Author: Bambi

It seems that Mr. Bryan Adams expressed a frustration against “bat eaters”, using the F. word.

He was immediately called out by a couple of so-called “social justice activists”, labelling him with the R. word.

All the Canadian media picked up the story in lockstep (here is just one example: https://www.cbc.ca/news/canada/british-columbia/bryan-adams-instagram-1.5565624).

Don’t journalists have anything more important to do than this?

Or are they somehow diverting our attention from the main issue, cleverly raised by Mr. Lilley yesterday and that should matter more here:

Why isn’t Canada joining the USA, Australia, France, Germany, the Netherlands, Britain, the European Union, the African Union, and even countries like Kenya, Uganda, Kazakhstan, and Nigeria in condemning China?

LILLEY: Trudeau’s silence on China becoming deeply disturbing

To come back to Mr. Adam’s “racism”, are people in Taiwan racists too ??

Anyhow, Bambi as a deer who loves eating meat (minus bats) is more disturbed by Canada’s silence, about China’s attitude at the beginning of the pandemic, than by Mr. Bryan Adams’ words.

China may have not been responsible for the beginning of the tragedy (it could have started anywhere else).

However, sadly yet perhaps not surprisingly, China had a dictatorship’s reflex in dealing with the tragedy when it started and for that, it should be held accountable.

As a reminder, China’s initial response was to hide the truth (not just deny it, as this would have been a typical first reaction, especially when frozen by fear). Specifically, the Chinese government oppressed healthcare providers and citizens talking about the coronavirus, kept secret the seriousness of the outbreak, played political shenanigans within the World Health Organization to deceive us all even longer, collected protective medical equipment from all around the world, and then profited from our misery by selling us personal protective equipment, etc. (some of which were even defective).

Anyhow, this story makes Bambi recall “Bovine Spongiform Encephalopathy” (or mad cow disease). At that time, people were criticizing British animal husbandry practices and rightly so:

https://www.theguardian.com/tv-and-radio/2019/jul/11/mad-cow-disease-the-great-british-beef-scandal-review-is-it-really-gone-for-good

Why wasn’t this criticism racist back then? And why is it now?

To conclude this post on a lighter note, let’s imagine for a second that the virus did not originate from the pangolin and then moved to the bat as an intermediate host. Let’s imagine that it all started in a shawarma (like donair but, of course, tastier ?)!

If people start criticizing Lebanese hygiene in cutting shawarma, will they be racist? Even if they use the full F. word, they won’t be racist. Guess what? The people of Lebanon themselves would be using it too, just like people in Taiwan and Hong Kong.

First, without lyrics:

Well, with lyrics, if you feel like practising your French by singing with Ms. Reno :)!

After a relatively excellent job in its fight against the coronavirus (with 0 new cases in many regions), Lebanon is now seeing a surge in its covid-19 cases, with 36 new cases on Sunday (13 on Saturday, and 12 on Friday).

As a result, Lebanon has extended its curfew, from 7 PM to 5 AM. It is even, considering a full lockdown again, which could last from 48 to even 72 hours, according to the Health Minister:

https://www.aa.com.tr/en/latest-on-coronavirus-outbreak/lebanon-extends-curfew-amid-spike-in-coronavirus-cases/1835830

Journalists from the MTV Channel tried to get information from the Ministry of Foreign Affairs. The latter declined to offer any explanation, stating that its repatriating mission ends when the doors of the airplane close. The journalists then turned to the Ministry of Internal Affairs. The latter sent them to the Ministry of Health.

Luckily, the Minister of Health accepted their invitation for an interview: https://www.mtv.com.lb/en/programs/prime_time_news/2020/videos/10_may_2020/

From what Bambi understood from the documentary above (Arabic content), the first two steps of the repatriating mission were conducted in a rigorous manner by the Ministry of Health, as reported in earlier posts.

However, it seems that some Lebanese expats who have been quarantined in hotels in Beirut until their test results, forgot about the strict instructions of the Ministry of Health. As soon as they returned their regions/villages, they engaged in social activities. One expat from Nigeria received friends over (a Lebanese tradition to welcome newcomers). Others literally left their places. Some even attended social events, including Iftar dinners with loved ones, after a day of fast (Ramadan month is still on).

After investigations by the health authorities, it turned out that the person who received his friends over infected them all with the coronavirus. One of those infected guests happens to be a soldier who works in the military tribunal. Well, he then had an Iftar with 12 of his colleagues. They are now all infected.

Why can’t some citizens be covidwise? Is using one’s brain too much to ask for, even if we are happy to be back home or even if we are celebrating a holy month? Don’t we have a collective duty in a pandemic, toward our fellow citizens? The latter have been sacrificing, by putting their lives and economy on hold, for over three months. They deserve some respect and consideration.

First, here Mr. Dumont’s original article published on May 8, 2020 in the Journal de Montréal:

https://www.journaldemontreal.com/2020/05/08/le-canada-sans-budget

Second, here is a quick translation:

“Should the Canadian government have a budget? Justin Trudeau has hinted that he will not table any. The budget is a forecasting exercise. With this year’s situation being too unpredictable, he said the exercise would become pointless.

Generally, the exercise is done in late February or early March.

Minister Morneau pushed it back a bit this year, and then we found ourselves in the middle of a crisis.

In the past month, the Prime Minister announced unprecedentedly large budgetary measures, but did so at daily press conferences.

From a legal point of view, completely new measures, such as the CERB [Canadian Emergency Response Benefit], have taken their legal foundation in the bills adopted urgently in Parliament.

From a strictly legal point of view, it could therefore be said that a budget is not mandatory.

But…

Minimum

The opposition parties are demanding at least an economic update, a kind of a lean version of a budget.

I would say this is the minimum. Budgeting is not trivial, even if the forecast it contains may become obsolete after a few months, during turbulent times.

Mr. Trudeau maintains that he was completely transparent in disclosing all his measures daily and stating the cost of each. True, but this has nothing to do with a budget. Unpacking a long list of expenses is not the same as budgeting.

Budgeting brings income and expenses together. It deals with debt financing, an economic strategy, and the interaction between measures, for example.

The CERB and the wage subsidy are communicating vessels. Where are we at? The taxpayers who receive this aid will return part of it via their tax, for those who earn enough. How much do we estimate?

Spend, spend

Making a budget is the difference between spending relentlessly and having some sort of plan, even if you are going through a storm.

A budget also provides the government with a framework for future decisions. These difficult decisions will come quickly.

Next June, should we extend a few billion more to extend the wage subsidy for companies that have not resumed their activities?

In July, the Trudeau government will have to rule on the CERB. Add months or turn the millions of people still out of work on regular EI [Employment Insurance]?

These decisions must be made as a function of the needs expressed, but also according to the government’s ability to pay.

Normally, the budget provides the government with a framework for drawing the line among all possible expenses.

Right now, we would rather have the impression that Mr. Trudeau is spending frantically and enjoying announcing it during his press briefings [mind you, the French verb for “enjoying” is “jouit”. One must say that it has a sexual connotation in the language of Molière. If Bambi is not mistaken, it is not the case in the language of Shakespeare].

The urgency of the situation justifies much of it, but still. Is anyone still keeping a record/account on his/her calculator somewhere?

In the absence of a budget, we are asked for a complete act of faith in Justin Trudeau. And rigorous financial management is not his specialty.”

Bambi just came across the following moving article and video documentary (29 minutes, 29 seconds) by Mr. Adam Harvey, from Foreign Correspondent (ABC News):

https://www.abc.net.au/foreign/revolution-in-the-time-of-corona/12216964

First, here is the story:

Ontario man pleads guilty, turned back at New Brunswick airport over ‘miscommunication’: father

Second, both Mr. Daniel Arefi and his family, should have educated themselves better about the emergency measures in New Brunswick in the middle of the covid-19 pandemic.

In addition, perhaps the airline company should have not accepted to fly Mr. Arefi from Toronto (Ontario) to NB. Did anyone ask him about the purpose of his trip, essential business or not? Didn’t they tell him about the travel ban before the flight?

Upon his arrival, this youth seems to have explained that his trip was to “visit” his family. According to his dad, it was rather to move back to NB to live with them (after having lost his job in Toronto, as a barber).

Miscommunication? Maybe.

Perhaps this is the result of uncertain times for a young man who may have been forced, by the economic circumstances, to come back to live with or closer to his parents. Perhaps that was not his first choice at this stage of his life. Perhaps in his mind, it was just a visit (even if visits can sometimes last a lifetime). Perhaps this is how he and his parents negotiated this tough crisis together. Anyhow, this is neither our business, nor the focus of this post.

In this story, we can see the following: On one hand, we have a province serious about its covid-19 measures (bravo, as this is meant to protect us!). However, on the other, we have NB airport staff who went a bit TOO far in the application of the provincial emergency measures.

This has resulted in an “unfortunate situation” for the individual and his family, to borrow the words of Premier Higgs (who was asked a question about this at today’s press conference, as per the article above).

We can even add that this situation is not just “unfortunate”, it is both ridiculous and unfair.

Since Mr. Arefi has already landed in NB and he does not have a job in Toronto anymore, why didn’t we allow him to self-quarantine here (his dad seems to have talked about having rented an apartment for him for this purpose). We would have allowed this family to be happily re-united in 14 days from now.

Fine him only, if this is necessary… but why was he handcuffed whilst being arrested? Was this necessary? Why was he sent back to Toronto, after all the flying hassle and costs? Is this the safest and wisest legal decision, even if he did not act in a “covidwise” way?

Talking about fines, were Mr. Trudeau and Mr. Ford fined for having gone to their cottages?

LILLEY: Trudeau’s cottage visit mocks us and the rules he sets

WARMINGTON: Ford said not to go to cottage – then went himself

https://www.thestar.com/politics/provincial/2020/05/08/premier-doug-ford-made-quick-visit-to-muskoka-cottage-over-easter-despite-vow-he-wouldnt-due-to-covid-19.html

Surely not… even if they did not set the good examples to all of us, including to Mr. Arefi.

In contrast, we do not hesitate to harshly punish this youth/his family and so many other citizens across the country.

All this has a name in English: Double standard.

“Deux poids, deux mesures”, in French.

In Lebanese Arabic, it sounds lighter: “Some get the olive oil” (= health-enhancing), “others the trans fats” (=health compromising).

Regardless of the language, the meaning is the same: it seems UNFAIR.

Many thanks to the New Wark Times for this shocking, yet not surprising, article:

Phinney cited for violating Sackville’s new Code of Conduct

Bambi knows VERY well two facts in our town:

First, the shenanigans of our town’s council are legendary. They sadly know no shame and no limits. Today, we have another evidence of this reality. Regardless of the different format of meetings, physical or virtual, some things just remain unchanged.

Second, Councillor Bruce Phinney is one of the VERY rare PRINCIPLED politicians. With all due respect to Sackville’s public servants, he is perhaps our best town councillor. Make no mistake, Bambi is not saying this because he cannot be wrong. Of course, he can at times, like all of us. Bambi is stating this simply because Councillor Phinney is always true to both his principles AND his constituents.

Bearing this in mind, we all know what it means to accuse him of violating a so-called (new) code of conduct.

Actually, such accusation is like a double-edged sword. One one hand, it serves to corner and silence him. On the other hand, it is an honour for him, morally speaking. Here is why: Councillor Phinney speaks his mind. His opinions are not for sale. He looks at the evidence, with an attention to details. He also sees the bigger picture very lucidly. He has a continuity in his thoughts. Most importantly, he is not afraid of saying the truth as it is. He stands up for his values, for the citizens he represents, and for justice for the sake of justice. He does neither virtue signal nor gain anything in return of his opinions.

Thank you Councillor Phinney for whom you are.Today, it is our turn to stand up for you. Through you, we stand up for both common sense and justice in our town. Enough of control to hide we do not know what. Enough of control to hide behind we do not care what. Today, it is a code of conduct. Tomorrow, it will be another invention. Enough childlessness. Sackvillians deserve a better practice of politics.

Thus, using the platform of her personal blog, as a citizen of Sackville, Bambi VERY strongly condemns these accusations, altogether. She also FULLY supports Councillor Bruce Phinney. We need MORE of him… We need MORE politicians like him, not just in Sackville but also in Fredericton, Ottawa, Beirut, the rest of the world… !

To conclude this post, there are no words more powerful than those of Ms. Sharon’s Hicks (comments already published on the New Wark Times). Bambi will allow herself to highlight them again below. Thank you Ms. Hicks for being simply SO RIGHT. Please read her comment until the end, without missing her clever bolded question!

SHARON HICKS (taken from the New Wark Times, please see the link above):

“This latest updated version of the Code of Conduct for Councilors was passed in March of this year, which added even more ‘control features’ to the previous version from 2017. Here is the link to the document, located on the Town website – https://sackville.com/wp-content/uploads/2020/03/271-Code-of-Conduct-By-Law.pdf

When you read through the entire by-law, as I have done several times, and consider the potential ramifications of each individual section, it presents as a document seemingly designed to control [Councilors] to the highest degree possible, as [Councilor] Phinney has pointed out.

While it is indeed essential for all elected officials to present themselves with a high degree of professionalism and courtesy, and to represent the best interests of the citizens who elect them, one could ask why this ‘extreme’ level of control is deemed to be necessary, and by whom.

If I were considering running for Sackville Town Council, after reading this document I would definitely have reservations about putting myself in that position where I would basically be ‘muzzled’, unable to speak up to represent the best interests of our citizens without threat of personal reprimand.

Who is Council elected to represent – the citizens or the bureaucracy?”

Bambi usually likes Mr. Champagne, Minister of Global Affairs Canada (formerly known as Foreign Affairs). She is disappointed to see him not answering a question directly (is he learning from his boss ??). Most importantly, she is disappointed to learn this from the video in the media ( https://globalnews.ca/video/6916567/foreign-affairs-minister-says-canada-is-grateful-for-countries-providing-medical-supplies-including-taiwan): Canada did not thank Taiwan for its kind donation of 25K masks yet?! What is it waiting for? For China’s blessing (or green light)?

We can thank two countries at once, Canada. We can even interact with two countries at once, despite their historical issues (ex. Israel and Palestine, etc.).

So why not apply the same diplomatic logic here?

We can even thank without endorsing or… even without liking an entity. It is called clever diplomacy.

Bambi is disturbed because when she voted for Mr. Trudeau the first time (thank goodness not the second time), her wish was to see Canada re-playing a role at the international scene. Frankly, she is afraid we may be becoming the clown of the world…

Bambi is also sad because, in some regards, Taiwan is like the Lebanon of this world. China is like the Iran of the Middle East, so to speak (larger scale). Yes, Bambi would have appreciated some thoughtful politeness, had Lebanon donated those masks.

Anyhow, to conclude this post, regardless of our government’s impolite attitude, Bambi would like to thank Taiwan for its nice gesture toward us!

Following the link below, you can find a translation of an article by Mr. Facal published today in the Journal de Montréal:

https://www.journaldemontreal.com/2020/05/07/trudeau-legault-vous-et-moi

“Since the beginning of this crisis, I defend François Legault, but I have severely criticized Justin Trudeau.

Readers have asked me why the latter is not entitled to the same indulgence as the former.

It’s an honest question that deserves an honest answer.

Easier

If I am more severe with Trudeau, it is not, as readers believe, because I am a sovereignist.

Legault, after all, has turned his back on the cause. So why?

Serious cinephiles may be familiar with an old Stanley Kubrick film entitled Paths of Glory (1957).

The plot matters little.

Suffice to say that, during World War I, Colonel Dax was in the trenches with his men.

Whenever the order to attack was given, he came out of his hole and charged with them.

Bullets whistled. His men fell like flies around him.

Meanwhile, far, far, far from the front, well sheltered in their headquarters, Generals Broulard and Mireau sip champagne while dreaming of glory, medals, and promotions.

I use the film allegorically, you will understand, not to be taken at face value.

Legault and the premiers are in the trenches. They are the ones who receive the bullets.

Hospitals, CHSLDs [long-term care centres], daycares, schools, the decision to close or reopen businesses, to close or not regions, to give us instructions to stay at home or not, to wear a mask or not, all this are decisions of provincial governments.

The sharing of responsibilities is like that in many federations.

In the United States too, while Trump invents his science every day, the governors are at the front.

Does Legault make mistakes? Obviously. As he said on Tuesday, there is no operations manual.

His best reflex was to have grasped the gravity of the situation from the start and acted quickly with the means he had. Not Trudeau.

I was talking about constitutional responsibilities.

Trudeau was responsible for border control and for travelers arriving here.

He was the last in the country to accept that everything had to be closed. How many infected people have returned who have infected others?

Then, at Easter, while you and I were locked up by obligation, he left for the cottage with a wife and children.

But he was kind enough, it’s true, to share beautiful selfies with us.

He then caught up, you say, by spending without counting.

Yes, but it’s our money, our debt, and signing checks is easy.

Fault?

I will be told, if we want to compare equivalent jurisdictions, that Legault does not deserve congratulations since there are more deaths here than in other provinces.

Remember that more than 70% of COVID-19 deaths in Québec took place in residences for the elderly.

However, more than half of the elderly who, in Canada, live in these institutions, neglected for ages, are in Québec.

Legault’s fault?”