for China for obvious reasons but if the above paralysis continues, it and other Dictatorships will have us for lunch as in we will be on their menu.  

When Clint Eastwood leaves the scene for the last time we will all be poorer for it but know, there is no one in the wings capable of replacing him.  

Free Popcorn Anyone?

As I See It...

'K.D. Galagher'

 

SANCTITY OF THE RULE OF LAW...

 

UPDATE:  How coincidental, an article appeared in our Ottawa Sun today which touches grately on this Blog...a Justice of the Peace here in Ottawa was censured for writing a newspaper column about Ottawa's Bail Court.  The Ontario Divisional Court ruled correctly that her doing so was a "breach of her judicial independence".  In other words, what her personal view of the Law - as a member of the Judiciary matters not and she needs to keep those thoughts to herself.  KDG

I HAVE BEEN PREACHING OF LATE THE IMPORTANCE OF POLITICIANS RESPECTING THE RULE OF LAW...IN OTHER WORDS TO KEEP AWAY FROM INTERFERING WITH ITS OPERATION.

WELL THERE ARE EXCEPTIONS TO THAT RULE... SO LET'S CALL THIS BLOG 'AN EXCEPTION TO THAT RULE'.

CASE IN POINT...A Few Days Ago, Cop Killer - Umar Zameer was Granted Bail in the Deliberate Death of Constable Jeffrey Northrup a 31 year veteran of the Toronto Police Force.  I am not going to get into the facts other than to simply say Zameer ran Const. Northrup down with his car.

His lawyer issued a statement saying that Zameer's family was "very pleased with the outcome" of the bail hearing.  I wonder though if the deceased Police Officer's Family was equally so "pleased".

The President of the Police Union made it very clear as to his thoughts: "it was appalling that we have an individual that's charged with first-degree murder, let alone the murder of a police officer, released on bail".  Amen to that.

But my Blog is speaking of the Exception to the Rule of Law that allows Politicians and not Union Leaders to similarly express their disgust in the face of a travesty by Justice itself.  

And to the credit of the Mayor of Toronto - His Worship John Tory, albeit an avowed Progressive, he came out strongly and had this to say about the Court's Decision to Release this Killer: "Our Justice System needs to get its act together and start putting victims and their families ahead of criminals".  And although not said by Tory and true nonetheless ... His Honour's Statement applies doubly in cases involving the killing of a Cop. 

Mayor Tory's revulsion was backed up by Premier Ford who had this to say: "This is beyond comprehension. It's completely unacceptable that the person charged for this heinous crime is now out on bail".

Okay ...you might ask, why is wrong Trudeau to try to influence the Scales of Justice when it comes to his friends at SNC Lavalin but it is okay for the Mayor of Toronto and the Ontario Premier to come out and criticize the Court for granting bail in the case of Constable Northrup killing?  Should the Judicial System not be crying Political Interference as it has sadly done too often in the past?

That said, I would have liked to provide you with some info on who exactly this 31 year old Zameer is but due to the Court's publication ban there is nothing to be found on the Web.  Pity.  Seems to me though that the Defence is fearful of having the spotlight focused on their defendant and it makes one wonder why?

So I am going to come at this from the Policeman angle and more to the point from the Thin Blue Line. 

This phrase, it is said, came from Richard Enright in 1922 - the year my father was born...Enright was a New York City Police Commissioner who used the phrase to describe police as the intensive battle line...the first line of defence against criminality.  It has come to mean that the police are the line which keeps society from descending into chaos...and the "blue" refers to the colour of the uniforms worn in most police departments. 

With that bit of information...let's look then at who Constable Jeffrey Northrup was and how he exemplified his fellows who make up that LINE:

• Constable Northrup started in 1989 as a court officer before graduating from police college in 1999 and heading to 11 Division and then to 52 Division in 2008;
• Jeffrey Northrup was married with four children who were the love of his shortened life. He was a devoted father who was deeply involved in his children's activities and sports... was a volunteer for the Special Olympics and active in Scouts and Lacrosse;
• Master of ceremonies at his funeral,  Supt. Peter Code, told the amassed mourners that, to fellow officers, the 31-year veteran from 52 Division was "the hardest of all workers" who would take on any task. Northrup was always the first to arrive for a job", Code said. "And he would do it with a smile," he said;
• Premier Ford, also in attendance, offered his condolences to the Northrup family, saying the Officer made the "ultimate sacrifice in the line of duty".  "He did so as a hero. He put his life on the line in order to serve and protect his community, and this is a debt we will never be able to repay;"
• Toronto Mayor followed by praising Northrup for "his years of hard work and his deep commitment to public service";
• Police Services Board Chair Jim Hart called Constable Northrup a "giant in stature and heart who was known for his wisdom, wit and kind character".  "He tragically gave his life doing what he truly and sincerely loved doing serving and protecting his community";
• His wife, Margaret, summed up the funeral service with the following:  "I am so grateful to have had you in my life for 28 years. You were my knight, my strength, my confidant, and my best friend … I am lost without you. However, I will remain strong with you still in my heart, and by my side"... "Goodbye, my love."

Okay, I believe I have established the Tragedy in Constable Northrup's premature death and how it would undoubtedly qualify as An Exception To The Rule Of Law where Politicians should rightfully interfere with its Operation and why Trudeau's attempt to distort Justice to protect his Friends and Cronies from the Business World should not.  But neither case provides us with a Definition as to when Interference on their part is justified.    

Well in fact there is no such definition available.  Indeed, it comes down to a Judgment Call on the part part of Politicians given that they are both the Peoples' Representatives and that they are the Authors of the Law in the first place. With those Two Roles they have a Sacred Duty to get involved if they see the Courts flagrantly violating the Right, Interests and Norms of Society.  This has become ever more important in recent years as the Courts have ventured into Making Laws rather than simply Interpreting them.  

As I See It...

'K. D. Galagher'

MENG WANZHOU

 A Triumph for the Rule of Law ?....

As we all know now, Meng along with our Two Michaels were released Friday and are safely back in their respective homelands.

Canadian Pundits are calling it a Victory for the Rule of Law since in their eyes, Canada ...read Justin Trudeau - stood firm in the face of  Progressive Demands that Wanzhou be released in the hope that China would reciprocate by releasing Michael Spavov and Michael Kovig.

Why these Progressives... in this case Senior Liberals and Senior Bureaucrats past and present ...would make such a demand of Trudeau is a question for another time but the fact remains something is 'Rotten in the State of Denmark' a.k.a. Canada as Shakespeare would say.

But before we go too far into this let's review how all this began:

• Ms. Wanzhou was arrested by Canadian Officials when she arrived in Vancouver on her way to Mexico from Hong Kong on the 1st of December 2018 ...the better part of three (3) years ago.  This related to allegations by the US Department of Justice that Huawei and Meng Wanzhou as its Chief Financial Officer, had for the past decade stolen trade secrets, obstructed a criminal investigation and evaded economic sanctions on Iran;
• By shear coincidence... I am sure, the two Michaels were arrested in China later that same month but unlike Wanzhou who lived in the lap of luxury while in Canada's prettiest Province they endured Hell on Earth confined in their Chinese Prison Cells; 
• It is trite, yet still appropriate, to say that Justice Delayed is Justice Denied and the fact that it took the Canadian Judiciary nearly three years to decide on Wanzhou's Extradition to the United States is simply unconscionable.  After all, Our Courts were not deciding her guilt or innocence and even if they were - 3 years and counting to come to that conclusion is still far too long to take.  Here all they were considering was whether to Extradite an individual to another country (America) which has a Judiciary comparable to our own.  The Court was not being asked to extradite the poor woman to a country like China that is devoid of the Rule of Law so it should have taken them a week at most to make its decision and then place her on the nearest plane bound for Washington.

With that let's get back to the Rule of Law and whether it was followed in Wanzhou's case. First, the strange fact that former US President Donald Trump offered to use this woman as a bargaining chip in trade negotiations with China.  Hardly consistent with the precepts of the R of L.  Indeed, quite the opposite. This would be something one could expect from a Dictatorship.  So if Trump could so easily circumvent an Extradition demanded by his own country's Justice Department how does that differ from China misusing its own Kangaroo Courts to try the two Michaels.  In degree I grant you but not in appearance. 

The other glaring inconsistency was in regard to yesterday's swap.  For some time now, the Canadian Government - both at the Political and Bureaucratic level have been lobbying the United States to make a deal with China to 'get our boys freed'.  And in the end this is just what happened.

Without so much as a guilty plea, Wanzhou was freed from the arms of Lady Justice on both sides of our international border.  In other words, we witnessed a prisoner swap... on one side an individual who was likely guilty as charged and on the other side two innocent victims who were in the wrong place at the wrong time. 

For the two Michaels, this was a blessing but for the Rule of Law it represents a betrayal.  And how can we - the US and Canada - continue to criticize China for ignoring the Rule of Law when we too can jettison it at will?  

In 2019 Trudeau was sanctioned by Canada's Ethic's Commission for violating our Conflict of Interest Act when he tried to pressure our then Minister of Justice the Honourable Jody Wilson-Raybould into treating SNC Lavalin more leniently than our legal system of Justice believed appropriate.      

The danger with these three examples of course is the more the Rule of Law is ignored or violated, the easier it becomes to do in the future.  

Lessons Learned?

Well certainly China has learned that by kidnapping innocent foreign nationals they ultimately get their way.  They have also learned that despite Western Democracies claiming to be faithful to Justice and the Rule of Law, that fidelity has its limits. 

And while I am happy for the Michaels I believe the same result could have occurred... even much earlier, if the world's democracies had moved quickly to isolate China from civilized discourse.  Not just because of what China did in our particular case but because it has been acting as a Rogue, Bully State since the coming into power of its current President Xi Jinping. If we do not soon collectively grow a spine we'll be in for even far worse trouble with China.

Canada, for its part, can begin by finally dropping Huawei from the 5G Networks ...we are the only member of the Five Eyes intelligence-sharing network not to have already done so.

As I See It...

'K. D. Galagher'