Yes, another fiasco is brewing and we have minister of state for the status of women Helena Guergis to thank for it. Her immature and despicable temper tantrum at a PEI airport would have landed most people in Jail, but not only was she rushed through security her plane was delayed to ensure she made her flight.

Opposition critics have described Guergis as petulant; calls for her dismissal are coming from both sides of the house; and it doesn’t help her public image that her husband is also the centre of another whirlwind of bad press. Rahim Jaffer had his day in court recently and received what can only be described as one honey of a sweet deal.Even if we do not take into account the fact Jaffer was found in possession of a controlled substance he was operating a motor vehicle at unsafe speeds while under the influence of alcohol.

If you consult Ontario’s demerit point system careless driving nets you 6 points; exceeding the speed limit by 30 to 49 km/h earns you another four; and those are just the traffic offences. Driving under the influence is a criminal offence in Ontario and rightly so. Driving drunk is not careless driving, it’s reckless and irresponsible driving and should be punished to the full extent of the law. If it had been me or you behind the wheel of that car with the same blood alcohol levels it’s unlikely we would have recieved the same lenient treatment.

There seems to be a theme developing here; a pattern perhaps? Stephen Maher of The Chronicle Hearld certainly noticed. Gloria Galloway, with the Globe and Mail, The National Post’s Tasha Kheiriddin and others are focusing mainly on Guergis, but there is a bigger picture here. As Maher puts it Guergis and Jaffer have done Canadians a service by “Drawing attention to the limits of the Conservatives crime agenda.”

There appears to be a complete lack of common sense on Guergis and Jaffers part, or maybe it’s just me. If, hypothetically, I had thrown a tantrum in an airport complete with kicking, cursing, throwing boots and pounding of security glass what would the result have been? Well, after a hypothetical tazering and arrest it would be safe to say I wouldn’t be getting through security, let alone on my plane. Furthermore, I’m pretty sure my hypothetical next move wouldn’t be to sue the airline for talking about an act that I had plainly committed.

Common sense.  act like a mature human being minister Guergis; be the type of strong woman you are so fond of promoting; and for Pete’s sake don’t act like an ignorant child in public that’s what question period is for.

When it comes to cars this green-washing effect is clearly evident. One needs only look at the hype and the cost surrounding so-called environmentally friendly vehicles. More and more manufacturers are offering hybrid versions of traditional models in addition to their popular hybrid vehicles. Should the eco-minded consumer choose to buy a hybrid version of a Honda civic (base model cost $16190) they can expect to pay a premium for the hybrid option, which starts at a whopping $27350.

Being a green motorist is far from cheap and when one examines the materials and manufacturing processes the benefits seem even more costly. Although lead acid and nickel cadmium batteries have given way to more efficient and cleaner alternatives batteries are not the greenest things on the planet.

Hybrid owners do not deserve to be so smarmy and uppity about saving the earth by driving a vehicle the car companies tell them is green. Manufacture and transport of the batteries and other components means that hybrids have creates equal amounts, or more pollution than a gas-guzzler would before they even leave the factory floor. The electricity that charges your batteries is generated by a gasoline engine, or in the case of plug in hybrids by coal-fired power plants that feed the grid.

Technology in the 21^st century seems slow to catch up with the environmental quagmire the human race is mired in. Hydrogen fuel cell technology has been the poster child of the up and coming green technologies for some time. The electric car may have been killed, but if recent news is any indication a hydrogen-powered zombie may just be lurking around the corner.

A prototype of Honda’s next generation of smaller and more efficient solar powered hydrogen stations came online at their Los Angeles research and development centre January 27, 2010.

The new units are designed to fit within the confines of the average garage while still providing enough hydrogen to power a fuel cell electric vehicle for just over 16000 km a year. Probably not enough to take frequent long trips, but this system sounds promising for city dwellers. Honda eliminated the need for a bulky and expensive compressor and made many of the systems components much smaller. The systems solar cells are made by a subsidiary of Honda, using manufacturing techniques that produce less CO2 than conventional methods.

Honda’s Hydrogen fuel cell vehicle, the FCX Clarity depends on a network of larger solar powered filling stations. Drivers can choose a fast fill option for short trips or a longer five-minute fill for longer ones. Right now these stations are few and far between, which leads one to wonder if the technology is readily available and the market is there what’s the hold-up? Auto manufactures and oil companies have certainly been dragging their feet on these transitions, and although the prospect of a home fueling station is appealing this author is suspicious. A proprietary system built, sold and maintained entirely by Honda locks the consumer into a position that could easily be exploited.

These home units are slow too; they can only partially refuel the FCX overnight during an eight-hour fueling period. But, when not producing hydrogen the systems solar panels produce electricity that can be fed back into the grid and offset some of the cost of operation.

Although Macleans oversimplifies the Shalom Life interview with Minister of state for foreign affairs of the Americas, Peter Kent the controversial bits remain. Kent said “Prime Minister Harper has made it quite clear for some time now and has regularly stated that an attack on Israel would be considered an attack on Canada,” and surprisingly not many people heard it.

Kent, predictably, spouted the typical rhetoric of tighter sanctions intended to dissuade Iran from building nukes. A toothless follow-up to the tired threat of sanctions was Kent’s tiptoeing around the matter of military intervention. He did not rule out the possibility, but referred to military action as “The last possible option, but that remains in the broad range of options and unfortunate possibilities.”

Obviously, when our politicians go around speaking unilaterally about such thorny topics as Israel we, as Canadians, should take note. Our government is supposed to look out for our interests, our safety and that of our military. Committing our forces to some future engagement with the Iranians is sheer lunacy of the highest caliber.

It’s been a long time since Canadian boots hit the ground in Afghanistan, our troops have spilled the blood of a devious and determined enemy and that enemy has spilled the blood of our soldiers all too often. The logistics and sacrifice involved in the Afghanistan mission have been difficult and painful.  The fact of the matter is though, the current conflict with which we are faced is but a mere shadow of what the Islamic republic of Iran could throw at any invading force.

The Iranians are often credited with inventing suicide bombing. One of their national heroes is the famous martyr Mohammed Hossein Fahmideh, a 13-year-old boy who crawled under an Iraqi tank with a live grenade. Their military is formidable and well equipped.  They would easily muster more resistance than the foes Canadians have faced so far in Afghanistan. To even consider going up against Iran, even with a coalition is an ill-advised and potentially disastrous endeavour.

Granted, there is little certainty in anything that Kent, or any of our great leaders other cronies, have said about Iran; but that is beside the point. It is entirely plausible that the majority of Canadians may feel strongly about the plight of the Israelis. But, to interpret this concern as citizens sharing the opinion of our fearless leader and his whole “Attack on Israel would be considered an attack on Canada,” shtick is just delusional.

The next time our government feels the need to throw our lot in with another country they should endeavour to find one with a better human rights record or at the very least one that no longer uses white phosphorous on non-combatants.

Figures from a study done by professors at the University College London tell an interesting tale. People who are very bored stand a 37 per cent higher chance of dying compared to those that are not bored.

The results of the study also state that the people most likely to be very bored are young , out of shape females with dull menial jobs. But if you happen to be a male aged 50 to 55 who’s in shape, has a high ranking job and is physically active your risk of boredom decreases.

The bored are not doomed to die though, provided they start finding interest in boredom fighting activities and maintain that interest. The bored may not be able to do anything about their dull boring jobs, but they certainly can try to inject excitement into their lives with social and physical activity.

Knowing that lazing about and feeling down in the dumps will send you to an early grave will no doubt interest quite a few people; including this author. Honestly, who hasn’t been bored at one point or another? Readers may be alleviating boredom by reading the original article, or alternatively becoming hatefully bored by reading this blog; either way boredom is a fact of modern life.

With obesity on the rise and diabetes stalking all us fat bodies like the plague it’s always reassuring that there is yet another thing that is out to kill us all. But, being bored to death? Really? Live a dull life, work a dull job, and die an equally dull death. That’s just… well sad and a bit boring.

It stands to reason that if you don’t maintain a healthy active lifestyle and don’t have much to live for in terms of career advancement or social stimulation you’ll, quite obviously, not have much to live for. Maybe the bored among us that are 37 per cent more likely to die are just plain bored with life.

But, how can boredom exist in a world with 24-hour cable news, an information superhighway offering limitless information at our fingertips and unimaginable technological advances in entertainment? Maybe these things are doing more to cause boredom than to alleviate it. If we spend most of our time plugged into a network that provides entertainment, information and just about anything else we can imagine how will we view the time spend unplugged.

Information overload and media overstimulation may be part of the problem here, perhaps even a root cause. We think we are alleviating boredom by watching a movie on an HD TV, but we are also sitting idle both physically and mentally for the entire runtime. The hours spent surfing the Internet or watching television also leave us inactive for hours. Social interaction and physical activity seem boring by comparison when we can replace them with Facebook and Wii fit.

Maybe bored to death is a misnomer; we are doing this to ourselves after all. The more accurate description would be suicide by boredom.

The recall woes Toyota has been experiencing have been portrayed as mechanical in nature. But, there are underlying software issues that may prove to be a lurking danger. In 2002 Toyota and Lexus began equipping its vehicles with electronic throttle control, which replaced mechanical components like throttle cables and linkages with computers and servomotors. This drive-by-wire system was intended to provide drivers with smoother acceleration, better gas mileage and a safer all around driving experience.

The old mechanical technology was not perfect by any means. Engineer and electrical engineering consultant, Antony Anderson explains that mechanical throttles could jam, but “An uncommanded wide open throttle was almost an impossibility.” Increasingly, technology has been replacing the traditional mechanical components found in cars. The result is a modern vehicle that has nearly every aspect of its operation controlled by computers and other electronic systems.  “What happens today is that the driver is made the fail safe for the electronics,” says Anderson.

The recent spate of recalls and accidents are not the first time that accelerator issues have surfaced with Toyotas. In 2005 a man was backing out of his driveway in a 2002 Toyota Camry when it suddenly accelerated into a utility box; he maintains he never touched the accelerator. In fact, the large-scale implementation of drive-by-wire coincided with a jump in reports of cars accelerating on their own.  Toyota has publicly said that its investigation has found no evidence of an electronic cause for the acceleration, but will continue to look for any glitches.

The rub lies in how computer-controlled cars deal with these glitches, faults and other problems. What happens if your computer has an electric brain fart; starts to think that it’s Michael Shumaker; and tells the engine that it would be a good idea to go to wide open throttle? You’d think that some part the system would detect the problem and fix it or at least make a note of it, but you’d be wrong. As soon as a vehicle is turned off, or disabled in a crash the record of that error is erased from the computers memory; if it was recorded in the first place.

Many of these incidents can also be explained by inexperienced drivers dealing with throttle hesitation. If the drive-by-wire throttle hesitates, i.e. you press the pedal and nothing happens, some drivers may depress the pedal further. Eventually, when the computer catches up to all this the vehicle could experience a burst of acceleration because you’ve stepped on the gas. Cars have become much more than just a collection of cogs, gears and wheels.  The sophistication of the modern car has distanced the driver from the machine. Many people do not understand how their cars work, or only understand parts of its operation. It’s vitally important that people understand that the feeling of control they have behind the wheel is an illusion. Power steering, anti-lock brakes and drive by wire throttle all replace simple mechanical systems with more complex and expensive alternatives; alternatives that are not infallible.

Today’s driver is reduced to little more than a button-pushing monkey, the car and its computer brain dispensing treats when the right button is pushed. This ads further distance between car and driver by giving the computer final say on the majority of the decisions. It’s entirely plausible that self-driving cars could be on the road within our lifetime; advanced radar cruise control; cars that park themselves; and other innovations may make the driver an endangered species. This also means the days of the backyard mechanic are numbered.

Modern cars require specialized tools and computers for maintenance, so you won’t get far with a floor jack and a torque wrench. This is the high price we pay for the modern conveniences crammed under our hoods. Simple vehicle maintenance that could be done in an afternoon has become rocket science. Case in point, someone could change the spark plugs in a 1986 Oldsmobile with minimal experience and limited tools, but performing the same task on a 1996 Oldsmobile would require a vehicle hoist and a trained technician.

All of this new technology and not just the bits intended to make driving safer need to be more closely scrutinized and regulated. There has to be a concerted effort to prevent incidents like the recent problems at Toyota. Unfortunately, no system is infallible. Accidents happen; that’s why they’re called accidents. But, consumers need to demand more accountability from manufactures, especially when products are causing injury and death. Having the president of the company say that he’s sorry just doesn’t cut it.

The biggest question in this whole mess is why there has not been more recalls from other manufactures that supposedly use the same faulty accelerator components. Have people forgotten that this accelerator problem was originally blamed on a floor mat? The chance that a brand wide problem can have two causes could be plausible, but it becomes increasingly improbable when new causes begin to crop up for the same problem.

Other car manufactures and the media are getting far too caught up in Toyota-bashing or Japan-bashing when we need to concentrate on industry wide manufacturing standards and corporate accountability. Consumers deserve to be able to buy products without fear of catastrophic failure plain and simple, why is that so hard for manufacturers and corporations to comprehend?

Patrons at nine different pubs in England became the first TV viewers to witness a live 3D sports broadcast. An English Premier League soccer game was televised by Sky channel using regular satellite equipment and receivers. The technology allows people to “View things in a way they could only do if they came to the stadium themselves,” said Sky Sports director Darren Long. The technology was well received by pub goers; a 71-year-old fan described the broadcast as “Fantastic, but the wide angle is not quite so impressive.”

In recent years 3D Televisions have been showing up at consumer electronic shows to mixed reviews. Although the technology seems promising a lot of people do not like the prospect of having to buy a 3D enabled television after shelling out hundreds of dollar to upgrade to an HD TV. Those that remember the ludicrous prices of the first HD, plasma and flat panel televisions shouldn’t be surprised at the hefty price tag of a new 3D set(many manufactures have not decided prices but some have released figures in the nine to 12 thousand dollar rang).

There may not be any flying cars and robot maids yet, but 3D television sounds better than a kick in the head from some luddite. Some dissenters point out that this new 3D technology can cause headaches and other unpleasant side effects in some viewers; it bears noting that some people experience motion sickness and vertigo from simple first person shooter games. Obviously some form of warning should be included with any 3D product, but this is no reason for concern.

Could the cost of setting up your own home 3D system be worth it, or is it simply another expensive gimmick? The 3D experience in theatres and 3D TV is comparable to a moving stereopticon; it’s a case of very old technology gone very high tech. The rub here is existing sets cannot be upgraded or up-converted to display 3D and cheap, durable glasses are non-existent. Although 3D TV is stereoscopic it’s more complex than theaters, expensive sets require special LCD micro shutter glasses that can cost hundreds of dollars and no, those glasses from the theatre won’t work.

The price of admission for 3D home theatre will be prohibitive for most viewers. To experience the full potential of HD 3D you need to purchase a new television, which may or may not come with glasses that could potentially cost hundreds of dollars more and the extra cost doesn’t end there. Only the Sony Playstation 3 will be able to play 3D content, meaning if you don’t own a PS3 be ready to buy a 3D capable Blu-ray player. The next generation of High Definition Multimedia Interface, or HDMI, cables is reportedly the only cables capable of delivering full HD 3D, yet another expense to factor in. The logistics of dealing with expensive, delicate, and battery-powered glasses raises some real concerns. The frustration of having to recharge the glasses in the middle of a film of show is one thing, but what do you do when they break?

If this technology was afordable and did not reek of engineered obsolescence it would be far more exciting. As it stands, 3D television seems like a genuinely interesting and undeniably shiny bit of technology, but it’s still gimmicky.

Afghan president Hamid Karzai has been championing this plan since its inception in 2005 and after Thursday’s conference he now has the funds to fully implement it. The graveyard of empires stands poised to hold a rather expensive funeral for the latest occupying power to have a kick at the can.

The loss of Afghan and foreign lives were but a mere deposit on buying “victory” from an enemy that hasn’t known defeat. Alexander the Great, Genghis Khan, the invincible British Empire and the formidable Soviet Union have failed to accomplish with blood and brawn that which is now to be achieved with jobs, housing and cash.

“We expect a lot of the foot soldiers on the battlefield will be leaving the Taliban because many of them have wanted to leave, many of them are tired of fighting,” says Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

If she is to be believed, the enemy that has mercilessly continued to send our young men and women back home in body bags since 2001 is low on morale and secretly wants to quit. If this were true why is Canada’s top soldier in Afghanistan, Brigadier-General Daniel Ménard saying we should expect heavy losses in an upcoming offensive and why the surge of American troops?

Casual members of the Taliban, bandits, mercenaries and those looking to make more than what the Taliban pays are the people the “Peace and Reintegration Trust Fund” is aiming to bring back into Afghan society. What happens when they get a better offer? What happens when their bribe money dries up? More importantly, how are these “reformed” insurgents to be monitored to ensure we get our moneys worth?

This plan has met with strong criticism in the past and other attempts to win over the Taliban with money have not faired well. The British attempt to sweeten the pot of peace with cash struck many westerners as distasteful and is no doubt viewed as an insult in the eyes ofthe Taliban. The 2007 effort by the British cost £1.5 million and was reported to have reintegrated 4000 Taliban, but these were not senior hardliners.

This program came after the British killed two senior Taliban council members and imprisoned a third; the thinking was that the Taliban would be disheartened by the loss. There was even a name for it, the “Dadullah effect” named after one of the dead Taliban elders. The reasoning here seems to be to threaten the Taliban with imminent death until they are ready to make a deal.

Even our own Defence minister, Peter MacKay, has expressed his distaste for such undertakings. Canadians do employ Afghans and even pay them for turning in weapons, but Canadians paying off insurgents to behave like good little girls and boys is “Taliban propaganda” according to MacKay.

The Western world went to war in Afghanistan largely because of September 11 and the big objective was Usama Bin Laden’s head. Nine years in and he’s still at large, but the Taliban have been “removed” from power by bombing Afghanistan back to the Stone Age and occupying the country.

If anyone is tired of the fighting it’s the westerners, tired of a conflict longer than World War II and tired of watching politicians spend trillions on sending our soldiers to die. With the amount of soldiers killed, wounded and maimed in the Afghanistan war it seems insulting to say “Thanks for the sacrifice, but we’ve bought the insurgents and now they are our friends.”

Who can say if one of these reformed insurgents built an IED that took a Canadian life, perhaps they were a sniper that ended the life of a young British soldier or tossed a grenade that killed an American Medic. What is to say an Afghan who is down on his luck can’t show up with an AK-47 claiming to be a Taliban fighter just to collect the money? How can you trust someone you are bribing if all you are doing is fighting corruption with corruption? Western cultures view corruption and bribery as unsavory and even criminal, but in Islam bribery is a sin.

“May the curse of Allah be upon the one who pays a bribe and the one who takes it,” these are the words of The Prophet Muhammad.

The articles author, Scott A. Ross, maintains that Canadians are on the hook for a total of $130,407,733 just because Prime Minister Harper prorogued parliament. Besides the cost of running parliament, which Ross pegs at $3 million a day, he claims Bills before the house before prorogation will cost us too. The 5 “viable” crime bills that would have been passed into law, had parliament continued to operate, are alleged to have cost us $64.5 million.

Scott A Ross, identified as a liberal blogger in this opinion piece, does not seem like a credible source of information. This man is incredibly biased and it seems odd to see why he ended up being published in a national paper. The whole thing smacks of propaganda, not political commentary and objectivity is non-existent. A sampling of his other blog posts turns up titles like Harper, the coward, NDP calls our troops terrorists, and (Elizabeth) May – “Canadians Are Stupid” . Obviously this man’s biases’ are clear as day.

To his credit he does not hide it in his blog posts, but without the benefit of viewing them someone reading this piece in the newspaper may get the wrong idea. He does not pull his punches with the liberal party on his blog but it is quite obvious that he reserves his venom and bile for the other parties.

Ross voices a rather indignant opinion of the recent prorogation of parliament. The article is pure speculation and offers no sources or proof to back up any of its claims and as such asks the reader to take a lot on faith. It is hard to argue against saying the prorogation is a bad thing and harder still to argue that it isn’t costing us, but there is much more to consider.

The figures used seem to be pulled out of thin air and can only serve to further confuse Canadians being bombarded with information on the prorogation. Had credible sources or references been used this article could have provided important information to Canadians, but it only serves to confuse and misinform

The recent prorogation of parliament has been a sore spot for many Canadians and this author is among them. It is hard enough to form an objective and balanced opinion on such a controversial and upsetting issue without having to contend with partisan propagandists like Ross. The freedom to speak ones mind has given us great things, but it also has allowed some unpopular opinions to be voiced publicly. Bloggers offer us commentary, satire, criticism and entertainment and if they don’t offer credentials or some other proof of legitimacy they are nothing more than citizen journalists; if that.

Quality should always be put ahead of quantity when it comes to writing and when it is not the finished product is put into question. My view of the prorogation is unchanged, but the opinion piece written by Ross has put my opinion of the partisan wankery that has been going on further into the dumps. All the political chest beating and pseudo-partisan rallies that have been going on make for good press, but in the end what good will it come to.

It turns out that Quebec’s Health minister, Yves Bolduc has received a request from a group of orthopedic specialists. The specialists claim they are loosing money at home while they work abroad and think they should be compensated. The magic number is $704 a day, this is a “base fee” that they make in Quebec and so far only the orthopedic doctors have requested this kind of reimbursement.

The request is being considered by the Quebec government who are mindful of the implication of agreeing to the doctor’s demands. “There are many consequences to the decision, because you have many people who work in Haiti and they are volunteers and they are not paid,” says minister Bolduc. If the government does not agree to pay, the doctors will remain in Haiti, but not as long as they would have if they’d been compensated.

Dr. Gaétan Barrette, head of the federation of medical specialists in Quebec, contends that the request is fitting for the situation. Dr. Barrette compares the services the doctors provide to the work done by firefighters and police who, coincidentally, get paid for their services.

With the disaster in Haiti starting to fade in the collective consciousness of the media, and as a result society at large, stories like this really need to be in the forefront. As noble as it is to volunteer or to donate there are always people with ulterior motives to their philanthropy, this may be one of those cases. It may be the first of many reports of such requests and that is something to look out for.

Medical professionals are often revered in our society, they go to special schools, they have special titles, and they have the power over life and death. Power and prestige are tricky things because they can make a person great or they can make them monsters. This recent request for compensation seems to be a case of doctors taking advantage of their stature.

The Canadian Oxford Dictionary defines volunteer in a variety ways, but the two closest to fitting the bill here are:

1. A person who voluntarily takes part in an enterprise or offers to undertake a task.

3. A person who works for an organization voluntarily and without pay

So the question is which definition did the doctors have in mind when they volunteered their services? Is the sentiment of the doctor’s action tainted if they were voluntarily taking part in the aid effort with no intention of forgoing some form of pay? So many ethical and moral questions are raised by this story and answering them is made more difficult by the scope of the Haitian disaster.

On the one hand, these doctors are uprooting themselves from their lives and going into harms way, presumably, to help those in need. The cynical view is that they are taking a disaster vacation and will return to their practices with some great photos of smiling Haitian children and a large feather in their caps.

There must be a middle ground to this situation, some way to make compensating volunteers seem less petty, a tax break or something less vulgar than cash money. Perhaps these doctors deserve $704 a day for their work. They make nearly $5000 a week on these fees alone in Canada and it may be too much to ask them to forgo that income. They provide an essential service that is desperately needed in Haiti and that is hard to put a price on.