Jagmeet Singh: David taking on the neoliberal Goliath

79 posts / 0 new
Last post

NorthReport wrote:

Just watch how Canada’s image will now be attacked 

I have seen Justin mouthing off about Duterte and other world leaders From here on, Justin will be ridiculed for those kind of comments

Canada’s brand has been damaged and the sooner Canadians address it the better

Duterte kills people with death squads. I know, same thing. 



Now you are an authority on the Philippines, are you?

Please for your own sake stop falling into the Justin trap


Misfit and quizzical,

I would prefer not to post in the JWR protesteth too much thread but just would like to say how much I appreciate your comments there

You both have done good!

PS And Krop as well


FWIW bekayne ask any Pinoy working abroad why they have had to leave the Philippines to find decent work and almost every one of them will tell you it is because of the corruption in their homeland Duterte is cut from a different cloth, is not corrupt, and will be re-elected with a massive majority. I am not condoning the Justice system or lack thereof in the Philippines in relation to drugs but do you really believe Canada should be bragging about our Justice System after what we have just been exposed to with our prime minister and the SNC scandal? 


NorthReport wrote:

FWIW bekayne ask any Pinoy working abroad why they have had to leave the Philippines to find decent work and almost every one of them will tell you it is because of the corruption in their homeland Duterte is cut from a different cloth, is not corrupt, and will be re-elected with a massive majority. I am not condoning the Justice system or lack thereof in the Philippines in relation to drugs but do you really believe Canada should be bragging about our Justice System after what we have just been exposed to with our prime minister and the SNC scandal? 

I think we can safely brag it's leaps and bounds better than the one the Philippines has under Duterte, yes. That doesn't mean it's good enough, of course.


Jagmeet, Jagmeet where art thou? Now is your time to come out in the sun!




Jagmeet, it's your job to make sure the current Liberal brand sticks, so get going now on your mission, eh!

Without a rebrand, the SNC smell will stick to the Liberals



Jagmeet, this is serious shit  for all Canadians we are dealing with here, and you are capable of doing much better than this, so get going and do it.

Justin appears to just want to stonewall and by his behaviour make things worse than they already are. All Canadians will pay the price for his intransigence.   

Justin Trudeau is tampering with Canada’s brand


The context is important here. One of those former ministers, Jody Wilson-Raybould, resigned from cabinet because she felt Trudeau inappropriately interfered in the administration of justice in order to ease the way for SNC-Lavalin — an employer of 9,000 people in Canada — through charges of fraud and corruption.

It’s one thing to stand up for jobs and growth. It’s quite another to unapologetically push the limits of the rule of law to do so.

And it’s also short-sighted, because Canada’s global Boy Scout reputation — offering stability and solid respect for institutions — is central to the country’s ability to attract investment and, by extension, jobs.

Branding is everything in the global competition to lure investment, as the federal Liberals know perfectly well.

Early in their mandate, when they sought and then implemented outside advice on how to enhance economic growth in Canada, highlighting the country’s reputation to foreign investors was front and centre.

The Trudeau government created Invest in Canada to showcase the country’s strengths and smooth the way for investors. On its website, our reputation is right there on the home page as a key reason why foreign firms should make Canada a destination: “#1 Most Reputable among G7 countries,” it says.

Trudeau himself has personified the branding effort. His progressive agenda caught the world’s attention when he was first elected, and he quickly sought to turn that adulation into investment deals, often meeting CEOs face to face.

Government officials spend a great deal of time and effort negotiating foreign investment protection agreements with other countries; they want to ensure that when Canadian firms venture into their territories, they are treated with respect and the rule of law. Those countries expect the same here.

And when Canada ran into diplomatic trouble with China last December for detaining Huawei executive Meng Wangzhou, its defence — which it shopped around the world — was that Canada always respects the rule of law.

“Our independent legal system is one of the finest, if not the finest, in the world. I trust it, Canadians should trust it, and our partners around the world should trust it, too,” Foreign Affairs Minister Chrystia Freeland said in December at a Toronto discussion that focused on the Huawei conflict.

But trust is difficult to market when the former justice minister has alleged political interference in that system, and the prime minister sees nothing wrong with that.

Dan Tisch is CEO of Argyle Public Relationships, a Toronto-based firm that is involved in global studies comparing countries’ reputations — including the one featured on the Invest in Canada website. He says the world ignores most of what goes on in Canada, but is taking note now — to the detriment of Canada’s brand.

Canada has received top marks because it’s a beautiful and friendly place, but also because of its strong governance and stable economy, Tisch says. The SNC-Lavalin controversy obviously doesn’t change the beautiful and friendly part, but it does take aim at Canada’s economic and political reputation. “It’s potentially very serious for Canada because it strikes a blow in two of the three directions,” Tisch said.

So it was no accident that Export Development Canada (EDC), the government’s export financing agency responsible for promoting Canadian business overseas, quickly hired outside counsel to look into allegations in a CBC report that SNC-Lavalin may have paid bribes in a 2011 project in Angola that was partly financed by EDC.

“EDC has strict commitments for responsible business conduct and we would never, under any circumstances, knowingly participate in a transaction tainted by bribery or corruption,” the agency said in a statement. “This behaviour goes against EDC’s core values and deep-rooted culture of business integrity.”

The EDC clearly knows which side its bread is buttered on. Canada’s reputation for upholding the rule of law is primordial to good business.



Another Liberal sellout to big biz

How Billionaires and Big Pharma Battled Canada’s National Drug Plan

Many people thought pharmacare would be in this federal budget. It wasn’t. Sharon Batt’s report helps explain why.


[Editor’s note: The federal government didn’t deliver a national pharmacare plan in last month’s budget, despite announcing an advisory council to advise on implementing a national program in the 2018 budget. 

Why? Sharon Batt, an adjunct professor at Dalhousie University, looked at the reasons in a report for the Canadian Federation of Nurses Unions. 

Batt found powerful players — including insurance and drug companies — profit from the current system. And that they had unleashed a major, expensive lobbying, PR and public campaign to fight a national pharmacare program. 

The Tyee is pleased to share edited excerpts from the report.]


The SNS scandal has to be the most golden opportunity for the NDP to rebound in the polls.  

Jagmeet and the NDP Team:  The ball is now in your court - use it thoroughly and wisely, as many, many Canadians are counting on you.

The Wilson-Raybould drama is not going away anytime soon

Alas. The Jody Wilson-Raybould affair seems doomed to continue.

Those Canadians who hoped her expulsion from the Liberal caucus this week would end official Ottawa’s obsession with this saga are fated to be disappointed.

Wilson-Raybould and fellow caucus expellee Jane Philpott are back on the media circuit promoting their version of this complicated business.

So are their critics.

Wilson-Raybould, the former attorney general and veterans’ affairs minister, made her pitch in a sit-down interview with the Globe and Mail on Wednesday. Philpott, the former treasury board president, chose CBC Radio for her exclusive interview Thursday.

Neither interview provided any new information. But in both, these two masterful politicians were able to present themselves as wronged women, saddened rather than angered by Prime Minister Justin Trudeau’s decision to boot them from the governing party’s caucus.

Both insisted that principle alone drove their actions, including their decisions to resign from cabinet.

Meanwhile, their detractors point to evidence suggesting that, for Wilson-Raybould at least, more was at stake.

In particular, they point to a Star story Wednesday by my colleague Bob Hepburn reporting that early on in the controversy she issued an ultimatum to Trudeau: Accede to my demands if you want me in cabinet.

Those demands, Hepburn reported citing an unnamed Liberal insider, were threefold.

First, Trudeau had to fire both his principal secretary Gerald Butts and top civil servant Michael Wernick.

Second, the prime minister had to direct David Lametti, Wilson-Raybould’s successor as attorney general, to follow her lead and not offer a plea bargain to Quebec engineering firm SNC-Lavalin, the company charged with bribery and corruption that is at the heart of this affair.

Her third reported demand was that Trudeau apologize unreservedly to her and the entire Liberal caucus for what she called his improper interference in the prosecution of SNC-Lavalin.

Later Wednesday, CBC issued its own report based on what it called multiple Liberal sources confirming the Star story. CBC also added a couple of wrinkles, including the claim that Wilson-Raybould made more demands as time went on.

According to CBC, talks aimed at closing the rift between Trudeau and Wilson-Raybould went on until Monday, the day before she was expelled from caucus.

There are two extraordinary aspects to these reports. One is that Wilson-Raybould felt confident enough of her position vis-à-vis the prime minister to impose unprecedented conditions as her price for staying in, or rejoining cabinet.

The other is that in key areas, Trudeau appears to have given her what she wanted.

Butts resigned his job and Wernick retired from his. Up to now at least, Lametti has scrupulously followed Wilson-Raybould’s lead and not offered SNC-Lavalin a plea bargain.

And while Trudeau has technically never apologized for pressing Wilson-Raybould on the SNC-Lavalin prosecution, he has come mightily close.

It’s easy to see why she was surprised by his decision to expel her from caucus. Up until then, she appeared to hold the whip hand.

Don’t expect Wilson-Raybould and Philpott to disappear. Both have promised more. They will almost certainly deliver. Wilson-Raybould, in particular, is not likely to go gentle into that good night.

For the opposition parties, all of this is a gift. The New Democrats can cite Wilson-Raybould and Philpott as proof that Trudeau is not as progressive as he claims. This should help them in the fall election. By splitting the left-liberal vote, it may in some ridings also inadvertently help Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives.

The Conservatives have long made Trudeau himself, as opposed to his often popular policies, the focus of their attack. They must be grabbing themselves with glee.

This story will not easily die. It is in the interest of too many to keep it going.




Now you can clearly see how Justin operates. Heads he wins, tails you lose!

Justin Trudeau's lost apology

A few weeks ago, the Anonymous Sources wanted us to believe the Prime Minister would apologize for Jody Wilson-Raybould's treatment. Now they want us to believe she demanded an apology, and that it was totally unreasonable.

It seems like another century, but was in fact only a few weeks ago, that Justin Trudeau had a plausible plan to cauterize the SNC-Lavalin wound within his party: He would apologize for … something.

Presumably he would not apologize for trying to protect 9,000 jobs, and presumably he would not admit improper interference in the attorney general’s and director of public prosecution’s roles. But perhaps he might cop to overzealousness in concern for those jobs, or for poorly communicating his entirely appropriate concerns, or for the various anonymous party sources who were slagging off Jody Wilson-Raybould to friendly journalists.

The latter, certainly, seemed downright imperative. Trudeau and his minions, either under orders or self-assigning, had snatched calamity from the jaws of bother. They were badmouthing an accomplished Indigenous female lawyer for being headstrong, “difficult to work with,” and various other descriptors commonly attached to Type A women when they behave like Type A men. When they ran out of those, they started insinuating she wasn’t a very good justice minister — which is certainly an arguable point, but which rather clashed with Trudeau’s insistence she would still hold that title if not for Scott Brison’s impending departure.

Floating a trial balloon to measure potential reactions is not often prelude to the sincerest of apologies. But in the end, no real apology was forthcoming


It was absolutely torching their brand. People were laughing in their faces. Something had to be done. And this stand-by-for-contrition narrative was lent some credence, fittingly enough, by anonymous sources. “A senior government official said one of the options being discussed is for Trudeau to ‘show some ownership over the actions of his staff and officials’ in their dealings with his former attorney general,” CBC reported on March 5.

Floating a trial balloon to measure potential reactions is not often prelude to the sincerest of apologies. But in the end, no real apology was forthcoming. The brand-torching continued unabated. And by Wednesday this week, the Anonymous Sources had come full circle: Wilson-Raybould had set various extraordinary conditions for remaining in Cabinet, they told various outlets.

One of them was that Trudeau apologize.

So. Weeks after the Anonymous Sources had floated an apology, and it seemed inevitable, we are now meant to see Wilson-Raybould’s request for it as evidence of ego gone to seed — “huge demands” constituting an “extraordinary step,” Bob Hepburn gasped in the Toronto Star. “Fantasy run wild,” tweeted his Star colleague Heather Mallick, whose human form is but a vessel for transporting Trudeau’s water. “JWR seemed to think she was co-Prime Minister.”

The great thing about doing politics the old way, especially when you don’t actually believe in the new way, is it spares you being exposed as a total fraud


Wilson-Raybould also allegedly demanded that her replacement, David Lametti, not be allowed to overrule her final decision, freely made, and grant SNC-Lavalin a deferred prosecution agreement. No biggie, right? Trudeau & Co. have always insisted it was up to her. Surely they wouldn’t install a new attorney general just to let a bent company off the hook! But Liberal partisans would have us see it as hypocrisy: Where Wilson-Raybould argued her mandate was being interfered with, here she is trying to interfere in her successor’s.

The third demand was allegedly that Trudeau’s principal secretary, Gerald Butts, clerk of the privy council Michael Wernick, and PMO senior adviser Mathieu Bouchard be fired. This does not seem like a crazy idea at all, frankly. Considering two of the three have since resigned of their own accord, it seems rather prescient.

On Wednesday, after Wilson-Raybould and Jane Philpott were expelled form caucus — the former, Trudeau said, because of her “unconscionable” taped phone call with Wernick, which did nothing but validate her story; and the latter with very little explanation at all — there were questions about what this said about Trudeau’s ostensibly newfangled Liberals.

“Government by Cabinet is back,” Trudeau crowed on Nov. 4, 2015, upon the swearing in of his first batch of ministers. Their platform had promised more freedom for CabMins and rank-and-file MPs alike. It was to be a democracy, not a dictatorship. Now it seems you can’t even resign from Cabinet on principle, pledge support for the PM and his agenda — as Philpott did — and stay in caucus? Are they still doing politics differently?

Agriculture Minister Marie-Claude Bibeau had an utterly shameless, distinctly old-timey answer ready for that: In the old way of doing things, she said, they would have been kicked out ages ago. Voilà: New, different politics!

It’s magnificent, isn’t it? In its own wretched way?

These Liberals have proven themselves truly terrible at damage control, and all but impervious to learning dead-obvious lessons. But having taken weeks upon weeks to axe two of his most formidable ministers for standing on points of principle, to multiple standing ovations from the rest of his caucus, one suspects Trudeau will move rather quicker in future. The great thing about doing politics the old way, especially when you don’t actually believe in the new way, is it spares you being exposed as a total fraud, day after day after day, over and over again.





In the abandoned ruins of Ottawa

Paul Wells: How did the SNC-Lavalin scandal manage to rattle this government so badly? Because it reveals some truths to Canadians about this Prime Minister.


Apr 4, 2019


Trudeau makes his way to caucus on Parliament Hill in Ottawa, Wednesday, April 3, 2019. (THE CANADIAN PRESS/Adrian Wyld)

Jody Wilson-Raybould’s and Jane Philpott’s place in or out of the Liberal caucus matters less than most of the two-month SNC-Lavalin drama. A parliamentary caucus is not a rules organization, it’s a trust organization. Liberals no longer trusted the two former ministers, in part because clearly neither trusts the Prime Minister. So out they went. How other people organize their clubs is their concern.

I’ll note a contradiction: in 2002, when the entire country knew Paul Martin was plotting to unseat a sitting Liberal prime minister, Paul Martin continued to sit as a member of the Liberal caucus. Ah yes, some Liberal friends remind me, but that’s because most of the caucus was in on Martin’s scheme. That’s true, and it raises stubborn and recurrent questions about the wisdom of Liberal caucuses. Members of Alcoholics Anonymous sometimes say, “My best thinking brought me here.” A Liberal caucus in the grip of its best thinking is a wonder to behold.

But onward. I’m left with questions from Wilson-Raybould’s recording of her December phone conversation with Michael Wernick, the soon-to-be-former clerk of the Privy Council. Sure, it’s a terrible thing when a woman records her 20th surreal conversation with people who insist they’re not pressuring her. Here’s her penalty: I’ll ignore what she said on that call and listen only to Wernick.

He describes an imminent, pressing economic crisis that has transfixed the Prime Minister of Canada. “Our intelligence from various sources,” he says, is that SNC’s board has asked consulting firms for options that could include “selling out to somebody else, moving—you know, various things.” All of this “seems to be real and not a bluff,” Wernick says.

Trudeau “wants to be able to say he has tried everything within the legitimate toolbox” to avert this disaster. He is “determined” and “firm.” “I think he is going to find a way to get it done one way or another.” He is in “that kinda mood.”

The conversation goes poorly. “I am going to have to report back before he leaves,” Wernick says. “He is in a pretty firm frame of mind about this, so I am a bit worried . . . . I just saw him a few hours ago and this is really important to him.” Fortunately, “He is still around tomorrow.”

READ MORE: Jody Wilson-Raybould: ‘The Liberal party is not something I understand anymore’


And then, according to later replies to inquiries from both the Prime Minister’s Office and Trudeau himself, Wernick never breathed a word about this extraordinary conversation to the Prime Minister. Even though Trudeau was in Ottawa for a day after the clerk’s call with Wilson-Raybould. Even though telephones work in Whistler, where he vacationed following a pre-Christmas trip to Mali. Even though he was in the office for another day, back from holidays, before launching a cabinet shuffle.

What part of this sounds like the work habits of a serious Prime Minister?

If you, dear reader, were determined and firm and looking to get something done one way or another, if you were in that kinda mood, I bet you wouldn’t let three weeks go by without checking in on a file’s progress.

And then, if you switched out the deeply aggravating attorney general for a new one, say a solid white male McGill graduate like you and Gerry Butts—entirely by accident! It’s not as though that was the goal or anything!—I’m betting you wouldn’t let two more months go by without fixing the no-bluff 9,000-job problem.

And yet that’s what Justin Trudeau has done. The so-called deferred prosecution agreement that would have saved SNC from a trial, but that only an attorney general could order the public prosecutor to negotiate, remains available. At this writing, David Lametti hasn’t delivered the public order that would trigger its use. Now, of course, there’s been a lot going on. But was Trudeau only intent on action if he could be bold in secret? Was he only going to save those 9,000 jobs if it was easy? How thrilled are you to learn that a Prime Minister who’s determined and firm and in that kinda mood hasn’t actually done anything to get closer to effective action?

I ask because I’ve been struck by a peculiarity of this whole mess. It’s this: How did this scandal manage to rattle this government so profoundly? And the best answer I can find is this: Because it reveals truths about this Prime Minister that shake many Canadians’ confidence in him.

As my moral betters in the newspaper columns never tire of repeating, by many standards the SNC-Lavalin mess is quite modest. It seems probable that no money changed hands improperly in 2018 and no law was broken. The protagonists were motivated mostly by a kind of distracted hunch that jobs might be at stake. I mean, the extent to which they had zero evidence for that is breathtaking, but let’s give them the benefit of the doubt. And also by a similarly vague suspicion that it might be bad for branded Liberal candidates if SNC ran into trouble ahead of a Quebec or federal election.

That latter motivation is specifically forbidden in the Open and Accountable Government handbook the PM and the clerk told every minister to read and take to heart. Which helps explain why it’s the only claim Wilson-Raybould made in her testimony to the Justice Committee that the PM’s team wouldn’t touch in their rebuttals.

But still, the whole thing is easy to dismiss as a technicality or a misunderstanding. So why did the Liberals take such a hammering in the polls as it played out? Why, indeed, has Trudeau’s biggest trouble before SNC come from other incidents that would not normally make the big leagues of global scandal, such as his colourful but otherwise vacuous trip to India and his clandestine island vacation with Seamus O’Regan and the Aga Khan?

The answer, I think, is that each time, they reveal unlovely truths about this Prime Minister.

READ MORE: Jane Philpott: ‘We cannot ever be afraid of the truth’

First, a constitutional inability to tell the truth quickly. It took a year, and the industrious digging of the ethics commissioner, to get details of the Aga Khan vacation. The early response to the SNC story (“That did not happen”) has been replaced only with progressively more sophisticated attempts at obfuscation.

Second, a tendency to parry questions of substance with appeals to partisan advantage. As the SNC story dragged on, and especially after Jane Philpott doubled the number of ex-ministers who were not content to let it die, just about every Liberal loyal to Trudeau defaulted to arguing that the rest of us had to stop asking questions because Andrew Scheer’s Conservatives might benefit.

This is deeply undemocratic. Canadians are grown-ups. They can vote by their own lights, based on their own values, when election day comes. Not that it’s your business, but after all this I still am not close to deciding how I’ll vote this year. Andrew Scheer’s attitudes on climate change and immigration remind me that I like my Liberal MP. But the fact that she’s playing along with Trudeau’s season-long self-pity circus makes me wonder who my local Green candidate will be. But in the meantime, we have a government right now. It is governing right now. It has been governing for years. Serious questions deserve serious answers, even if they embarrass some party leader you dislike less than some other party leader.

And incidentally, “because it’s an election year” is precisely the argument Jody Wilson-Raybould says she heard, again and again, from assorted PMO emissaries while they were trying to make her forget she was the attorney general of Canada. So maybe part of the Liberals’ problem is that they keep acting out her accusations, like dinner theatre.

Finally, all three of these scandalettes have laid bare a stubbornly ramshackle approach to running what has sometimes been a serious country. When flying to India, sure, pack your embroidered sherwani and your convicted attempted murderer, but also maybe bring along a travel plan, a sales pitch and a list of objectives worth achieving. Especially if your ineptitude is about to guarantee you will never get a second chance to visit India.

On SNC, what emerges from all the testimony is the impression that a dozen kids from the McGill debating team snuck into the abandoned ruins of Ottawa and started pretending to be the government of Canada. Jody complained to Bill that Elder and Ben were being mean to Jessica. Justin sent Michael but somehow Michael didn’t have the Section 13 ruling Jody had sent to Mathieu. Then it was Christmas and they all went home for a month.

Where the hell were the 208,000 public servants whose job was to ensure options were explored and workflows respected? Why, in September, when Wernick says everyone was distracted by NAFTA, did nobody at the weekly deputy ministers’ meeting say, “Well, there’s only room for 10 people at the NAFTA table, so why don’t the rest of us strike a working group of officials from Justice, Finance, Innovation and the Privy Council to ride this SNC puppy until we know what’s what?”

I’m pretty sure the reason this didn’t happen is that Butts found it thrilling to have all the important conversations run through his phone. That’s a bush-league reason to stumble into a government-shaking mess.

You vote how you like this fall. If anything I’ve written sounds like partisan advice, ignore it. But 21st-century Trudeauism as a system of government is badly broken: unserious, sneaky, incapable of multitasking, easily distracted. It needs fixing. To some extent the election will be about who can fix it. The Liberals’ advantage is that they have more intimate experience with its pathologies. I’m not sure how you fit that onto a campaign poster.



NorthReport wrote:

FWIW bekayne ask any Pinoy working abroad why they have had to leave the Philippines to find decent work and almost every one of them will tell you it is because of the corruption in their homeland Duterte is cut from a different cloth, is not corrupt, and will be re-elected with a massive majority. I am not condoning the Justice system or lack thereof in the Philippines in relation to drugs but do you really believe Canada should be bragging about our Justice System after what we have just been exposed to with our prime minister and the SNC scandal? 

And if we got rid of Trudeau and replaced him with someone like Mussolini, Via Trains would regain all their old routes and run on time! Canada has become such a laughing stock under Prime Minister Fancy Socks and the world knows it!


She's right now.

Canadians know enough about SNC-Lavalin affair to judge what happened: Philpott



Wilson-Raybould, Philpott 'disappointed' by ouster from Liberal caucus, PM on defensive



Maybe as Dr Philpott says, we have already heard enough.

Senate could launch special committee to investigate issues in SNC-Lavalin scandal

His proposal came two days after Prime Minister Justin Trudeau kicked Wilson-Raybould and another former minister, Jane Philpott, out of his Liberal caucus



Tristin Hopper the author of this article needs to take a chill pill.

Could the Tories woo Jane Philpott and Jody Wilson-Raybould into crossing the floor?

Some Conservative voters may want them, but the Tories – and the women themselves – don’t seem to like the idea at all



What is this thread about?


I miss Cartman He used to post on EnMasse Has anyone heard from him?

voice of the damned

I'm not a diehard hater of the National Post, in fact, I quite enjoy a couple of their columnists, including at least one being quoted on this thread. But I would take their dire assesment of SNC-Lavalin's impact on Trudeau with a measure of caution, given their pre-existing animosity to the Liberals.


bekayne wrote:

What is this thread about?

1. About the Old Testament, I believe.

2. Either that, or it's about all the articles NorthReport thinks we should be reading.

Since we have several threads of type #2, I'm proposing we reserve this thread for type #1 discussion. I'll lead off:


bekayne wrote:

What is this thread about?

That's what I was wondering.

The SNC-Lavalin scandal is going to be important right up until election day, I'd argue important enough to have its own threads (oh, it has like four).

As for the actual article, I have to say I don't really see much evidence that Jagmeet "let's means test OAS" Singh has embraced any kind of critique of neoliberalism, though I wish he would. 

Pogo Pogo's picture

I think past it's own thread to "why doesn't SNC have its own topic category'?  Are you with me?  

Ken Burch

This thread needs to be renamed, given that it started in something posted by a now-banned poster who was notorious for posting his personal blog entries and then never engaging the comments those entries received.  He was banned for a post which was apologism for the anti-Semitic, anti-refugee prime minister of Hungary.