Skip navigation

 Login or Register | Member Centre

Jimmy Carter, he's not

Globe and Mail Blog Post

Latest comment posted at 4:36 PM EST 18/08/08

Read the full article

This conversation is closed

  1. Derek Holtom from Swan River, Canada writes: Pretty classless comments from Chretien.
    Not exactly a champion of human rights, is he?
    Sounds like he's more interested in money from China.
  2. M F from GTA, Canada writes: Chretien is very realistic in what he says. Many idealists may have problems with his position, but I think that his perspective and explanation of his position on China is very clear and well thought out. Who are we to 'tell' China what to do? You catch more flies with honey than with vinegar and he is right on that.

    Sure they have room for improvement, but that won't come because others tell them to change.

    If he were to run again, I'm sure he would whip Dion and Harper. He would make them look like incompetents with his wisdom and fearlessness.
  3. Alistair McLaughlin from Canada writes: Everyone should click on the link Adam has placed on the word 'intersect' before making further comments. You'll see exactly why Chretien is speaking out so 'passionately' on this, of all issues.
  4. John Longshot from Canada writes: This is for all those short-sighted ignorant LPC brown-nosers! Let's get a few things straight regarding Cretin's record in office: ---- it was Preston Manning's daily goading that moved Cretin to action on the deficit. Being the quintessential opportunist Cretin has always been, he realized that he could neuter the opposition by taking action (lawyers are never too swift when it comes to economics....I'm not convinced that Cretin recognized to long term economic benefits here.) He delegated the task to Martin who was unable to locate funds anywhere (sponsorship had drained the coffers)....but Paul in his short-sighted and crafty ways concluded that he could gut provincial transfer payments (which ultimatley crippled Medicare) satisfy his boss, Cretin, look good politically (like a stuffed shirt), and the best part...the Provinces would be on the receiving end of flak from taxpayers who were denied medical and social services. Recently Cretin commented that his time in office was 'fun' --- no mention of service of public service or service to one's country --- speaks volumes about the man's character (or lack thereof)!
  5. Diane Schweik from EDMONTON, Canada writes: .

    I would say that JC has always been passionate about JC's economic well-being.He's still the loudmouthed bully he's always been.

    Listening to JC and RK slapping one another on the back on CBC radio a few weeks back,just made me realise what a pair of self-important mediocrities we had to endure for over a decade.
  6. Mr Ottawa from Canada writes: 'M F from GTA, Canada' That might be true if it was a position that he held true for all economic powers. The problem is thats not that case. The most significant evidence of this is the Dalai Lama who is someone most Canadians strongly support. This is pure and simple Chretian protecting his personal buisness interests.

    Chretien was bought and paid for by China awhile ago. Make no mistake which country his pocket book owes its allegance to.
  7. B I from Toronto, Canada writes: Of course he has business in China, what businessperson doesn't?

    Prime Minister Chretien was well liked by the Chinese community in Canada and after this, he will be loved by them. The former Prime Minister may have gone a small way this morning to bridge some of the gap in fundraising between Liberals and Conservatives. I hope the Liberal Party doesn't mishandle this or make comments that may show any divisions in the Liberal camp.

    Chinese human rights is one thing, but replacing a Prime Minister here in Canada that openly attacks artists he disagrees with; makes gimmicky tax cuts leading to budget deficits; while ignoring the infrastructure of our cities - getting rid of that guy is more important to me than honouring the Dalai Lama, who may or may not be an agent provocateur for his own political causes.
  8. Mr Ottawa from Canada writes: 'B I from Toronto, Canada' with regards to Liberal fundraising, I'd prefer not to have foreign countries being the financial support for our political parties in general here.

    And with regards to your displeasure with our current Prime Minister. One issue has nothing to do with with the other. Regardless if you dislike or like Harper, Chretien is still out of line.

    Chretien is putting both China's interests and his own personal buisness interests ahead of that of the interests of Canada and Canadians. I generally like Paul Martian but Chretien in my opinion is scammer and a sell out.

    Chretien may not realise it but he just screwed over the LPC party today. Then again he may not care anymore as long bosses are happy as his next Chinese sponsored pay cheque clears.
  9. Ballin Munson from toronto, Canada writes: an 'nudder ting....
  10. Fake Name from Canada writes: ' John Longshot from Canada writes: Let's get a few things straight regarding Cretin's record in office: ---- it was Preston Manning's daily goading that moved Cretin to action on the deficit.'

    Glad I wasn't drinking any coffee while I read that - it might be hard to get the stains (which would have been caused by spraying it out my nose from laughing so hard) off the computer.
  11. Ed Lane from Ottawa, Canada writes: Just some facts. The 2007 World Bank rating of economies by GDP ranks China fourth after the US, Japan and Germany. The US values are about four times that of China and each of the others. The EU in total is second to the US. But who is counting.
  12. John Longshot from Canada writes: Go back to sleep Fake Name....you must be one of those short-sighted ignorant LPC brown-nose supporters! Not a clue about Canada's political history. Read...it might do you good to get the facts straight.
  13. Rebel Prince from Berlin, Germany writes: The government of Canada is behaving in an appallingly naive manner as it attempts to score points with Canadian voters concerned with human rights by publicly insulting the Chinese regime.

    Business interests or not, Chretien's point is correct and important not to miss on account of that typical Canadian penchant for naive, self-righteousness.

    The Canadian government will change NOTHING on the ground for ANY minority there by publicly hectoring and snubbing the Chinese goverment. It is only harming Canadian business interests and opportunities there and at home, and thereby significantly damaging the Canadian economy going forward.

    Harper's strategy is just lose-lose for minority interests in China and for Canadian interests as a whole. But because he obviously believes it will sell well in the next election, he has repeatedly 'sought' to embarrass Chinese leadership in a public manner meant for Canadian consumption. In doing so, he's no doubt aware of two things: (a) The Chinese media are in the Chinese government's back pocket, so no Canadian bullhorn gets through to the Chinese public, and (b) Canadians have a grossly exaggerated sense of their own international importance and 'right' to instruct other nations on political morality.

    And Radwanski obviously just has a narrow-minded political axe to grind.
  14. Stan L from Canada writes: Rebel Prince...absolutely correct. Canadians may not like who delivered the message but he is spot on regardless of any interest he may or may not have. At the end of the day Harper is sacrificing Canadians interests in favour of cheap low-pro politicking to his base.
  15. Rebel Prince from Berlin, Germany writes: B I from Toronto, Canada makes excellent points.

    We mustn't listen to Chretien 'because he has business interests there'. Gawd, Rawdwanski, get a grip on reality, and Canada's place in it.
  16. Ed Long from Canada writes: Chretien's business interests, those of his son-in-law's family, of anybody he may know, of Canada's diplomatic interests, of Canada's trade interests, of Canada's various business interests are all relevant to this issue.

    I am not praising Chretien. God forbid I ever vote for Dion.

    But Chretien has hit the nail on the head.

    Harper is a small man who is doing great damage to this country with is prurient fundamentalist view of the world.
  17. 100% Conservative from Victoria BC, Canada writes: Finally we have a PM who will not bow to the almighty dollar like Chreitien did (then hid it all) and then he comes out and whines against the PM. I think the real issue here is that Dion has seen the writing on the wall and probably asked him for help. The Chinese boycooted our Olympics at Montreal because we were friendly with Taiwan and now people expect Harper to attend the games! I think not ... Good for Harper to acknowledge the Dalai Lama and for sending Emerson to attend the games it's about time we had a PM who has some guts.
  18. snow crash from Canada writes: Canada is such an inconsequential player in the international arena that we have absolutely ZERO influence on anything China wishes to do. Stephen Harper and other Dalai Lama groupies are engaging in self-delusion if they believe China give's a rodent's behind what Canada thinks.

    Russia steam rollers into Georgia, a country that has the military backing of the U.S. and they didn't give it a second thought. So China's going to be bothered by some pipsqueak country trying to lecture them on human rights?
  19. Ricky for a Centrist Canada from Canada writes:
    So M. Chretien's comments have no value because he's involved in business that includes China. Well who in the business world isn't?

    Maybe he is using his position to protect personal interests as well as the bigger picture.

    That would make him unique........how?
  20. Stan L from Canada writes: 100% Conservative from Victoria BC, Canada writes: Finally we have a PM who will not bow to the almighty dollar like Chreitien did (then hid it all) and then he comes out and whines against the PM. I think the real issue here is that Dion has seen the writing on the wall and probably asked him for help. The Chinese boycooted our Olympics at Montreal because we were friendly with Taiwan and now people expect Harper to attend the games! I think not ... Good for Harper to acknowledge the Dalai Lama and for sending Emerson to attend the games it's about time we had a PM who has some guts.

    How can you say that? Harper has claimed that this was NOT a message to China it was that he simply had a scheduling conflict or an asthma problem (take your pick I have heard both stories) How can you praise him for something he is claiming not to be doing? AND even if he was doing this to prove a point sending Emersona nd Guerigis and the vatationing Hertiage department is a little like palying both sides of the coin is it not? Chretien is right on this....I know it's probably a bitter pill, but he is right.....and if you are thinking Dion asked for his help, give me a break.
  21. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    The blue link marked 'intersected' provided tells most, but not all the story of Chretien China links.

    Did Chretien always act in the best interests of the country, or in the best interests of HIMSELF?? Bet on the later!

    The MSM is very quiet about his China connections that started with Gordon Capital from 1986-1990.

    A visit the Sidewinder Report--a joint RCMP-CSIS report tells much. It is a case study on the links between China, Hong Kong billionaires and Canadian financial institutions that are 'clearly worrying for Canada's national security.'

    Another person of interest is Li Ka-Shing. Some other tidbits is Desmarais Powercorp board position on International Advisory Council of the China International Trust Investment Company (CITIC). CITIC is China's largest conglomerate and is 42 percent owned by the government of China.

    In a 1997 report, Chinese Military Commerce and U.S. National Security, the RAND Center for Asia Pacific Policy reported that CITIC acts as a shell or front operation on behalf of Chinas Peoples Liberation Army.

    Complete Sidewinder Report found here:

    http://www.primetimecrime.com/Articles/RobertRead/Sidewinder%20page%201.htm
    .
  22. Stan L from Canada writes: R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    The blue link marked 'intersected' provided tells most, but not all the story of Chretien China links.

    Did Chretien always act in the best interests of the country, or in the best interests of HIMSELF?? Bet on the later!

    Like I said, you may not like the messenger, but he is not wrong. Harper isn't making any sort of political statement other than to secure his base with a well worn and familiar bit of easy politicking.....don't let the fact that even the Dalai Lama told everyone not to stay away keep you from a good line though....in short this isn't about the messenger but the message.
  23. M M from canada, Canada writes: So why is there no ethics committee investigation into JC's dealing with China?- I'm sure Power Corp and JC made some of the 'contacts' before he left office. Just another example of the Lieberals treatment in the public. Sad, sad, sad
  24. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    Chretien stated the folllowing quote,: ' 'I met 18 times with the president of China. I discussed human rights every time,'

    Let's assume he did. WHAT did he ever accomplish FOR CANADA in his 10 years as PM and his 4 prior years as a lobbyist in China for Gordon Capital from 1986-1990? Something-anything? How did Chinese human rights change concerning his talks? Besides Desmarais and the tentacles, and Strong, what did Chretien actually accomplish for Canada in his dealings with China?
    .
  25. Joe Little from Cowtown, Canada writes: JC is absolutely correct. Not so smart Harpo only put his wacked idealogy above the national interests.
  26. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    Stan L from Canada: Personally, I couldn't care less if Harper went or stayed home. Nothing will change our economic situation with China. One thing is certain, China wants our resources and we want, for the moment, the garbage products they are producing that fall apart or don't work after a short time!

    And Stan-You neatly and completely bypassed the Chretien-China connections mentioned both before he was PM, and during his time. I was wondering about your thoughts? I won't hold my breath......
    .
  27. Clear Thinker from Canada writes: So Chretien defends China in a speech, Mo Strong writes a glowing essay in Macleans'. Those kick back checks must still be rolling in.
  28. Ballin Munson from toronto, Canada writes: Harper a small man? Well, maybe.

    I met JC a few years back (oddly enough on his way back from a Team Canada mission to the PRC!!!), and my 10 minute discussion and his response to my questions, led me to believe he was someone who had all the political sharps of the small town council man who will make sure your sidewalk/street gets plowed first, if you donate to his campaign, give a job to his nephew, etc.

    I beleive that the postulation a few years ago, regarding his $50,000 or so investment, and the golf course affair was that 'THE PM OF CANADA' would not stoop so low as to allow such a piffling amount sway his judgement, and sully his reputation.

    Yes he would.

    As Radnowski so correctly pointed out J.C. collects a lot of paychecks as a consultant to various Chinese interests. No question, it is his current right. But I can tell you he made plenty of personal connections on his trips to China, on the governments' dime.

    Harpers' problem is that he is too nieve to actually grease his own palm while in office. Sly dog, he's not.
  29. mojo fr kokomo from Calgary, Canada writes: Well if all it takes to completely disrupt our relationship with China is not showing up at the Olympic opener I say too bad so sad. There will be plenty of other areas that we are not going to agree with the Chinese govt. - if this is all it takes to upset them then i guess we need to think about what kind of relationship we want. Master - peon? I would rather have a mutually respectful one myself but hey all you posters that want to kiss butt go for it. While you are wringing your hands about our future business interests in a corrupt country with little respect for contract law maybe you should ask BP how they are doing in Russia these days - another country that plays by a different rule book.
  30. Building an Ark from Eastern Slopes, Canada writes: The Bully from Shawinigan still can not keep away from the spot-light. Hasn't had the capacity to realize his self-importance is no longer headlines, hey where did my collection of golf balls go???
  31. pierre lefebvre from Brossard, Canada writes: For too long this sh$t disturber has done damage to Canada. His aggravation was felt at time of Meech Lake, Oka First Nation troubles, Adscam affair and so on. He had his chance and not much pride can be his claim for that era. To discredit Canada`s position on Olympics and Tibet Chretien has added to the problem. Chretien should learn to shut up like previous Prime Ministers Paul Martin and Joe Clark. But that twisted mind cannot accomplish reserve, cause its a matter of decency. Its an LPC trait of arrogance!
  32. Stan L from Canada writes: R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes: Stan L from Canada: Personally, I couldn't care less if Harper went or stayed home. Nothing will change our economic situation with China. One thing is certain, China wants our resources and we want, for the moment, the garbage products they are producing that fall apart or don't work after a short time! And Stan-You neatly and completely bypassed the Chretien-China connections mentioned both before he was PM, and during his time. I was wondering about your thoughts? I won't hold my breath...... What does JC have to do with the price of rice in china so to speak? pretend for a moment that this was a prominent Canadian business man who happens to do a lot of business with China.....would HE be wrong? Without question Chretien planted many a seed to be sowed when he was out of office...on that I will agree, but name me a PM or even an MP who hasn't done the same after they left office? Not many....spin spin spin, but let's face it networking to your advantage is networking whether you are in or out of politics. As for the resources? sure they want our resources, and for all of Harper's posturing, it hasn't stopped them from coming in (ie: oils sands etc...), all they want....so where is this ethical mythical stance of Harper's? What game is he playing? Fast and loose I would say but whatever, and if you don't think that China can just trot over to South Africa or Russia you are mistaken....in fact they may just do that in future....or when Harper blows the whole arctic thing and ceeds control to the Russians or the US. And if you think all that Canada does with China is import crappy product I am afraid you are gravely mistaken...... I will agree with you on one point, this is not THAT big of a deal in the grand scheme of things. Not going or going...whatever, but let's not turn Harper into a martyr for the cause or anything....he tried to do some cheap politicking and it failed...big deal.
  33. Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: Maybe Mr. Chretein does not think Manufacturers Life will do as well in China after that snub?

    On the other hand, in my opinion, Mr. Harper is not intelligent enough to even understand the meaning of the word Diplomacy.
  34. J Hare from Saskatoon, Canada writes: Some have been posting here noting that Canada is unimportant in international affairs and noteing how current actions 'panders' to his base. I draw issue with both these points. First, if taking a stand is only important if it can have results then this has profound consequences. Why vote for a party that has no chance of winning? Why hold and follow moral convictions that are different from others? Why should Canada not just instruct our forgin service just to vote with the majority always at the UN? We are often 'off side' on a number of issues but still be stick to them. International oppinion does not support Israle but Canada does so should that change as well? Second, I fail to see how this panders to his base? The conservative party would have natural support amoung the buisness community so why make things more difficult with an emerging power? Would that not reduce their support for his party and have consequences the parties future fundraising and political support? I'm not sure of the answer but I think this is a valid question to ask.

    James Hare
  35. B I from Toronto, Canada writes: Keep playing the non consequential 'Adscam' card Conservatives. Not a single elected Liberal leader was touched by that and the investigation was carried out by Conservatives. Either you guys really suck, or Liberals didn't do anything wrong, take your pick. Not to mention that your chosen Prime Minister threw away all of the reccommendations from Justice Gomery which mounts to another one of his several broken election promises.

    When your dirty MPs eventually get caught for In and Out financing schemes, we'll see what excuses you come up with for the crooked liars that you convicts-in-waiting support.
  36. Ricky for a Centrist Canada from Canada writes:
    Hey con hack losers - don't forget to mock his facial anomaly, too.
  37. Peter The Not Quite Great from Edmonton, Canada writes: I suppose the real debate here is whether Canada should 'engage' China or hold itself distant. Harper has chosen to be 'less engaged'. Not exactly rejecting China but not embracing it either. While I usually support engagement I can't see it has done much good with China. There hasn't exactly been a flowering of human rights and political freedom in the last 20 years.

    The Economist Magazine ran a good article last week (or the week before) pointing out that awarding China the Olympics has probably set back progress on human rights by several years. How effective is engagement when you've already given all the carrots away (WTO membership, the Olympics, etc)? I prefer the EU's approach to engagement: you can join the EU when you meet certain standards of political freedom and human rights.
  38. John Smith from Ottawa, Canada writes: We all know that if Harper went to Beijing the LPC would be screaming about how the CPC's do not respect human rights. The LPC would then say the CPC is encouraging abuse by the Chinese gov't. Talk about wanting your cake and eating it too. Also, interesting that the LPC has to bring out a re-tread PM as an attack dog. I'm sick of this crap, and I wish the LPC would either present policies favourable to Canadians or shut up.
  39. Stan L from Canada writes: J. Hare....I would agree with another example BUT sorry Harper is pandering to his base and I wouldn't say that we are unimportant in international affairs when if comes to China...as much as I would sy not necessary. The fact is that Harper trief to do a cheap bit of politcking. He said he wouldn't go and expressly said that it was not a snub...his base would interpret that AS a snub and his non-base would take it at face value also IF the world leaders decided not to go en masse becuase of some boycott...he could say 'me too' and if they did not....(as they have) he could say scheduling conflict.....these are hardly the actions of a guy with a stong an pricipled view of the world or a strong sense of moral convictions, in fact it is the worst form of weak kneed fence sitting and poltical pandering....that is low pro and obvious. You mention, 'The conservative party would have natural support amoung the buisness community so why make things more difficult with an emerging power? Would that not reduce their support for his party and have consequences the parties future fundraising and political support?' Good question, the conservatives of today are very proud to say that they have MASSIVE grassroots support not business support....I think what you said makes sense for the Mulroney era, but not for the Harper era....Bay street is not on board with Harper to any great extent, and certianly not to the degree that they were with Mulroney.
  40. Michael K from Toronto, Canada writes: As someone suggested above, all questions will be answered by reading this article in the G&M from several months after Chretian left office as PM:

    theglobeandmail.com

    Chretian said that he talked about human rights with China, perhaps between bites of gourmet food while he was treated like a king on his China trips. But he was cultivating his business deals the whole time and could only wait a few months after leaving office to get back to China and start gorging on the business connections he made as PM.

    The Chinese regime uses anything and anyone to manipulate foreign governments, media and business. After speaking empty words about human rights in China while making his business deals as PM, Chretian is now the Chinese regime's mouthpiece, criticizing PM Harper for actually taking some kind of stand on human rights, both in word and deed.

    Read the article posted above. You will see the real reason why Chretian is making noise.
  41. Michael Soft from Outerspace, Canada writes: 'mojo fr kokomo from Calgary, Canada writes: ... Master - peon? I would rather have a mutually respectful one myself but hey all you posters that want to kiss butt go for it.'

    Well...mutual respect? It looks more like Canada wants to be the master telling the peon China what to do.
  42. wayne ouellette from Canada writes: All 'the little guy' needs to do is make a phone call to the g&m and they will send someone to publish his verbal diarrhea. What did this guy do for Canada and how did he get preferred access to the g&m?
    I know it is hard to find a current liberal who is interesting and has something of substance to communicate, but give us a break with this guy.
  43. Green Dragon from Ottawa, Canada writes: Chretien's criticism boils down to the following: 'It is not in Canada's interests to alienate one of the most powerful nations on earth.'

    But isn't that exactly what Chretiien did to the Americans? Wasn't it one of his M.P.s (Carolyn Parrish?) who said, 'Those damn Americans, I hate them.'

    Jean should have taken his own advice when he was in power.
  44. Derek Holtom from Swan River, Canada writes: Green Dragon from Ottawa, Canada writes: Chretien's criticism boils down to the following: 'It is not in Canada's interests to alienate one of the most powerful nations on earth.'

    But isn't that exactly what Chretiien did to the Americans? Wasn't it one of his M.P.s (Carolyn Parrish?) who said, 'Those damn Americans, I hate them.'

    Jean should have taken his own advice when he was in power.

    That sums it up in a nutshell
    Given Chretien's business interests with the Chinese, this makes him look bad. Really bad.
  45. none of your business from leningrad, Russian Federation writes: What the heck is an Adam Radwanski? Does he expect to get a free citizenship in exile from the Dalai dude some day by kissing so hard on the rear end? And who wants to be a Jimmy Carter, who pitifully wasn't able to free his diplomats for 400 days? And which other fool thinks Carter as an elder statesman beyond partisan? The point is that Chretien is much a wiser man. The fools traded him for a Paul Martin and a Stephen Harper and then complain aloud.
  46. pierre lefebvre from Brossard, Canada writes: Chretien the Lobbyist did not wait very long before promoting business deals with powerful political leaders be it in China, Russia and Kazakhstan. Remember PetroKazakstan deal through a Calgary law firm. This transaction has handsomely compensated Chretien despite the fact he could not wait to leave PMO before consuming this deal. Entitlement culture and Adscam scandal. You bet.
  47. jeff franklin from Canada writes: Chretien could open up a serious can of whoop a$$ on Rapture Boy.
  48. R. Carriere from Maritimes, Canada writes:

    Stan L from Canada writes, ' Without question Chretien planted many a seed to be sowed when he was out of office.. but name me a PM or even an MP who hasn't done the same after they left office?'

    Perhaps you meant to say when he was IN office? And Stan, come now, you know how mad the LPC partisans get when a CPC partisan says the Libs. did it in the past--so it's OK!!

    You also write: ' .....or when Harper blows the whole arctic thing and ceeds control to the Russians or the US.'

    Stan, regardless of who is PM, the Russians and Americans will take what they want, when they want it-everybody does (reference off shore NL r a p e fishing...France Spain Portugal USSR..)

    Even though I said I couldn't care less if Harper went or stayed home, (doesn't affect my life..) at the end of the day, I would have preferred that Harper attended for 2 reasons: 1) To support our Olympic athletes. 2) To 'break bread' with the Chinese officials to try and find some common ground-a point of departure.

    Talk, or some form of dialogue, is always better than ignoring and digging in....but coming from Chretien makes me ill.
    .
  49. Stan L from Canada writes: Green Dragon from Ottawa, Canada writes: Chretien's criticism boils down to the following: 'It is not in Canada's interests to alienate one of the most powerful nations on earth.'

    But isn't that exactly what Chretiien did to the Americans? Wasn't it one of his M.P.s (Carolyn Parrish?) who said, 'Those damn Americans, I hate them.'

    And was she given a medal? or was she booted out for that bit of nonsense....Carolyn Parish is hardly evidence of anything.....or than what happens when you lip off a little too much.
  50. Howard Roark from Whitby, Canada writes: It is hard to imagine a situation where J Crouton did not put his interests ahead of the nation. He stayed out of Iraq primarily due to the fact that his daughter was married to the inheritor of PetroFina, the largest oil producer, and friend of SoDamn Hinsane.
  51. One Of Seven from Ottawa, Canada writes: Stan L, Chretien is doing more than networking and 'planting seeds' -- unless you mean that he is in up to the hilt, in a manner of speaking, which he is:

    http://www.primetimecrime.com/contributing/2005/20050120Gray.htm

    Chretien is attempting to influence Canada's foreign policy by addressing an audience of CBA members, and don't tell me there isn't crossover between a room full of lawyers and the world of politics. He is doing so NOT to further Canada's interests, but to further his own, and those of his clan's.

    I am no fan of Harper's, believe you me, and I disagree with just about everything his so-called conservative party represents, but he did the right thing skipping the opening ceremonies even if it was for weak reasons. It is unfortunate that his foreign minister subsequently hastened to strongly underscore 'Canada''s support of the 'one China' policy. Still the speaking with forked tongue.

    By the way, JC, honorary citizenship to the Dalai Lama had to be approved by all of elected Parliament. You don't have a seat in parliament, you do not represent the people of Canada, so kindly shut up.
  52. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Someone who has business interests in China is the VERY person who can comment on Canada's diplomatic successes or failures vis a vis China, and Mr. Radwanski has apparently forgotten that Mr. Mulroney didn't much concern himself with the niceties of the role of 'elder statesman'.
  53. Stan L from Canada writes: One Of Seven from Ottawa, Canada writes:
    I am no fan of Harper's, believe you me, and I disagree with just about everything his so-called conservative party represents, but he did the right thing skipping the opening ceremonies even if it was for weak reasons. It is unfortunate that his foreign minister subsequently hastened to strongly underscore 'Canada''s support of the 'one China' policy. Still the speaking with forked tongue.

    Like I have said about three times now....I don't care if it was JC commenting or not, he will pay for his sins whenever.....it doens't make him wrong. And Harper should have gone given the confusing and ridiculous non-statement this makes...first to suppor the athletes, second, to network with other leaders and support Emmerson in his goals regarding business development and investment, third simply becuase it is a good way to show support without endorsement to China.....
  54. Building an Ark from Eastern Slopes, Canada writes: diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Someone who has business interests in China is the VERY person who can comment on Canada's diplomatic successes or failures vis a vis China, and Mr. Radwanski has apparently forgotten that Mr. Mulroney didn't much concern himself with the niceties of the role of 'elder statesman'.

    So JC once again can comment for his personal gain? How entitled...or has he lost his capacity, enquiring Canadians wish to know where ethics supercede profits...
  55. Meng W. from Ottawa, Canada writes: Canadians take themselves way too seriously, you can't exactly snub someone when you have no leverage whatsoever. China has lost aboslutely nothing from Harper's non-appearance, infact I doubt the cameraman could even find Harper when Canada entered the stadium should he have gone.

    People need to wake up to reality: Canada is Canada, it has no place and no ability to lecture China on anything, the onlything you do have control of is your own destiny, to snub Canadian economy for some meaningless ego boosting is laughable at best.
  56. Joseph Bloggins from Canada writes: Chretien, Chretien...let's see...where have I heard that name before? Oh yeah! He is the clown who committed Canada to the idiotic Kyoto accord and also the guy who supports the Khadr family wholeheartedly. What an embarrassment that loon is.
  57. J Hare from Saskatoon, Canada writes: Meng W., while this train of thought appears simple and practical it can have profound implications when applied to the logical extent. China long has advocated such a position, ie. internal affairs are just that, but this ignores a number of key western ideas regarding the relation of the state to its citizens. At the root of this disagreement is the way individuals relate to the state. Here in Canada we tend towards that individuals are self actors who have rights seperate from the state they live in. This allows one, at the heart of the matter, reject the state by both leaving and giving back their passport (symbolically the permission of the state to travel and participate with in the society). China does not allow this and has a greater feeling that the state is inseperable for the citizen, hense its refusal to recognize claims of new citizenship of those who leave. As you can see there is some distance between these two ideas regarding the rights of people and those of states. To simply aquiese to those of states such as China is to capitulate regarding this debate.

    James Hare
  58. Anne Ayotte from Canada writes: How is it that JC missed the Olympics when he was PM and now he gets to spout this crap?
  59. Meng W. from Ottawa, Canada writes: Sigh, Mr. Hare, to agree to disagree is one thing, to starve yourself because you disagree is quite another. Canada is like someone who went on hunger strike alone in his room but can't get any press, hey, if you are happy go right ahead, when nobody takes you seriously you are only hurting yourself.
  60. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Building an Ark:-- I must say that I find it laughable that CPC-supporters and assorted right-wingers complain when money - filthy lucre - is either made by or pursued by anyone they would refer to as an outsider. Fates forbid, for example, an environmentalist from making money. Mr. Chretien is not a spring chicken and diplomacy takes a very long time to bear fruit. He is unlikely to profit from any position he has assumed today - unless, of course, you believe him to be more powerful than he really is.
  61. J Hare from Saskatoon, Canada writes: Meng W., I'm fail to see how your analogy makes any sence. Canada has many nations to trade with and holds a host of forign policy priciples that others object to. Why should this be any different? Exactly how are we 'starving'? If we object, then we do so because Canadians have objections, rather then because Canadians feel that objection will produce results. As an example, do the countries who traded with the nazi's during the war and accepted gold they knew was stolen bear some responcibility for the actions of the german government? When do other countries enable actions that are morally repugnant? When do these actions have further consequences? These are some of the questions that underly the current discussion.

    James Hare
  62. ken kolthammer from Edmonton, Canada writes: LPC supporters really hate someone who takes a principled stand, as opposed to a principal (and interest) stand
  63. Building an Ark from Eastern Slopes, Canada writes: diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Building an Ark:-- I must say that I find it laughable that CPC-supporters and assorted right-wingers complain when money - filthy lucre - is either made by or pursued by anyone they would refer to as an outsider. Fates forbid, for example, an environmentalist from making money.

    Well thanks DM but making money from the environment is not an issue, a former PM who has made cash deals on napkins for a hotel/ Golf course and signed treaties which had no plausible ways of ratification has no pass for G(L)orficifaction. In fact Mssrs Cretien enjoyed playing off one area of this country against another, just as he now enjoys a free pass in the press for his personal edification. He and others who hold him in high regard should truly be ashamed, ...here's a Golf Ball signed by another important guy I met once...?
  64. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Tom Robinson:-- For your information, Mr. Chretien contracted Bell's Palsy at an early age, which resulted in some facial muscle paralysis. In fact, if you check Wikipedia's page on the subject (Bell's Palsy), you will see Mr. Chretien's picture.
  65. Building an Ark from Eastern Slopes, Canada writes: I'm so sorry I can't help myself, JC on a podium on front of his peers (Lawyers) hey I did a complicated land deal and forgot about the Ps and Qs of a formal contract - wait here's my napkin! Now leave China and complications to me I decide what is right!
  66. CM Chen from Toronto, Canada writes: Ex PM Chretien deserves to be listened in a respectful way even though he may have extensive business dealings.

    However, I disagree with his characterization of our current gov't action as naive and in error. Yes, China is no Saskatchewan, but neither was Chretien a Chinese provincial governor. He was the leader of an influential country.

    Actually PM Harper's advices on China are relatively moderate. The Chinese gov't may not like some of the messages but by no means insulted. Many Chinese Canadians enjoy the openness of our country and may wish some of our values reflected in their original homeland.

    Best wishes to China in the future, and have a wonderful Olympics.
  67. Ricky for a Centrist Canada from Canada writes:
    Tom Robinson - thanks for confirming how classless you con hack losers truly are.

    That's why your party is so grossly unpopular.

    Can't wait until the true conservatives take back the party, leaving extremists like you and Harpercrite's goons, in the dust.
  68. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Building an Ark:-- Am I supposed to take the views of someone who can't even spell Mr. Chretien's name seriously? Messrs, by the way, is the abbreviated form of Messieurs, plural of Monsieur. One might say Messrs Day and Harper, for example. One does not need to worship everything someone has done in order to judge the veracity of something that person says. So, for example, I would have no difficulty hearing and respecting Mr. Harper's opinions about cats as pets. As for golf balls, Mr. Harper signs hockey pucks, which he then gives away as personal gifts/mementos. The taxpayer may even pay for them.
  69. Alberta Dennis Notso,redneck from Canada writes: I have never heard anything from JC that made any sense, ever, until his latest statement. In my view Harper (a good strong leader, best we have had) missed the boat. Making China unhappy with Canada will not bode well for us.
  70. Stan W from Winnipeg, Canada writes: This would be the Chretien who gave us pepper spray at the Vancouver APEC conference, bought the RCMP Tasers, but didn't let us buy our armed forces a replacement for ageing helicopters and missing icebreakers.

    How did Chretien suddenly become someone's expert in foreign affairs or human rights?
  71. Duane Freemantle from writes: Chretien is correct about the current governments attitude towards China.
  72. Stan L from Canada writes: ken kolthammer from Edmonton, Canada writes: LPC supporters really hate someone who takes a principled stand, as opposed to a principal (and interest) stand

    For a minute there I thought we had a PM who takes a pricipled stances and then I realized you were talking about Harper......Harber BTW has said that his non-attendance WAS not to send a message.....so you were saying?
  73. Stan W from Winnipeg, Canada writes: Diana, does the Wikipedia article mention Chretien is verbally illiterate in both official languages?

    Many of us knew he couldn't construct a proper sentence in the English language, but his inability to speak French was covered-up.

    Our news media covered that up, as if communication ability and appearance is irrelevant to a job as Prime Minister, national leader, and chief diplomat.

    On the other hand, our news media made a big deal about Stockwell Day's not knowing the intricacies of Ontario geography and appearing for a press conference on a jet ski, and Bob Stanfield missing a kick of 1 in 10 footballs.

    Don't pander to prejudice, don't make racist fun of people from other regions, but do report on disabilities that affect ability to perform the essential duties of the job.
  74. Stan W from Winnipeg, Canada writes: 'Oh really?' Mr. Chrétien continued. 'You want me to the tell the president of a country of 1.3 billion people you should do this and do that, but I don't dare to say what to do to the premier of Saskatchewan? You have to put things in perspective.'

    I've personally heard Chretien tell the premier of Saskatchewan what to do.

    The man couldn't tell the truth to save his life.

    And now he's telling the PM what to do. His hypocracy is monumental.
  75. Building an Ark from Eastern Slopes, Canada writes: diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Building an Ark:-- Am I supposed to take the views of someone who can't even spell Mr. Chretien's name seriously? Messrs, by the way, is the abbreviated form of Messieurs, plural of Monsieur.

    DM you remind me of the old French teacher I once had, in fact I spell his name Cretin which seems to fit. Thanks for the lesson on spelling - I commend you for not using the word Honerable in conjuction with JC...
  76. urban ranger from Vancouver, Canada writes: I read the article and these posts with bemusement.
    You mean some people actually care what Chretien says? I didn't care when he was PM and I sure as heck don't care now.
  77. none of your business from leningrad, Russian Federation writes: I like the hunger strike metaphor, maybe Canada can lodge a stronger indignation by setting itself on fire or cutting off a finger or two too. I will spare you a dime to call anyone who cares in China.
  78. G Montcler from Canada writes: This pathetic figure should stay put; the sponsorship is still in many people's mind and HE alone was responsible. Why would the CBA invite him as a speaker? Sponsorship, money grabs, lawyers... it fits.
  79. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Stan W:-- Some time ago, I caught a television interview with one of Mr. Chretien's many siblings - he has a good number of them (8). Dr. Michel Chretien is a well-known endocrinologist. He mentioned that he suffered from the same speech impediment as does his brother, Jean, and that only one of their siblings does not seem to have it. He said that he may look at an apple but be unable to retrieve the word, 'apple', and be thus forced to settle for 'red fruit'. This speech problem and others like it are no indication of either intelligence, ability, or wisdom. It did not prevent Mr. Chretien from earning a law degree from Laval. Presumably, being unable to spell hypocrisy doesn't prevent you from have a view on the subject.
  80. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Building an Ark:-- I wouldn't use honerable, because it's spelled honourable (or, if one is a Yank, honorable). Mr. Harper is our Prime Minister. I didn't vote for him and have no intention of ever doing so, but I do make it a point to spell his name - both of them - correctly, and almost always preceded by the honorific, Mr.
  81. Reality Check from Canada writes: Hey,'none of your business from leningrad, Russian Federation writes'

    This from a morally bankrupt country??? You think anyone cares about Russia... Perhaps the Euro countries will continue to pay lip-service, to keep your oil flowing, but the actions of Russian in Georgia are telling. Once the mad-dog that is your leader (having successfully side-steped democracy and retained all power for himself) is restrained, or Russia is kicked out of the G8, lets see who is willing to listen to who...

    Putz...
  82. Rangzen Bhu from Toronto, Canada writes: I guess Chretien is not a teen ager. Doesn't he remember Chinese boycott of Montreal 1972 unless he is one like Kissenger making loads of money from China as Chinese dictators are known to lavish favor to their well wishers abroad from Kissenger in US to Mugabe in Zimbabwe and family of Sudan's president.

    Will Chretien similar courtesy to Kim Ill Jong, Mugabe, for I don't see any difference between them and Chinese dictators.
  83. Building an Ark from Eastern Slopes, Canada writes: diane marie from calgary, Canada writes:-- I wouldn't use honerable

    Great after language class is over, and you certainly over perform in correcting others, could you go back to a Learned Lawyer, not completing a bill of sale, contract or any other important forms for a land deal when a simple two story home needs thirty pages with initials at every fourth page? - I forgot Hounerable as a napkin for a land deal, it's proper ...
  84. sudhir jain from Calgary, Canada writes: Who cares for what Jean Chretien says? When was the last time he said anything sensible?
  85. Mr. Perfect from Canada writes: Back in 1995, I made a proposal to Chinese officials that was well recieved by the the most senior personnel in a state owned company.
    They had to check with the Chinese government who turned down the proposal because of 'possible compromise to state secrets.' I will always remember what the Chinese official in Canada said to me. 'Chinese communism and Canadian capitalism really don't mix and its probably better that they didn't appove the deal because that you really can't trust the communist government.'
    Mr Chretien appears to have fallen to the Stockholm Syndrome.
  86. none of your business from leningrad, Russian Federation writes: Reality Check, if you bother to do your check, there isn't a Leningrad in Russia nowadays. So quite calling Russia bad names, but I guess you will do anyway, seeing your propagand prescribed wrods. For your info, 'none of your business' has been to many places including Marxstadt in DDR, Mao Zedong Shi in China, and maybe even Bethuneville in Canada. Maybe you can also check these place sout before you call those countries bad names. If Mars were allowed as an entry of city/country, 'none of your business' would have. But then the Martian population, who has done nothing wrong to you, would suffer the same fate.
  87. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Building an Ark:-- As you well know, contracts - whether on a napkin or in pages of legalese - are only as good as the commitment of the parties to honour them, Mr. Mackay and Mr. Orchard's agreement (on a napkin or similar) being a case in point. For some people, a handshake is good enough; for others, a so-called iron-clad document wouldn't be enough to make them honour their word.
  88. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: sudhir jain:-- At the beginning of the formation of the Coalition of the Willing.
  89. Rangzen Bhu from Toronto, Canada writes: Chretien really knows China well. Chinese leadership love any person of importance attacking Dalai Lama as there seemed to very few like Chretien and Kissenger who are in the good book of Beijing.

    Even in China those who attack Dalai Lama seemed to get promoted very soon like Hu Jintao.
  90. Ballin Munson from toronto, Canada writes: diane marie from calgary

    Won't vote for Harper....are you planning to move to his riding, or is Harper planning to move to yours, or do you not know how members of parliament are elected in Canada?

    Pick one....

    An an udder ting, for me, I put pepper on my steak...and chinese money in my pocket har har har...
  91. Reality Check from Canada writes: none of your business from leningrad, Russian Federation writes...

    Well, if you were from Mars, that would explain your silly comments.

    Nonetheless... My intent was to criticize your 'no one in China cares' statement... As well as insisting that by not appearing at the Opening Cerimonies, no statement was made.

    If you have followed this Olympics, you would know that it is ALL ABOUT CHINA's IMAGE, so by not appearing, it was a political statement, of a level that allows our athleats to compete.

    All in all, the RIGHT thing to do.
  92. Compos Mentis from in the Rootin', Tootin' West..., Canada writes: Yvonne Wackernagel from Woodville, Canada writes: '...On the other hand, in my opinion, Mr. Harper is not intelligent enough to even understand the meaning of the word Diplomacy. '

    Yet, there he is - being quoted in the front pages of the G&M! And you Yvonne?

    Complaining bitterly in the comments section of his story.

    Some people are too stupid to realize how stupid they really are.
  93. Compos Mentis from in the Rootin', Tootin' West..., Canada writes: Building an Ark from Eastern Slopes, Canada writes: '...So JC once again can comment for his personal gain? How entitled...or has he lost his capacity, enquiring Canadians wish to know where ethics supercede profits... '

    I don't get this comment?

    Governments are not in the business of commerce, are they? What is government for, but to grease the wheels of commerce (trade) for Canadian business people?

    So I really do not understand this argument that Chretien, now a private businesman, being denigrated for the pursuit of profit?

    Isn't the pursuit of profit a Conservative hallmark? You know - less government, more business profit?

    A Conservative arguing against profit. Now I've seen everything!
  94. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Ballin Munson:-- As you may know, a vote for any of the 308 (presumably) CPC candidates is a vote for Mr. Harper as Prime Minister. You do raise an interesting point, though, which Mr. Radwanski overlooked in his seeming admiration for the idea of American-style 'elder statesmen', and that is that Americans vote directly for President, which may explain the respect bestowed upon the Office irrespective of its occupant.
  95. none of your business from leningrad, Russian Federation writes: Much obliged to Harper government's kindness, I have offered my opinion how it can make a stronger statement, maybe even stronger than GWB's pre-Olympic ones. After all, among all the governments vying for the most anti-China title, this is probably the Canadian one's most realistic chance of beating the one in White House. The French one is such a flip-flop, the British one can't stick to the end, the German leader is only eager to show her anti-communism badge, being from an ex-communist country. I've even offered my dime. But even without my mizzly contribution, I am sure if the suggestions were taken, there would be crowds of Chinese not only listening but also watching.

    Oh, by the way, I met a guy on Mars who told me millions of earthlings call him God. He certainly won't call me silly.
  96. D sharman from calgary, Canada writes: for everyone who is riding the china superpower wave ...maybe you should wait a few......China is facing severe internal issues that will cripple it into the future least of which is a brutal demographic issue that makes our baby boom generation look insignificant. I am not one to pitch the wares of others but the following book (The Coming China Wars: Where They Will Be Fought and How They Can Be Won ) sheds pretty good insight on which pending superpower we should attach ourselves to....think India !!!!
  97. diane marie from calgary, Canada writes: Compos Mentis:-- I made the same point, though much, much less well, at 6:13. Since when are c/Conservatives opposed to people making money (and paying taxes on said income rather than hiding their income in a safe, I might add)? Confused thinking from the right, as usual.
  98. Reality Check from Canada writes: Arghhhh...'none of your business from leningrad, Russian Federation writes'

    And just beyond your simple little world... 'thar be a sign.. here thar be Dragons'...

    Reality.. a hard concept for someone raised in the bloc...

    But try.. we may still be able to salvage you...
  99. Ballin Munson from toronto, Canada writes: Diane Marie, to further your point, I believe the term 'Prime Minister' in not mentioned in this, or any other Commonwealth constitution. This points out that this role, is supposed to be one of limited importance...

    AS well, the PRESIDENT of the US, as well as most republics, is usually just the head of State,, not the head of Government as well (as in the US). This of course leads to the much missunderstood US dislike of anyone (especially foreingners) talking the presidency down...
  100. Richard Roskell from Canada writes: Mr. Cretien has never been shy about proving where commerce and human rights are on his list of priorities, relative to one another. I clearly recall his callous suppression of protest at UBC, when he hosted the corrupt dictator Sukarno of Indonesia at an economic summit. But! that does not mean that Mr. Cretien does not care about peace, good governance and human rights overall.

    Mr. Cretien is one of those rare commodities in politics: a realist. You can't fool him. And he knows how China's developed in the last twenty-five years.

    Like the Chinese, Mr. Cretien is pragmatic. He knows that positive change is coming to the citizens of China at a pace unseen anywhere else on the planet, probably in history. So who cares what government they're under? The Chinese nation is moving forward and taking its people along. And they want to do business with all nations! You'd have to be a fool to let petty bias stand in the way of progress- and opportunity- like that.
  101. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: Apparently, Jean Chretien, Power Corp. and the China consortium headed by the fierce and all-powerful Mo Strong opposed the war in Iraq because the war would stem the flow of their copious profits. They did not prevail in the face of the extra-mighty US military-industrial complex. The new breed of Conservatives in Canada, like their 'brethren and their women folk' in the US always try to find a way to deflect the finger of blame away from them. It may be called 'projection' in the Jungian sense, who knows? It's like the great global warming debate; for some reason, Al Gore and Mo Strong are simply running circles around the helpless oil companies, with visions of profits in their (not the oil companies') heads! Go figure. So you have Liberal cameras arriving at a bust at Conservative HQ two hours after the bust begins, but no, the Liberals were tipped off. The all-powerful Jean Chretien and the Liberal party, at the beck and call of rich corporations, as CPC supporters would have you believe. Ah yes, projection. CPC would never be at the beck and call of rich corporations. It is a grassroots party, after all. But only the shadow knows, hah, hah, hah, ahem. Oh yeah, China. Well, I did mention it once. What to do about China? Blow it to smithereens because Mao's policies killed millions? China will evolve on its own terms.
  102. Derek Holtom from Swan River, Canada writes: defending Chretien on this seem, I dunno, slimy
    talk about a conflict of interest and a lack of interest in human rights
  103. Paul MacEachern from Montreal, writes: Canada is an important country in the world. We have the world's second largest oil reserves. Harper could go to China and put the leader of China in a headlock and give him an atomic wedgy they would still have to be nice to us. LOL
  104. Richard Roskell from Canada writes: Sincere apologies for the error above, that should have been, 'the corrupt dictator SUHARTO...'
  105. D. B. from Greater Sask., Canada writes: Persecuted millions, with plenty of deaths and suicides. No reason to quibble over the exact figure. That would be a terrible thing to do. But China is the enemy of the future. I won't be around to see that, dammit.
  106. John Stanton from Canada writes: As usual, Chretien is being a hypocrite. Not only did he miss several Olympic openings himself, he also had no problem condescending to the Americans, an even bigger trading partner.
    • Posted 18/08/08 at 10:58 PM EST |