Strauss-Kahn set up- who is behind it?

It is fairly obvious that somebody has set up the head of the IMF, and the derogatory attacks continue with him reported under suicide watch, which given his personality profile is an exceedingly low risk but which does make him look a lot weaker regardless of the outcome of the criminal matter.

He gets on a plane to go to Germany, where he has a meeting with the chancellor, and realizes that he doesn’t have his cell phone. So he calls a hotel he was allegedly staying at to see if they found it.

Now, if you are planning to skip town to avoid a criminal investigation, do you call back to the crime scene and tell people that you are leaving the country? The act of calling back shows zero consciousness of guilt.

Some have said that if he was in such a rush that he left his cell phone, he must have been in a huge hurry.

But if so, why didn’t they find his luggage there? The cell phone is the first thing you grab when going, not the last.

My guess is they should be looking for a team of more than one person. Depending on how he holds his cell phone it may be an easy target for a pickpocket. One of the easiest things to pick off and plant at an alleged crime scene.

The act that supposedly shows his guilt actually shows his very likely innocence- if you are expecting to be investigated for a serious crime and intending to leave the country to avoid prosecution you just don’t phone back and give your location at an airport.

We have also heard a bunch of BS about how the maid in question was highly reluctant to give evidence, which is highly inconsistent with the nearly instantaneous actions of the authorities. How long did she hesitate with this great reluctance, 5 minutes?

The inconsistencies aren’t just with the stories from the maid, but with how things are characterized in the American media. It isn’t just being reported, it’s being spun.

Whatever is going in looks like it is coming from this side of the Atlantic so I don’t think it is Sarkozy.

The timing, when the guy is going to be heading for one of the most important meetings of his career, is highly suspect. The European Union may be falling apart economically if the IMF is unable to make a deal.

And then, no bail? That is an eyebrow raising decision. Just because there is a theoretical flight risk doesn’t mean you hold him with what sounds like a wildly unlikely story at the outset.

And if he avoids justice everything that he’s worked for would be over. It would be taken as an admission of guilt. It would finish him and if there is anybody that is going to come back for trial it’s him.

Advertisements

Ambiguity on Bin Laden’s death is the point

There is no incentive for the administration to provide conclusive and gory proof of Bin Laden’s capture and execution.

For people that aren’t naturally conspiracy theorists, it is going to be enough that he isn’t putting any more videos on the web. Unless dead he would never stop.

But from a defence standpoint, you probably want to leave some kinds of people confused. It means there won’t be organized retaliation. Let them be in denial- they still won’t get their orders.

If he weren’t dead or captured, the temptation to taunt the US for killing some other guy would be irresistable.

This isn’t a time to gloat in an off-putting way. Everybody that matters knows Bin Laden is out of circulation and leave it at that. Put defence needs first and ego needs second. Proving that Bin Laden is dead beyond a reasonable doubt, for the whole world, is an ego need.

And if it turns into another thing that the right wing nutbars can go on about it probably helps Obama’s re-election strategy. Even the people in trailer parks can figure out Bin Laden isn’t posting video anymore.

Hoping for another Canadian minority or coalition government

We hear a lot of whining from the Conservatives about the possibility of a coalition that doesn’t include them.

That notwithstanding that the Conservative party is itself a coalition of the old Conservative party and the Reform Party.

While Harper has been far from the worst right wing prime minister, that might well change if he gets a majority and there have been some signs that I didn’t like already.

The G20 summit was a high handed boondoggle with the police taking illegal actions to block protesters and even to seize bystanders.

We have seen Mulroney style problems with ballooning deficits, a not-credible plan to remove it, budgets for planes that don’t include the motors for the planes and other dubious things.

It might even do Mr. Harper some good to be in opposition for a while and give him clout to clean up his party. The right wing worldwide turn into pigs going to a trough once they get cocky, all the while bitterly complaining that welfare and health care are destroying the country that they are in fact robbing blind.

The rise of the NDP should be a good thing, the Liberals never stood for anything other than being in power and so were always reactive- swiping popular policies from other parties but otherwise treading water.

The NDP may be having the breakthrough that was necessary to become a national party, in Quebec and the Atlantic provinces. That may change the dynamics of Canadian politics forever, and in a good way. Historically Canada has really been for the most part a one party state with the Liberals holding control most of the time as the other parties were too extreme. and marginalized.

The best way for the NDP to have a first taste of national power is as a minority government. Then things can’t get too crazy.

The Canadian electoral system usually results in a party that is opposed by 60% of the voters having a five year dictatorship to do whatever they want, impeded only by the courts limits on constitutionality.

A minority government forces cooperations such that for a party to stay in power they must have cooperation between parties that represent a mandate of over half the voters.

Once they lose the support of people with that over 50% mandate, there is an immediate election.

If Mr. Harper thinks that is undemocratic, I don’t understand his position.

I’ve also never fully trusted him since he was invited to Bilderberg while in opposition, ever since getting mostly glowing official media support. That should worry people who are concerned about loyalty to Canada much more than Ignatief’s stint at Harvard.