Magic Statistics

Franska, a very controversial brown bear removed from Slovenia to the south of France last year, has died in a car crash in the Pyrenees.  She was struck by two cars on a road near Lourdes.  Local sheep farmers are celebrating, but environmentalists are grief-stricken and want her replaced ASAP.

One of five bears brought in from Slovenia in an attempt to maintain the species in the Pyrenees, Franska caused an uproar as soon as she arrived at her new home.

Farmers said that Franska killed at least 150 sheep, but pro-bear campaigners denied that she was a menace and blamed the farmers for incompetence.

President Sarkozy's Environment Ministry was embarrassed last month when it emerged that Franska was not a fertile seven-year-old, but an elderly 17 and probably beyond cub-bearing age. Her alleged ferocity was put down to her age. The Government nevertheless refused demands from farmers for her to be captured.

Jacques Chirac, Mr Sarkozy's predecessor, ordered the latest phase of reintroduction in 2004 after a hunter shot dead Cannelle, the last native she-bear. President Chirac described the shooting as an ecological disaster. Public opinion has strongly supported the campaign and, thanks to radio-tracking collars and the opposition of farmers, the media have followed the progress of the new bears.

Franska was described as “psychotic” because of her uninhibited sheep-killing spree.

The ecology minister was forced to admit France had been misled about Franska, a Slovenian brown bear set loose in the Pyrenees last summer. Instead of being a youngster of six, she was, in fact, a grouchy 17-year-old. This could explain her “unusual behaviour”, said experts, referring to her serial slaughter of sheep for fun rather than food.

Apparently, those “experts” were bear psychiatrists.

The revelation that Franska was actually 17 years of age led to accusations that Slovenia had deceived France.  Slovenia retorted that French bear psychiatrists “experts” were present when Franska was captured.

All that is now moot.  The bear that almost sparked an international incident is dead.  May she—and the sheep—rest in peace.

The drivers of the cars that did her in were not hurt, although the vehicles are probably write-offs.

Zimbabwe’s arbitrarily enforced price controls have caused shortages of such essential commodities as food, fuel, water, and electricity but, for many Zimbabweans, this could be the last straw.  Pubs ran out of beer earlier this week.

After a busy day trying to survive Zimbabwe's economic crisis, Jeffrey Ndoro likes to relax after work with a beer.

Even with inflation spiralling out of control, beer had been comparatively cheap before a price crackdown by President Robert Mugabe's government caused supplies to dry up.

"Of all the things, you can't find beer - this is too much," said Ndoro, sipping a soda at his drinking spot, the Chelsea Pub.

Robert Mugabe realised that a beer shortage could be a tipping point, so he quickly relaxed price controls on suds.  The following day, beer arrived in stores and pubs.  Funny how that works.

Beer deliveries resumed Friday after the government backed down on a price freeze on local lager brands and allowed producers to raise prices of some other goods.

Stores and bars were calculating a new retail price for beer as the government conceded it was being sold at a loss six weeks after an official edict that ordered price cuts of around 50 percent on all goods and services in a measure to tame rampant official inflation of 4,500 per cent, the highest in the world.

The controlled price of beer was Z$33,000—about C$2.35—per bottle. Prices on other essential food products, including bread, cornmeal, and beef, were allowed to increase as well.

The price control scheme is putting the squeeze on government corporate-tax revenues.  The private sector, from large manufacturing enterprises to corner retail stores, has lost untold sums of money.  Most are now reporting losses; many have shut down completely.  Yet, strangely, business leaders are still unwilling to criticise Mugabe and his mad policies.

Manufacturers are downscaling operations now, with some closing shop because of the lack of demand. The decline in manufacturing is expected to strike a blow to exports, which will affect the amount of foreign exchange flowing into the country.

Foreign exchange shortages will, in turn, restrict imports of fuel, electricity and medical supplies.

Nonetheless, business is tiptoeing around Mugabe, using flattery to win his ear at a crucial meeting last week.

According to a confidential business briefing handed to Mugabe, and minutes taken by one of the 12-member business team that attended the meeting, business leaders plied Mugabe with accolades, saying his “contribution to Zimbabwe was without equal”, that he was a “decisive” leader and that “the country” was responsible for the economic crisis by failing to meet his goals of “creating a prosperous society for all”.

What nonsense!  Members of Mugabe’s cabinet have shown more backbone than those sycophants.

The graphic at the top comes from Zambezi beer’s website.  More African beer here.

Previous related posts:

• Mugabe’s local store ignores price controls with impunity
• Mass arrests, internal dissension over Zimbabwe’s price rollback

So argues one of Canada’s foremost legal and moral philosophers, Margaret Somerville of McGill University.  Proponents of same-sex marriage have made a case that marriage is a social construct based not on biology but on the preferences of adult partners.  Now that Canada has given legal sanction to same-sex marriage, what is to stop other groups of willing adults from claiming that their relationships should also be confirmed as marriages?  If marriage is merely a social construct, what is sacred about a “two-people-only” rule?

Same-sex marriage, polygamous marriage and opposite-sex monogamous marriage are three different family structures. Family structure has a major impact on children. Gay marriage supporters argue that "genderless parenting" is just as good for children as opposite-sex parenting. With gay marriage, we are experimenting to see if that's correct. Should we try a parallel experiment with polygamy and study its impact on children as compared with both gay marriage and opposite-sex monogamous marriage?
. . .
Same-sex marriage opens up the possibility of polygamy because it detaches marriage from the biological reality of the basic procreative relationship between one man and one woman and that means there is no longer any inherent reason to limit it to two people whether of the same or opposite sex. Once that biological reality is removed as the central, essential feature and "limiting device," marriage can become whatever we choose to define it as.

Gay marriage advocates successfully argued that the primary function of marriage is to publicly recognize two adults' mutual love and commitment. But why shouldn't three or more adults, just as much as two, have their love and commitment publicly recognized and whether they are in same-sex relationships or opposite sex ones?

The Ontario Court of Appeal ruled earlier this year that a child can have three legal parents on the grounds that the three adults involved choose that arrangement, the child’s best interest notwithstanding.   Can legalised polygamy be far behind?

Nicholas Bala, law professor at Queen's University, agrees that polygamy has become a serious legal conundrum at this time because of the legalisation of same-sex marriage.

"It's not a coincidence that we're seeing the issue of polygamy arising now, given the fact that we have changed the traditional definition of marriage on constitutional grounds. It's reasonable to ask should we continue to change it … I understand the logic behind it, but I don't think it's very persuasive."

Other academics quoted in the same report disagree with Prof Bala on whether Canada’s polygamy statute will pass judicial muster.  This turmoil and uncertainty is, I think, mostly, if not almost entirely, attributable to the legalisation of same-sex marriage.

Margaret Somerville holds multiple academic posts at McGill: Professor, Faculty of Medicine; Founding Director, McGill Centre for Medicine, Ethics and Law; and Samuel Gale Professor of Law.

h/t for National Post: Religion News Blog

Previous related posts:

• Ontario court: Child can have three legal parents
• Poll shows overwhelming support for enforcing Canada’s polygamy law
• International human rights law obligates Canada to eliminate polygamy
• Binks rants

Israeli scientists are developing another inexpensive alternative to conventional energy.

Researchers at Israel’s National Center for Solar Energy near Sde Boker, in the Negev Desert, have discovered how to make solar energy commercially competitive with hydrocarbon and other conventional sources of energy.

A few months ago, the center's scientists managed to develop a new technology of solar, or photovoltaic cells, that [physicist Prof. David] Feiman [the center’s director] says will make the production of solar energy so efficient that the cost of the photovoltaic cells that convert solar energy into electricity will be negligible.
. . .
According to Feiman, "an ordinary photovoltaic cell, which is 10 by 10 centimeters, normally produces one watt of electricity. We managed to extract more than a thousand times more - 1,500 watts. In this way, the cost of a cell is 1,500 less, becoming almost nothing."

A new Israeli company, Zenith Solar, is now collaborating with the center to develop solar cells for home use.  It is anticipated that a system could be ready in about a year.

h/t: Greenie Watch

Previous related posts:

• UN official praises Israel
• Israel to begin producing energy from oil shale

The Times of London risks its reputation as a sober, responsible, and reasonably reliable news source with this hysterical misguided report on Canada’s efforts to retain control over its own territory.

Arctic military bases signal new Cold War

Canada fired a warning shot in a new Cold War over the vast resources of the far North by announcing last night that it will build two new military bases in the Arctic wilderness.

A week after Russia laid claim to the North Pole in what is rapidly becoming a global scramble for the region’s vast oil and gas reserves, Stephen Harper, the Canadian Prime Minister, said that Canada would open a new army training centre for cold-weather fighting at Resolute Bay, and a deep-water port at Nanisivik, on the northern tip of Baffin Island. The country is also beefing up its military presence in the far North with 900 Rangers.

“Canada’s Government understands that the first principle of Arctic sovereignty is use it or lose it,” Mr Harper said.

Mr Harper has it exactly right: If Canada does not beef up its military presence in the far northern territories, we risk loss of sovereignty over those lands.  If we do not maintain manned armed forces bases around the Arctic, we will not be able to control who enters our northern waters.  In an age of international terrorism, that would be insane.

In any case, Canada is asserting its Arctic sovereignty against the United States at least as much as against Russia.  The US does not recognise Canadian sovereignty over the Northwest Passage, so, to support its claim, Canada needs active military presence at the passage’s eastern entrance, adjacent to the proposed Nanisivik base.  (See map at bottom of this post.)  But that doesn’t suit The Times’s “Cold War” scenario too well.

What’s more, the whole world knows that Canada’s military has been allowed to deteriorate badly for decades.  Canada finally and belatedly begins an effort to re-build armed forces presence within our own boundaries, and The Times calls it the start of a new Cold War.  Rave on.

Previous related posts:

• US to challenge Canadian sovereignty in the Arctic?
• Navy to visit NW passage for first time in decades
• Defence Minister prefers not to wait for a threat

A billboard in Windsor, Ontario, featuring pictures of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah and four other political opponents of the Lebanon government has outraged Christian and Jewish groups in the city.  The English text on the billboard refers to efforts to establish peace in Lebanon, but Canada views Hezbollah as a terrorist organisation, not one dedicated to peace.

"That organization is banned in Canada," said Harvey Kessler, executive director of the Windsor Jewish Community Centre. "How can that billboard be up in Windsor when it represents a terrorist organization which is banned under the laws of Canada?"
. . .
Kessler said he feels Nasrallah represents "the opposite of peace."
"It should be offensive to all people living in Windsor. It should be offensive not only to the Jewish community, but to any Canadian.

Emile Nabbout, a leader of the Lebanese Christian community in Windsor, points out that the Arabic text on the right does not mention peace at all.

Printed in English on the left side of the billboard are the words: "Lebanese and Arab communities in Windsor city congratulate the Lebanese people for their steadfastness and endeavor to establish peace in Lebanon."

Nabbout said that Arabic writing which appears on the right side of the billboard does not match the English translation. According to Nabbout, the Arabic writing makes a reference to fighting.

"What they mean by 'fight' is basically 'guerrilla' — using arms and weapons," Nabbout said. "Basically, there is a very specific word… That is a definite difference between the Arabic and the English."

The mayor and police chief are investigating whether the billboard conforms to applicable laws.

If you want to let the mayor know your views, contact information is posted at Western Standard Shotgun.

Windsor Muslims are apparently feeling their oats.  Last January, they intimidated a local Christian church, alleging that a lecture by a Lebanese-born convert to Christianity entitled “The Deadly Threat of Islam” constituted hate speech and calling for a police investigation.  The pastor agreed that the title was excessively provocative but stood by the content of the lecture.

Now they have upped the ante with public praise for a banned terrorist organisation.

h/t: Jihad Watch

Previous related post: Muslims want Ontario church investigated for “hate speech”

UPDATE (13 Aug.): That didn't take long: The billboard has been removed.