Thoughts and Opinions On Today's Important Issues

Tuesday, April 06, 2010

Windsor Star's Stories of Desperation

Who really is the most desperate one? Matty Moroun or the Windsor Star or rather the DRIC people?

I cannot believe it. Another Star story telling why the Bridge Company NAFTA claim will not succeed. Of course, there is no one telling us why the Bridge Company might win but what can one expect from the Star.
  • "Moroun suit claims NAFTA breach
    Bridge owner unlikely to win $3.5B, experts say
Ok, I guess Matty better pack it in given what the Star says. He ought to throw in the towel. It's over for him.

Mind you, after American Secretary of State Clinton rocked Ottawa, I would think that the adjective "desperate" applies to the Prime Minister these days.

When Lawrence Cannon says this, then you know Canada is in trouble. He sounds like Minister Van Loan, living in a dream world:
  • "Foreign Affairs Minister Lawrence Cannon says Hillary Clinton's criticisms of Canada's maternal health initiative were her own views and not the policy of the Obama administration.

    "Mrs. Clinton expressed not her government's position; she expressed her personal point of view ...," Cannon told CTV's Question Period on Sunday...

    Clinton also criticized Canada last week for not inviting three Arctic countries, as well as indigenous groups, to talks on the Arctic, and made a public appeal for Canada to keep its troops in Afghanistan beyond its 2011 withdrawal date.

    Cannon said the criticisms did not signal a cooling of relations between Ottawa and Washington.

    "This is a tempest in a teapot," Cannon told CTV.

    "This is not snubbing anybody; this is nothing that is detrimental to Canada-U.S. relations. Our relations are the best relations in the world."

As if the Secretary is so dumb as to make off-the-cuff comments. Give me a break.

A word to the wise to the PM. Keep Governor General Michaelle Jean. She is all you have to preserve your relationship with President Obama!

I will deal with the latest NAFTA story another time but let us look at what the Star has written before.
  • "Bridge legal challenge called an act of desperation
    Claim to border tolls called shaky

Mind you, it comes after their recent absurd story about the bridge value decreasing:

  • "Windsor's Ambassador Bridge losing value, expert says"

Of course, the Star should be applauded for trying to educate their readers on important issues and setting out questions that are relevant. However, acting in a one-sided manner is hardly enlightening. Rather, it makes a mockery of the debate.

Even the Star cannot possibly believe what they are publishing so how can they expect their readers to do so.

Why would the Star quote Cliff Sutts for heaven's sake. Is he the only lawyer in town? Was he the stand-in for Edgar (aka Eddie) who is afraid to open his mouth now since he is scared that he would be sued? You had to read 8 paragraphs into the story before you saw:

  • "Sutts, who represents the city's tunnel commision."

You remember, dear reader, Sutts acted on the failed Tunnel deal with Detroit. That file cost the City a bundle in legal and expert's fees.

In fact, in a previous Star story, he was described this way:

  • "Lawyer Cliff Sutts has handled tunnel issues for the city for decades."

Of course, we know who the Tunnel's biggest competitor is don't we?

What do you expect him to say:

  • "Yup, Moroun has got them by the short and curlies. He won"

Come on Mr. Beneteau, we remember how Cliff feels about the Bridge Company:

  • "Sutts agreed the driving force behind the [City's Tunnel] deal has been "to keep this out of the hands of Matty Moroun and the Ambassador Bridge."

    The lawyer said a plan unveiled by the bridge last year to relocate the tunnel customs plaza to a new 200-lane superplaza in Detroit was "not in anybody's best interest."

    Sutts anticipates Moroun -- or potentially other private investment companies -- will attempt to derail the deal before it is completed."

And then to quote Brian Masse. Oh please. Mr. Bridge Public Authority.

I found this comment shocking for a Member of Parliament who makes laws that govern how parties are to act with each other:

  • "If this is successful in any way, it shows business has more rights than citizens of this country. It would set quite the precedent."

No Brian, it says that the law has been applied.

I expect that many of the questions posed can be answered by reading sections of the International Bridges and Tunnels Act (Bill C-3). That is the Act that Brian took the credit for when it passed while his real contribution was setting the world's record for the number of times the word "inadmissible" was used in relation to his proposed amendments.

  • "The Chair: We have an amendment introduced by the NDP. Again, I'm advised by counsel that it is inadmissible due to its being contrary to the principle of the bill.

    Mr. Brian Masse: I would like, at an appropriate time, at least written correspondence from the department on the inadmissibility of the amendments. They were originally submitted--those ones, in particular--from the City of Windsor and their legal experts."

Wouldn't it be a real hoot if, in the end, Brian is responsible for Matty being allowed to build his bridge because of Bill C-3!