Toronto commuting times worst of 19 major cities, study says

A study has recently shown that Greater Toronto's commuting times are the worst of 19 big cities polled. The average commute time for a round trip journey takes 80 minutes. People in Toronto spend on average an extra 24 minutes driving around the city each day than in Los Angeles, 12 minutes longer than New York and 32 minutes longer than Barcelona. This is astonishing because the cities mentioned above are much more populated than Toronto. The Board of Trade Chief Executive, Carol Wilding, commented on Toronto's last place ranking and says it is "embarrassing". The provincial budget, which delayed $4 billion in planned transit spending did not help. "This isn't complicated. Everybody agrees that Toronto has a fantastic transit system , but for a city of about one million we stopped making meaningful rapid transit years ago", commented Mayor David Miller to reporters on Monday. In the report is stated that only 29 percent of Toronto-area residents chose to leave their car at home when going to work. In Paris, 74 percent of people chose to leave their car at home. However, Toronto has still managed to remain a very popular place to live. It recently has ranked number 2 in labour attractiveness, only behind Barcelona.


The results from the study reflect upon how inefficient our road and traffic system is in Toronto. The government needs to spend more time on this very important issue of road traffic. I think that it is a very underrated problem in Toronto, the government and people tend to spend more time worrying about other issues like the environment. Don't get me wrong, I know that the environment is still an important issue that the government promised to fix, but maybe they should consider issues that are proving to be a problem on a day to day basis like road traffic. This issue has been dominating the way people plan their days. People have to plan ahead of the daily traffic to get to their destination. The statistic that suprised me is that Toronto still remains a very popular place to live, even though it rated worst in daily commuting times(80 minutes round trip).



http://www.blogger.com/post-edit.g?blogID=3357218327889429076&postID=922439062041490728

Zundel released from German prison

Ernst Zundel was released from a German prison this Monday, after serving 5 years in prison for his denying that the Holocaust every took place. Zundel has finally made his way back to Canada after 7 years, 3 weeks and 3 prisons in Germany. Zundel did not comment when asked if he still believed that there was no Holocaust. "It's kind of a sad situation; there's a lot to say. I'll certainly be careful not to offend anyone and their draconian laws" he stated. The German born Zundel, had been living in Canada for the last four decades, where he made frequent court visits to argue his anti-semetic views regarding the Holocaust. He had expressed his beliefs in books and websites. Zundel was deported to Germany in 2005 after the Federal court ruled that he was a threat to National security. Zundel was arrested upon arrival in his home country, and held without bail. In 2007, he was convicted of 14 counts of inciting racial hatred and sentenced to 5 years in prison. Zundel had received the maximum sentence under the German law for denying the holocaust. In many European countries such as Germany, Austria, Poland, Belgium,and Spain it is against the law to say that the Holocaust did not happen. Zundel spent only three years in jail as he received credit for the 2 prior years waiting to tried.

Zundel has spent the last seven years of his life forced to live in Germany for expressing his own personal beliefs. Canada has done the wrong thing by deporting him, as Canada does not persecute people for expressing their opinions. This is a country where everyone is entitled to freedom of speech. However, I personally do not agree with what Zundel is saying, but the government does not have the right to take away his citizenship. It would be different if he were to be living in Germany and expressing his views there. Since Canada could not legally sentence him in Canada they had to deport him to Germany, where he was guaranteed to be charged with a crime.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/03/01/zundel-release.html

Pope sounds warning over airport body scans

The head of the Roman Catholic Church, Pope Benedict XVI spoke out against the use of body scanners at airports. He stated, "Human dignity must be preserved even as countries attempt to protect their citizens against acts of terrorism". This announcement was made on Sunday at the Vatican, in front of an audience including airport officials, and airport workers. The pope did not use the word body scanners when he spoke out, but instead said that even when facing the threat of terrorism, airport security should not forget to respect, "the privacy of the human person". He also stated, "it is above all essential to protect and value the human person and their integrity". United states was the first place to start using these body scanners, then later Canada and European countries have started to follow. The purpose for the body scanners is detect items hidden under clothing without having to physically search each individual. Also recently, some of the Muslim community has chosen to be pat-down physically, instead of using the body scanners. They believe that is is against the teaching of the Muslim law. Canada is in the process of installing 44 new body scanners to be used for U.S. bound passengers. In response to all of the criticism regarding individual privacy, the officers will now be viewing the image in a different room, so they can never actually see the passenger. The reason for all of these new security measures is due to the Nigerian man who tried to sell off a bomb on Christmas day aboard an international flight bound for the United States.



I believe that installing the body scanners is the right thing to do. If this is what it takes to make traveling on airplanes safer, this is what should be done. However, I also agree that it does invade your privacy and human rights. The public has to understand that these people screening you are not there to invade your privacy they are just doing their job. People have to forget about and just get over it. If the public does not want to be scanned the airports should give them the choice either to be physically searched, or take the scanner test. This might eliminate the fear of people seeing "underneath" your clothes. Until the terrorist attacks stop, the need for these new security measures will just increase, in the meantime people just have to remember that safety comes first.

http://www.cbc.ca/world/story/2010/02/22/pope-body-scan.html

IOC orders blogger to remove video

The International Olympic Committee has ordered a P.E.I blogger, Stephan Pate to remove the video of the tragic death of Georgian luger Nodar Kumaritashvili from his website. Nodar was only 21 years of age when he died during a training run on February 12th, 2010, just hours before the Olympic ceremonies. Pate had posted the video of the death along with his commentary. The IOC has emailed him recently asking him to take it down. The email states that the IOC owns the rights to all of the images of the Vancouver 2010 Olympics, and only licensed broadcasters can use them. However, Pate recently has denied the request to remove the video, stating that Canada's copyright act allows the use of copyrighted material as part of a news story. Pate said the only reason he posted this video was because it is his job to report news. Also being part of the news organization(NJN), Pate has the right to post news. The IOC responded by saying that there are two reasons that they want the video removed: One is to protect the IOC's exclusive rights and those of the official broadcasters, secondly the IOC feels that it is disrespectful to the Kumaritashvili family. Pate has not yet removed the video and says that he will take it to court if necessary.

I feel that what Stephen Pate is doing is wrong, however what he is doing is completely legal. By posting the video of the death of someone, it shows that you really don't care or you don't know the meaning of respect. The IOC is doing the right thing by trying to get Pate to remove the video, but I feel that Pate will not. Pate cannot be criminally charged with anything, this is why he will not remove it. I feel that the only way to get Pate to remove the video is to get one of the Family members of Nodar to contact Pate and explain that what he is doing is wrong. Pate will not surrender to the IOC, because he does not want it to seem that he was wrong and they were right.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/prince-edward-island/story/2010/02/22/pei-blogger-olympic-video-584.html

Oylmpic cauldron fence thwarts visitors

The Olympic committee has recently erected concrete barriers and wire fencing surrounding the perimeter of the cauldron. The cauldron is a giant steel and glass structure that has four flames burning from it, rising almost 10 meters. The committee has done this for security measures because they feel that since it is made of glass someone will eventually try to break it. Some say that because of the recent anti Olympics protests in downtown Vancouver, the fence had to be put up. People traveled from all over the world to visit and take pictures of the Olympic symbol, however now the photographers have been forced to take pictures trough fences and from a distance of 50 meters from he cauldron. People are very upset " What a wonderful moment of the 2010 Vancouver Olympics to have a picture of you family in front of the torch, you can't do that"- visitor Carolyn Schmidt told the CBC. The fence has caused arguments and disputes among the photographers, people struggle to find the "perfect" view for their pictures. The Olympic committee in response stated that there are pictures on their website that people can download. However, people do not feel the same way, they actually want to take the picture themselves with their family in the photograph alongside the cauldron.

I believe, that the fence that they have put up is unnecessary. The Olympic committee has been concerned by recent vandals in Vancouver. The Olympic flame is not something that you just take away from the public. The flame is a symbol of the the Olympics, quite simply the Olympics would not be the same without it. The fence they have put up is an eye sore, it takes away from the natural beauty from the site of the flame. If they absolutely had to put up the fence they could have built a nicer looking fence, not one that looks like a chicken wire fence. It might as well have been a prison fence. Also, if they would have considered more of the options they could have built the structure holding the flame elevated on a stage with no opportunity for people to reach it. If they would have done this both the Olympic committee and the public would have been satisfied and the public would have been able to make the proper olympic moment in photographs.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/02/16/olympic-cauldron-fencing.html

U.K. press slams Canada's hosting of games

The British media have recently been criticizing Canada as being poor Olympic hosts. The main focus of the criticism is on the tragic death of 21 year old Georgian luger- Nodar Kumaritashvili. Nodar was killed in a training run on Friday, February 12, 2009. He lost control after turning corner # 16, fell and crashed into a metal pole. People have begun blaming the track setup for being too fast and dangerous. In response, the Olympic committee lowered the start level to the women's start point and made a new safety wall on turn #16. The British media now have started to criticize Canada for being poor hosts for the games. The media have made some very harsh remarks about Canada regarding the tragedy and the games itself. "Canada wanted to own the podium, this morning they can out their maple leaf stamp on something more instantly tangible" wrote Martin Samuel of the Daily Mail. Samuel has also accused Canada of cheating, stating that Canadian luge competitors practiced more than 300 times on the track while other countries' athletes had much less. Also, the media has been saying that Canada's desire to reach the podium is so high that they used the hometown track to their advantage, by limiting the use of the track to other countries prior to the Olympics.

I believe that the British press is unfairly criticizing Canada. The death of the luger was his own fault and blaming the Canadians for not allowing enough time to train is just not fair. The death was a total accident, it is something that is almost unheard of. Other lugers have even defended the committee by saying that they would have preferred the higher starting point, and that they like having more of a challenging course. Also, coaches and the luging community have come forward to say that the death was due to the lack of experience of Nodar. After the changes to the track there have been no crashes, or injuries substained to the competitors. After all of the negative comments let's see how perfect England willo be at hosting the Oylmpics in 2012.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/02/15/host-canada-criticism.html

Government has no plans to bring back Khadr

Last week that Supreme Court of Canada made the decision that Omar Khadr, who has been detained at Guantanamo Bay in Cuba for the past eight years, does not have the right, just because he is a Canadian citizen, to be brought to Canada for trial. The U.S government wants to try him in a U.S. court for his part in the killing of a U.S. soldier in Afghanistan eight years ago. The President of the United States, Barach Obama has stated that he will be closing Guantanamo Bay in the future and the the prisoners will be transfered to various locations in the U.S. for trial. Even though Khadr is a Canadian citizen the U.S. government feels that he should be tried in a U.S. court. Many in Canada feel that his rights as a Canadian are being taken away and that he should be brought back to Canada for trial. The Supreme Court feels it should not interfere with U.S./Canadian relations and by bringing him back to Canada for trial, they feel that relations between the two countries would suffer.

I believe that Khadr should be tried in the United States. Just because Khadr is a Canadian citizen, does not give him the right to be tried in Canada. Khadr left Canada therefore, he is responsible for his own actions that occur outside of the country. The U.S. arrested this man for a terrorist act against a U.S. citizen, which gives them the responsibility and right to convict Khadr. I believe that the rights that this man once had have been taken away due to his terrorist activity and considering it took place in a war zone outside Canada. Canada should not be in support if this man due to his terrorist act. Just because he was born in Canada, does not give right to be tried here. If Canada agrees to take responsibility for him and put in on trial in Canada, I feel that it would be a waste of our tax payers money and would create lenghty delays and problems within our legal systms.

http://www.cbc.ca/canada/story/2010/02/03/omar-khadr-government-repetriation.html