Canadian journalist meets Thai rescuer

A Calgary journalist who was shot and wounded while covering the anti-government protests in Bangkok, has met the Thai man who saved his life. "I don't know what to tell somebody that saved my life. I've never done it before. It's difficult to say. I hope when I'm out of the hospital we can be friends", said Nelson Rand. Rand was working with the France 24 television network, when he was hit by three bullets earlier this month in Bangkok during a showdown between protesters and the army. Earlier this week, a Thai TV station arranged for a reunion between Rand and Oan Thirawat, 25. Thirawat, who was among the Red shirt protestors and a complete stranger to Rand, risked his own life to drag Rand to a motorcycle and then to a hospital. "I wanted to help him after the first time he was shot but the soliders were still shooting" Thirawat said. "I had to duck. I was thinking I had to help him because it's my job". Rand took three bullets to his chest, though he lost a lot of blood doctors say he should recover from his wounds. "I felt happy that I saved one life", Oan said. Rands parents flew to Bangkok to meet their son and said "Without the assistance of Oan, he wouldn't be with us today".


Nelson Rand is a very lucky man. After taking three bullets to the chest, and being stranded in the middle of a riot, the chances of him living at that point were very low. If it weren't for Oan Nelson, Rand would be dead. Nelson would have needed immediate medical attention and most likely would not have received it if it weren't for Oan. Personally I am surprised on how Oan would risk his own life to save someone he didn't even know. Oan would of had to risk his own life, going into the "heart" of the riot to rescue Nelson. Oan should be proud of what he did as most people who were in his position would choose to run away from the riot. He did the opposite and went in to save a person in need. In conclusion, Nelson Rand should feel very lucky to be alive, and should give thanks to Oan Thirawat for saving his life.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/05/28/rand-thailand.html

Pakistan mosque attacks kill 80

AT least 80 people are dead after armed attackers stormed two mosques packed with hundreds of people in eastern Pakistan on Friday. Sajjad Butta, deputy commissioner of Lahore, said at least 78 people were wounded in the assaults which targeted the Ahmadi Islamic sector. At least seven attackers were involved in Friday's assaults on mosques in the Model Town and Garhi Shahu neighbourhoods of Lahore, police said. The assault at Model Town was brief, and involved four attackers spraying worshippers with bullets, and exploding hand grenades, Bhutta said. Several Kilometers away at Garhi Shau, the standoff dragged on for hours, as police traded gunfire with at least three attackers. "They fought the police for some time, but on seeing they were being defeated they exploded themselves" he said. It is not clear whether police have been able to secure the buildings, and officials haven't provided any information about what happened to the people who were held hostage. Members of the Ahmadi Islamic sector are often viewed as heretics by other Muslim groups, and Pakistan's government declared the group a non-Muslim minority in the 1970's.

Personally I am not surprised by these recent attacks. The tension between different religious and ethical beliefs in Pakistan is very high at the moment. The attackers that were responsible for the death of 80 people in the Ahmadi Sector, probably did so because of their belief differences. As the police mentioned, the Almadi sector is a place where the people who live there are viewed as being heretics by other Muslim groups. The issue oif religion is something that the people of Pakistan take much more seriously than we do in Canada. This is why I am not surprised by the attacks on the people of the Ahmadi Sector. I believe that the attackers will not stop as they did not want to just put fear into the Ahmadi people, they wanted to prove a point. I think the only way the attackers are going to stop, is to be caught be the police. Also, even if the attackers were caught there are most likely many more people like them in Pakistan who will carry on the attacks. In conclusion, I believe there really is nothing we can do to stop these types of attacks. There are many types of extremists that will do anything to prove their what they believe in.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/05/28/pakistan-lahore-attack.html

Video of student-principal scuffle released

Security video of a March confrontation between a principal and a student at a Dartmouth N.S., high school was posted on YouTube on Friday. The video appears to show Ken Fells, who at the time was principal of Graham Creigton Junior High, wrestling with 14 year old Josn Boutilier. Fells was removed as principal at the Cherry Brook school last week, but is still an employee of the Halifax Regional School Board. Josh, who now attends a new school, received a concussion, cuts and bruises during the altercation, according to his family. Mike Wagner and Janet Boutilier had asked to see the video involving their son, but the school board declined to show it. They first saw it Friday afternoon on CBC, after viewing it, the couple said it confirmed Josh's account and repeated their call for Fells to be fired. "It just horrifies me" Boutilier said, adding that her son felt as though he was going to die that day. "What people don't understand is the tape is bad enough. It's what happened in the office that's even worse" Wagner said. The video show Fells dragging Josh into an office, but ends there. Josh sustained a concussion while in the office.


I really feel sorry for the family. They were denied everything they asked for. I don't understand why the school board would not show them the video. The family has every right to see the video as their son was attacked by the principal. They should at least be able to see with their own eyes what actually happened. Also, I don't know why the school board has not relieved the principal of his duties. What good is a principal who abuses kids. It's not like the principal was someone special, they should just fire the guy. Another suspicion I have, is how did the boy sustained the concussion once in the office. It's one thing to wrestle someone, but if the principal had punched or hit the boy that is just wrong. The boy must have done something really wrong to get the principal this angry, however it does not give the principal the right to handle it the way he did. In conclusion, I suggest that the school board should fire the principal as soon as possible. It would end the tension and grief and would allow some peace to the family.


http://www.cbc.ca/canada/nova-scotia/story/2010/05/28/ns-fells-altercation-video.html

Harper to cities: stimulus must end

Prime Minister Stephen Harper, told representatives from Canada's cities and towns on Friday that the federal government infrastructure stimulus program will end next spring. In his statement he said the thousands of infrastructure projects were an important part of Canada'a economic recovery, but warned mayors and other municipal representatives that they can't expects to live on stimulus funds forever. "People can't live on adrenalin, and economies can't live on stimulus" Harper said. The $43 billion infrastructure program must end March 32,2011, to let the government being reducing the deficit and lead the recovery from last year's global financial crisis the prime minister said. He insisted Canada "will lead the way" in the coming G8 and G20 summits to push for countries to get their fiscal houses in order. "Canada was the last major developed country dragged into the recession and we will be the least affected by it and will emerge from it fastest and in the strongest position of them all" Harper said. Mayors from Canada's largest cities argued at this week's meeting that it shouldn't take a global financial crisis for municipalities to get the fiscal help they so desperately need. Also, Liberal leader Michael Ignatieff criticized the prime minister and how the current government views its relationship with municipalities. "The prime minister came here this morning and he said we're turning off the taps. The stimulus is ending, and my vision of this is we're in this for a long haul because we've got a country to build together". Ignatieff said.



I agree with Harper, Canada can't keep on living on the governments money. If the government were to keep pouring money into the economy, the economic state of our country would never really improve. It's been over a yet now since the recession hit, the government has put some effort into creating stimulus packages. The economy has improved to a point were I believe that it does not need anymore stimulus packages. If they were to keep on giving out these packages people would become dependant on them. Also the method would just give a "quick boost" to the economy. I do believe that the government has been spending money on things that are unnecessary, for example the G20 meeting. The government has spent millions on security for the meeting. I don't think it was a good idea for our country to volunteer to host this meeting. The money that was spent on it could have gone towards other things such as improving the economy. In conclusion, I believe in what Harper is doing, our country is almost to a point were it is financially strong and there is no more need for stimulus packages.


http://www.cbc.ca/politics/story/2010/05/28/harper-municipalities.html

Toronto G20 restricted areas unveiled

Officials in Toronto have outlined the areas in the"heart" of the city that will be restricted to the public as a result of the G20 Summit. These security areas are now starting to take place due to the the meeting of the world leaders, which is taking place at the Metro Toronto Convention Centre between June 26-27. The construction of a security fence will begin on June 7 and will continue 24 hours a day until it is completed, Tom Russel, the head of G20 planning for Toronto police told reporters. "We know this will be inconvenient to Torontonians and we ask for your patience and understanding during this time" Russel said. "It is out hope that members of the public will be able to move freely throughout the fence perimeter until the evening of Friday, June 25". The northern portion of the fence will run along Wellington Street West, wile the Southern portion will run along Lakeshore Boulevard West. The Western portion zigzags southwards along Windsor Street and Blue Jays Way. The Eastern portion runs along Bay Street, east along Front Street West and then south on York Street. However, Russel had stated " the boundaries of the fence are subject to change".


I believe that Toronto is making a huge mistake by hosting the G20 meeting. I really do not think that Toronto as a city is gaining anything from hosting this event as we are losing huge sums of money and causing inconveniences for the public. For example, this fence that they are building, will only cause inconveniences for the population who lives in the downtown Toronto area. Also, people have no say in the matter, they can't make these security decisions, they just have to sit back and let them happen, and meanwhile it causes a major pain in the neck for them. I don't understand why Toronto volunteered to host this event. If Canada wanted to host it, it would have made sense to have had it in Ottawa. Ottawa is the the capital of Canada. In conclusion, I don not agree with having the G20 meeting in Toronto as I do not see it as a positive for Canada, and it is causing an inconvenience for the people of Toronto.


http://www.cbc.ca/canada/toronto/story/2010/05/28/g20-security-zone684.html

N. Korea scraps S. Korea naval accord

North Korea said Thursday that it will scrap an accord aimed at preventing accidental naval clashes with South Korea. This was after South Korea blamed North Korea for a torpedo attack that sank a warship. The tension between these two countries, which are separated between a peninsula, has risen dramatically since last week's attack. Still to this point North Korea has denied its involvement in the sinking and warned any retaliation would result in war. North Korea's military said it will "completely nullify" an inter-Korean accord aimed at preventing accidental armed skirmishes along the disputed western sea border. "Immediate physical strikes will be launched" against any South Korean ships that intrude into North Korean waters, the countries military said. North Korea also said it will look at banning South Korean personnel and vehicles from entering a joint industrial park in the North Korean border. The North Korean military said the first-phase reactions will be to ban the South Korean people in the border town, however they suggest that more changes are to follow. A South Korean defence ministry official said South Korea will "resolutely" deal with the new North's changes and measures. The South Koreans warships staged a large scale anti-submarine drill of the west coast despite North Korea's warnings that such exercises will drive them to war.

I really do not understand the reason for the South Koreans anti-submarnie drill. The north Koreans warned them that if they were to do this, war could break out. Personally I would not underestimate North Korea, they are a country that is ruled by a leader who is not afraid of doing the unthinkable. I think that South Korea should try to put the torpedo attack under the table as much as they can, and they should try and forget about it. There is no need to start a war, the war would turn into a world war. When I say world war, I mean that that every country around the world will be affected by this war. This is because of the potential rivalry if China decides to join forces with North Korea. It could potentially be a dispute that could run throughout the world, due to the population of Chinese and South Koreans in North America. In conclusion, I would advise the South Koreans to try and avoid engaging in any activities that could potentially upset the North Koreans.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/05/27/north-korea-china.html

Mandatory school volunteering plan opposed

The progressive Conservatives' plan to introduce mandatory volunteering in New Brunswick high schools is producing much criticism from two Fredericton volunteer organizations. Last week, the Tory leader David Alward released the campaign promises, and among them the party's least costly suggestions is getting the most attention. Alward wants to bring in a new requirement that students would have to accrue a specific number of hours volunteering in their community before they can graduate. The current governing Liberal party have criticized the plan's mandatory aspect. Groups that rely on volunteers are not eager to accept high school students who would be required to be there. Judy Coates, the co-chair of a steering committee set up for a new volunteer centre in Fredericton, said new volunteers are always needed, but she has concerns about whatAlward's new program could entail. "I would be opposed to it just being that students all have to do 100 hours of volunteer work and have a community person write them a letter and they get checked-off" Coates said. She also said she would welcome new volunteers, but it should only be part of a wider range program of community involvement for students. John Carty, the executive director of Meals on Wheels, said volunteers are depended on for delivering the meals and helping with security checks. However,Carty said he's not convinced mandating students to help in their community is appropriate. "I would not want volunteers there because they have to be there" said Carty. The conservatives say no student will be forced to volunteer for a specific group. Instead, they'll be given a list of approved organizations and they will get to choose whichever one they like, but the required log hours will still be needed.



Personally, I support David Alward's new policy. I am a high school student in Ontario, and I have to by law, record 40 hours of community service to graduate. I feel as though by contributing either in a park clean up, or helping out a community event, teaches me how just by helping people in need gives you a source of satisfaction. However, I do agree with some of the criticisms that the new policy is getting. Some of the people are saying that there is no point of introducing the rule because it won't actually teach the students to give back. This is true for some of the high school students as some will just go and volunteer at any random event just to get the required hours, and not actually "want to be there". Fortunately not all of the students who volunteer, will regret doing so. Some of the kids will learn from the experience and will be motivated to help out the community in as many ways as they can. In conclusion, even though the law will not be beneficial for all students, some of the students will take something away from their experience. Whether it be, realizing that how helping out gives them a source of satisfaction or learning how many people are living underprivledged and in poor conditions. This is why I believe the policy should be mandatory in New Brunswick.



http://www.cbc.ca/canada/new-brunswick/story/2010/05/24/nb-mandatory-volunteer-alward-852.html

Wearing life-jackets should be mandatory: OPP

Ontario Provincial Police are calling on Ottawa for a new law to require everyone in small boats to wear life-jackets. This new law in intended to stop boating-related fatalities. Canada's average boating-related fatalities each year is 180. The OPP commissioner, Julian Fantino, pressed the case with federal transport minister John Baird recently. He wanted to mandate the wearing of life jackets on moving vessels under six meters in length."You increase your odds of surviving exponentially by wearing your PFD" OPP staff Chris Whaley told CBC news this week in Toronto. Currently, boaters are required to have PFD's within reach for everyone on board a boat. However, the law does not force anyone to actually wear a life-jacket. "85 per cent of victims, had they been wearing their life-jackets, would have survived" Whaley said. Unfortunately, Ottawa has no plans to change the existing law. The only thing the OPP can do is to continue to work with law enforcement to try to convince them into changing their minds.



I really do not understand why the government is not considering changing the law. The statistics speak for themselves, on average 180 deaths each year due to boating accidents. Just by wearing a life-jacket aproximately 85 per cent of the victims who died would still be living. I think that law of having a life-jacket on at all times while in a moving boat should have been put into place a long time ago. I cannot think of one reason why the government is not even thinking about changing the law. Untill the law is changed by the government, many lives will be lost. The worst part about it though is that most of these individuals lives could have been saved if they were wearing a life-jacket.



http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/05/21/life-jackets-boaters-law.html

British Airways strike begins

The union representing British Airways cabin crew has begun a five-day strike. However, the airline says it will be able to carry 70 per cent of passengers who have booked flights. Thousands of in-flight workers walked of the job this Monday to protest a cost cutting plan. This plan is going to be responsible for the elimination of roughly 1,700 jobs. The airline has a contingency plan in place that will allow it to move 7o per cent of its normal traffic using leased planes and other workers while putting customers on other airlines. However, even though the airline company has a contingency plan in place, more than half of the airline's flights out of London, Heathrow were cancelled Monday. This leaves many of the customers unsatisfied with British Airways, "I think the strikers are greedy, the way the econmy is. They should be happy to have a job", London traveller Maureen Lonergan said. The strike was supposed to begin on May 17 but was ruled invalid by Britain's High Court because the union did not follow the procedures when announcing the results of the vote to members. One of the union's key issues is the demand that the airline restore employee travel benefits that the airline suspended. The unions leader, Tony Woodley, said the dispute has turned personal because he believes the airline dislikes the cabin crew union. British Airways said it has accepted an invitation for more negotiations, and said it believes the union will also accept.


I believe that the cabin crew employees are taking their job for granted. During the economic times that we are in at the moment, they have to understand that British Airways has to start making cut backs. The first thing they would look into reducing is the cabin crew employees, because the airline itself does not need as many of them to operate efficiently. Also, by walking out like the cabin crew did, it hurt the reputation of British Airways. I believe it will make people think twice before flying with this airline company. I predict that this strike will come to a conclusion soon, because British Airways cannot go on with cancelling and postponing flights. If they let the strike go on for more than 2 weeks the will loose a great amount of money, and their reputation of being a major and reliable airline company will take a huge hit.


http://www.cbc.ca/consumer/story/2010/05/24/british-airways-strike.html

Canada imposes sanctions on N. Korea

Canada and the United States both have agreed to offer their full support to South Korea. South Korea's president has cut all trade to North Korea as of Monday. This is all in retaliation for a torpedo attack that killed 46 sailors. Prime Minister Stephen Harper said in a statement that Canada's sanctions will include enhanced restrictions on trade, investment and other bilateral relations with North Korea. Also, the Canadian government has agreed to suspend high-level visits to Canada by North Korean officials. "Canada has condemned the reckless North Korean regime for this egregious violation of international law and its blatant disregard of its international obligations," Harper had said in his statement. Harper also said in his statement that Canada has pledged full support towards South Korean President Lee Myung-baks decision to respond decisively to the "act of aggression." The South Korean President said his country has "always tolerated North Korea's brutality, time and again". Lee said that they did this because they "had a genuine longing for peace on the Korean Peninsula". "But now things are different, North Korea will pay a price corresponding to its provocative acts," he said. Three experts from the Canadian Navy joined the multinational team that investigated the incident, and concluded the warship was sunk by a torpedo on March 25 near the western maritime border. In conclusion, Harper's statement adds that Canada is committed to a co-ordinated international response, including through the United Nations Security Council.


I feel as though that Canada is being a responsible ally to South Korea. Canada really has no choice other than to say "yes", we will support the South Korean government. If Canada were to say "no", they are no going to help South Korea, many of the population would feel betrayed or feel that Canada is not being a responsible ally. However, this is a very serious issue, as I believe that this torpedo incident could be the cause for a war between South and North Korea. The reason I think this could occur is because of the long lasting feud between the two countries. South and North Korea are two very different countries, they are governed in complete different ways, and their way of life differs dramatically. Also, there is no evidence yet that the torpedo attack on the warship is to be blamed on North Korea. Personally I do believe that North Korea is responsible, but they have not come forth and taken responsibility for it yet. In conclusion, Canada is doing the ethical and responsible action in this situation, and is contributing to its reputation of being a friendly ally.


http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/05/24/south-korea024.html

N. Korea fired deadly torpedo at ship: probe

Evidence overwhelmingly proves a North Korea torpedoed and sank a South Korean warship in March, killing 46 sailors. The Ssouth Korean President, Lee Myung-Bak vowed"stern action" for the missile attack and called an emergency security meeting for Friday."We will take resolute countermeasures against North Korea and make them admit its wrong doings through strong international co-operation," Lee told Australian Prime minister Kevin Rudd. The White Hhouse called the sinking an act of aggression that constitutes a challenge to international peace and security. Canada's Foreign Affairs Minister, Lawrence Cannon, has stated that "evidence points conclusively to a North Korean torpedo having been responsible" and continues to say that "there is no other plausible explanation". Lawrence had also told the press that Canada is in full support of South Korea, as it is our ally and friend. However, North Korea warned that it will wage "all out war" if they are punished for the sinking of the warship. The North Korean Central News Agency quoted a spokesman from the National Defence Commission as rejecting the findings as a "fabrication".





I agree with both the White House and South Korea. I believe that North Korea is responsible for this attack. There was no apparent reason for the attack, however North Korea just wanted to show power and seek revenge towards South Korea. The feud between North and South Korea has been going on for years, and even though there has not been much in terms of actual attacks between the two countries, it does not mean they are still not feuding. One of the reasons that causes me to blame North Korea for this attack, is because of there previous violent history. I would advise the president of South Korea not to engage in attacks against North Korea. I think this is what North Korea wants as they do not want to start the war as it would look bad on their country. If South Korea where to engage in attacks then this would give a reason for North Korea to attack back. Also, North Korea has the advantage if they were to engage in war, because they have the latest technology in military equipment. In conclusion, I believe North Korea is to blame for the torpedo attack, but I would not advise South Korea to engage in war.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/05/19/north-korea-torpedo.html

Teen babysitter sued over fire

A 14 year old who lives in northern Alberta, is being sued $350,000 after a fire burned down the home she was babysitting. This incident occurred back in 2007, when the babysitter Aaliyah Braybook was 12. She was looking after 2 little boys in a trailer in Clairmont, which is located just outside of Grand Prairie. When Aaliyah had noticed the fire, she quickly rescued the two little boys and brought them outside to safety, and then called 911. Earlier this week Aliyah and Douglas Mills, the father of the two boys were served with a statement of claim. They are being sued my Mills parents, Kendall and Diana Mills, who live in the damaged home. In their statement they wrote that Douglas Mills's five year old son Damien was playing with a cigarette when the fire broke out. They also said the Aaliyah was too young to be a responsible babysitter. Both Aaliyah and her father are shocked by this recent news, because they think that Aaliyah should be viewed as a hero for saving the two little boys from the fire. Aaliyah's father defended his daughter by saying that she had all of the qualifications to be a babysitter, and was well prepared to look after the children. Both the Braybrook and the Mills families are expected to hire a lawyer. The lawyer from the Mills family, said the lawsuit looks like a father is suing his son and the babysitter, but it is actually a dispute between the insurance companies.

I think that Aaliyah should not be sued. I agree with her father, saying that she should be thanked for saving the two boys lives, not be blamed. Also, I think that this is all about money for the insurance companies. If it weren't for the insurance companies I don't think their would be any type of financial arguments taking place. I feel sorry for the babysitter as she saved both of the kids lives and is being blamed for the fire. However, I do feel as though that she was too young to be babysitting. A 12 year old is too young to be responsible for two kids and a house. I am not saying she is to be blamed for the fire, I just feel that the government should make the minimum babysitting age older.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/edmonton/story/2010/05/05/teen-sued.html