It’s been 17 years since the Rwandan genocide. Jean is the first top-level Canadian official to visit Rwanda since the 1994 brutality. She delivered the speech in front of Rwanda authorities, acknowledging Canada’s failure to act during the genocide.

“The world’s failure to respond to adequately to the genocide is a failure in which Canada – as part of the international  community – readily acknowledges  its fair share of responsibility,”

“It is with a sense of utmost humility that I express the respects of Canada to all Rwandans who perished, suffered and who continue to suffer measurable loss in the Rwandan genocide,” she read.

The purpose of the visit was to strengthen the ties between Rwanda and Canada. The Governor-General is on a tour through the Republic of Rwanda, she started her tour through the Gisozi Genocide Memorial Center in Kigali, which is the capital of Rwanda. The Memorial Center is built over a grave where more than 250,000 bodies were buried from the genocide. Her trip will continue Thursday, visiting Butare, Nyamagabe, and Kibirizi, and then she will be returning to the capital. She is expected to return to Canada on Friday.

Oh right Canada is strengthening the ties with the Republic of Rwanda, so in order to do so the Governor-General will acknowledge what Canada did wrong. Why didn’t they do it 10 years ago? Or after it happened?

In the article it also states that, in 2004 and 2008 in Ottawa there were motions passed unanimously, which regretted the lack of action which occurred internationally during Rwanda’s time of need. This was also mentioned during the Governor-General’s statement.

Shocked would be the word to describe the feeling while reading this article. It’s been a long 17 years for the people in Rwanda, who have suffered deeply due to the genocide in 1994.

Over the course of 100 days Tutsis and some Hutus were in hell. Acts of genocide were spread throughout Rwanda; over 800,000 people lost their lives. Hundreds of people lost family and friends. While the people of Rwanda suffered, countries like the United States and Canada did nothing. Ignorance is bliss, to some. It must be nice to be able to acknowledge what Canada didn’t do, now after 17 years, but really isn’t it too late? Governments still ignored their pleas and the acts of genocide still happened.

As much as one can be angry about such treacherous times and the fact the people who could’ve done something chose to ignore it you have to be able to look at the bright side. There is awareness. It’s acknowledging that someone was at fault, or someone should have done more.

This story was first reported as an apology, but was quickly clarified stating by the Prime Minister’s office that it was just an acknowledgment.  Well her words sounded like an apology but she certainly never used the word apology.

But according to The New Times – Rwanda’s First Daily/ækˈnɒlɪdʒmənt/ , in the article “Canada apologizes over Genocide,” which was published today. The Governor-General apologized on behalf of Canada’s government.

Also yesterday, when the story came out the article was originally posted as;” Canada apologizes for role in Rwandan genocide.” The article was written by Alexander Panetta. Confusing, people don’t know whether or not the Governor-General was apologizing or acknowledging. Isn’t it a slap in the face for the Canadian government to say ‘oh no that wasn’t an apology; we were acknowledging what we did wrong’. But if the Rwandans feel as if it was an apology, why take that away?  Why is it so important to make the differentiation between an apology and acknowledgement?

Is it about blame?

Well if Canada was to apologize, it would be admitting guilt, that something wasn’t done (in this case). Of course, our lovely government officials hate taking blame or admitting guilt because it means they were wrong.

At the time Jean Chretien was Prime Minister of Canada, so that would mean he would be at fault for not doing anything.

So this issue brings up the discussion of whether or not a government should apologize for past governments mistakes.

Yes it should. Yes, it’s been 17 years and as much as it sounds ridiculous now to be acknowledging/apologizing. People are still affected by those words. If someone or something has the ability to impact people’s lives like that then why not? What has Canada got to lose? Nothing.

Nothing can be done to reverse what happened; but to always remember and learn from each other’s mistakes. As well as honour those who lost their lives.

It seems the how’s and why’s are being ignored by the Vatican, and they’re starting to point the finger. In the news article published by the National Post, Cardinal Tarcisio Bertone, Vatican secretary of state made harsh comments on who are abusing these children.

“But many others have demonstrated, have told me recently, that there is a link between homosexuality and pedophilia. This is true, this is the problem,” said Bertone.

The article goes on to talk about the relation between the two also incorporating a full-page ad that was in The New York Times, the U.S Catholic League for Religious and Civil Rights.

“While homosexuality does not cause predatory behaviour, and most gay priests are not molesters, most of the molesters have been gay,” read the ad.

Many feel this is an attempt to draw people’s attention away from the scandal and focus on this ridiculous notion. It doesn’t help this argument (if one must call it that), is a blatant viewpoint for the Roman Catholic Religion, as they see homosexuality as immoral. So, it’s rather obvious to put the blame on homosexuals.

Thomas Plante, a professor of psychology at Santa Clara University in California also talks in the article about this new issue. Plante also helps the Church screen candidates for priesthood.

“Before 2005 I would ask candidates their orientation to make sure they had a healthy psycho-sexual development, to see if they were mature enough. Now we don’t as because some seminaries will reject them for being gay.”

Now, there is no scientific proof to this claim, but it sure doesn’t stop the Church from spouting this unbelievable nonsense.

Sister Miriam Ukeritis, chief executive of the Southdown Institute spoke about the statements,

“There is an assumption that the sexual object for abusers is consistent with their sexual orientation—the assumption that a heterosexual would necessarily be attracted to young girls and a homosexual would be necessarily attracted to young boys. That’s not true,” Ukeritis said.

“There is no scientific correlation.”

On the flip side the Church is still making comments stating there is statistical evidence to this claim.

“The Catholic Church, under Pope Benedict XVI, has made it more difficult for practicing homosexuals to enter the priesthood. That is as it should be. Indeed, it is has been harder for gays to get into priesthood for some time, the result being that the incidence of abuse has declined,” said Bill Donohue, Catholic League president.

Pointing the Finger

Has the Church ever heard the saying you shouldn’t point a finger at someone because you have three other fingers pointing at yourself?

This is what it’s looking like, a blame game to switch the public’s attention from the horrible acts from priests, to coming up with a silly notion to cover everyone’s eyes.

The sad thing is no one is actually addressing the problem. The problem is the Church has priests abusing children. When it comes to light instead of addressing it the Church hides it. Why would the Roman Catholic Church want negative light shone down on them, when in the religion the Pope is the second to God?

The Three Fingers:

One, there is no scientific proof to what they’re claiming. It’s like an Ann Coulter statement, “Not all Muslims are terrorists, but all terrorists are Muslim.” Without directly saying what they want to say they are pointing the finger at homosexuals, when the problem has NOTHING to do with homosexuals at all. Then again, the Church has directly come out and said it’s a homosexual problem. It just means the people who choose these priests aren’t very good on judging character, because the people who do these despicable things, have something wrong with them, they are sick. It doesn’t matter how much praying or counselling occurs, this isn’t something that just floats away. It doesn`t matter how much blame the Church places on homosexuals it still looks like an attempt to shift everyone’s attention.

Two, why would sexual orientation matter anyways? If a man wants to become a priest, he knows full-well that he will have to be celibate. So, why is sexual orientation for priests even up for debate? It’s one giant vicious circle that is very confusing. In the National Post article Thomas Plante, screened candidates and now doesn’t ask about sexual orientation due to the fact the Church denies many homosexuals. It doesn’t matter if someone is straight or gay they want to become a priest, let them become a priest. And if they are denying homosexuals into the Church, why do they still have priests molesting children? This has nothing to with “homosexual tendencies” or celibacy; it means that these priests aren’t right upstairs.

Three, underneath all the blame and the pointing of fingers, lay one main issue. The unbalance of power, the Roman Catholic Church has a lot of influence over those who practice that religion. Not only that, but power in general. If the Church has the power to cover an issue that needs to be solved, there is something wrong. There is no excuse for taking an abusive priest away and then placing him somewhere else because no one wants to deal with it. That is just as bad as the act itself, its enabling. The power the Church has is astounding, and rightfully so it’s been around for ages and ages. Millions of people believe in that religion. But the Church can get away with a lot because of how much power they have, and that isn’t right. Many of those young children wouldn’t have been abused if the Church had done something earlier and just taken the priest out instead of placing him in different areas.

Instead of pointing the finger at a ridiculous non-existent issue someone should be looking at the real issues at hand.

The article seemed odd and stuck out to me. The article is about Feature reporter, Francine Kopun for the Toronto Star shutting off the TV for two days. No TV for two days is a great way; it seems today more people watch TV now than they ever did 10 years ago.

The article made me think of how watching too much TV is an issue and big generation gaps that people see every day. When I was a kid, I was never allowed inside, sure myself and my two other siblings watched Disney movies but we were ALWAYS outside! When you have a TV and it’s constantly on, it’s hard not to be sucked into the tube. When I look at younger generations, it seems that there are more children inside as opposed to outside. No one wants to go play, they’d rather play video games, or play on their DS, or on the computer, or watch TV. I don’t know if it’s a strict parent thing, or just children have changed. But I certainly remember when I was told to get outside, I went.
Now-a-days the world is much more technological, people have to have a television for every room of the house, a computer, cell phones, ipods, everything! It doesn’t help that when a young child is watching television that there is constant advertising, which as a young child of course you want the new action figure or Barbie because that’s what the other kids have.
I think the two days without television was a great idea, and a great article. I mean if you are used to watching a favourite show on at eight pm and you shut that TV off, now what is going to fill that time slot? Without TV, there are no distractions, but at the same time there is always the computer. I mean as a college student when you know you have a deadline to write a paper it’s easy to be distracted by Facebook, or Youtube.
It surprises me how much has changed since I was little and seeing kids pass me by. Certainly things have changed and I’m sure when I was little the older generations were bickering about us.
It isn’t the fact of cutting off the TV; it’s the idea that people have to make that decision, where it should be you know instead of eating dinner with the TV on how about we just talk about our days. Without TV kids are more active, kids have imaginations let them use them.

Would it be that hard to live without TV, maybe for a week?

The Pharmacy section in Shoppers will be closed early in some of those stores; free services will either be taken away or will be changed to a fee-based service. They are also claiming that the program to hire students for the summer isn`t being cut as well. Now Shoppers Drug Mart made $10 billion last year and they will be losing around $300,000 from the cuts from the government.

What is the big deal? It seems so minuscule next to the $10 billion that they made last year. Shoppers Drug Mart is a huge chain with 500 stores across Ontario. It’s hard to believe there will be drastic consequences involving this new cut.
With Rexall, there is a threat of pay freezing for their head office, and the cut of the intern and student programs that they have. They will also be putting a fee on drug deliveries.
According to the Globe and Mail drug stores will be facing a $1 billion lose in revenue next year.
Does it really cost that much for a one minute consultation? Must drug stores have to take away those services or put a fee on that, for a minute?
There is some sympathy for the little drug stores, which rely heavily on the Pharmacy. For some of them there is a threat of closing down and employee cuts. But they’re being given a fund to relieve the tension.

I wonder will service with a smile have a fee as well?

This picture was taken by me.

The Belleville Community Police put on their annual “Pitter Patter,” run this morning at Loyalist College. This would be the 16^th year this fundraiser has occurred. The Pitter Patter run is a major fundraiser for the organization, which all the money raised, goes to supporting Children’s Safety programs. Some of them are Belleville Police Service Bike Rodeo, Care Seat Clinics, and Child Print Identification Events etc.

As of 8:30 am registration began, dozens of people young and old came out to run or to cheer.  The atmosphere was hectic, and a little confusing. But people were ready to run; it was good to see so many people out there running for a cause at various ages.

The race began at 10 am sharp; Constable Aaron Bucci spoke up just before the run welcoming everyone and outlining the course for everyone running.  Chief of Police Cory McMullan counted it off and fired the gun, starting the run.

After 20 minutes or so, the first couple of people started to run in with strive and endurance. All the people at the end of the line were cheering for everyone coming in from the run.

After everyone came in from the run, everyone situated themselves in the Cafeteria in Loyalist, for refreshments. Before the medal ceremony took place Bucci thanked all the sponsors and donors for all their help, just to name a few; Remax, Starbucks, Cornels Popcorn, City of Belleville, Rona Cashway, Dairy Queen, Sears, Reids Dairy, Culligan The Good Water, and Tri and Run Sports. All participants were awarded with gifts, and first, second and third place winners were awarded with medals from each age group.

It was a beautiful day for a run!

But what is the difference between celebrity reporting and arts and entertainment?

Reading the article, “Hedley delights a young crowd,” published in the Toronto Star on April 6^th, 2010. The article was written by Ben Rayner, an entertainment reporter for the Toronto Star.

The article was engaging and informative. The article provided information that was useful and eye-opening. There were issues addressed in the article that were plausible. Arts and entertainment bring up ideas no one really thinks about. Its thought provoking, the writing is intelligible. People can tell when they’re reading a tabloid, its caddy, every detail is included, and most times it’s malicious. It’s often one-sided, and a lot of the time is considered a joke.

It’s hard to recognize the difference between the two, but if one were to look closely the differences are there.

There is no she shoots, she scores. It’s more like she stumbles and she falls. The horrible part about it is the fact the entire public watches. In the article it states that Lohan she had stumbled to a club from another club. Lohan suggests that it was well paid bouncers to make her look like an idiot. Another incident of Lohan stumbling entering and exiting a club, she claims she was pushed by a rabid paparazzi.

The entire situation revolving Lohan is rather ridiculous, every times she breathes, leaves her house, enters or leaves a club there are photographers. How this news worthy? What is so special about Lohan?

It all comes back to the very same thing, she is an actress and the public loves to watch her crumble and fall. It is an odd fascination, no one wants to see her succeed, and they want to see her go down this destructive path. In the article it also stated that one website posted “Dead in a year or less.” What kind of journalism is that? Where does someone get off making a statement like that? We’ve all seen her come back and say she’s on top again and then stumble off into the distance. But does it make it right?

At the same time, for some actresses or actors, any publicity is good publicity because their name is still in the tabloids.

Not only does Sandra Bullock have to put up with the fact her husband has cheated on her and the unrelenting coverage this story seems to be getting, more accusations come out. According to a Canadian journalist there is a sex tape of Bullock and James. The Montreal writer, Ian Halperin has stated the tape show James in a Nazi uniform with a Hitler moustache. This is just coming about at a time where James has just left a sex-rehab clinic. There is no proof that there is actually a tape such as thing that exists.

With the possibility of this alleged sex tape, many feel this could danger Sandra’s career because she’s known as “America’s Sweetheart.” If there is a tape, there is a possibility that it could danger her career.

But there is one question that isn’t answered…Why do we care?

It isn’t anyone’s business what any couple does behind closed doors. Why should people care if Jesse James and Sandra Bullock have a kinky sex tape?

Well it doesn’t help that there are shows like: TMZ, Entertainment Tonight, Access Hollywood, the list goes on. Those shows glorify reporting like this, getting into people’s lives. Unfortunately, that is what the public wants to know. The public wants to know everything about the celebrities of Hollywood. The public fuels this type of reporting because why should papers, TV shows and websites stop this type of reporting if the public wants it. It is in an ugly infatuation the public has with wanting to know every dirty detail in celebrity lives.

I will admit I like my piece of gossip every now and then but getting into someone’s personal life isn’t something to glorify or report about.

The blog “Redesigning the hot dog,” was written by Angela Peters. The article “Redesign the hot dog, doctor’s urge,” was originally published by the Toronto Star.

The hot dog is the highest food risk, said Dr. Gary Smith of Nationwide Children’s hospital. Hot dogs are in need of a redesign, so the potential of harm to small children is decreased. Its size and shape means the hot dog can wedge itself into a child’s throat, blocking the air passages entirely.

“There are no such regulations on high risk foods, and children are much more likely to put food in their mouths than a toy,” said Smith, who is the lead author of the policy published in the current issue of Pediatrics.

“And unlike other risk foods such as grapes and popcorn, however, hot dogs are man-made and manufacturers can easily change their shape,” he said.

Other risky foods for small children include grapes, popcorn, hard candy, carrots, pears, apples and celery. According to SafeKids Canada, about 44 children age 14 and under die every year from choking and another 380 are hospitalized. Almost half of those cases are from choking on food.  SafeKids agree with the American Academy of Pediatrics’ recommendation to slice the hot dog lengthwise. But, the paediatricians want a new shape for the dogs.

Smith notes, “There is nothing to stop you from redesigning the hot dog. Safety sells. Someone can create a dog that isn’t round and airways-sized.”

In Sweden since 1979, they’ve had “age labelling” on foods for infants and young children and they’ve also had warning labels on pre-packaged shelled nuts since 1981.

Janet Riley, president of the U.S National Hot Dog & Sausage Council, agrees with the need for education, and more than half of the hot dogs sold in the United States have warnings for parents to cut the hot dogs into smaller pieces.

“As a mother who has fed toddlers cylindrical foods like grapes, bananas, hot dogs and carrots, I ‘redesign’ them in my kitchen by cutting them with a paring knife until my children were old enough to manage on their own,” Riley said.

But, Smith disagrees.

The paediatricians are calling for:

• Warning labels on foods that pose a high choking risk
• A recall of food products that pose a significant choking hazard
• The establishment of a nationwide food-related choking-incident surveillance and reporting system
• A commitment from food manufacturers to design new food and redesign existing food to minimize chocking risk, to the extent possible.

Recommendations for parents and caregivers from the policy:

• Do not give children younger than four any round, firm foods unless they have been cut into very small pieces. Cut hot dogs lengthwise and cut grapes into quarters
• Do not give toddlers other high risk foods, such as hard candy, nuts, seeds and raw carrots
• Never let small children run, play or lie down while eating
• Keep coins and other small items out of reach of young children at all times

The importance of this article is the fact; many people in this country have families, young children. The statistics shown in this article are very high and is a concern for many parents. According to Statistics Canada’s 2006 Census there are 8.9 million families in Canada. Those are a lot of families, a lot of children to be worried about.

I remember as I child sitting with my brother and sister enjoying some KD with hotdogs, the dogs were cut up small on an angle. Man, it was delicious. I knew as I got older that hotdogs were a risky food for children to eat, which is why parents cut them up. But I never knew so many kids died specifically from choking. Some pretty scary stuff I’d say. Now in the benefits towards the child, this is a mighty fine idea. Changing the shape of the hot dog, isn’t going to be redesigned in a month, this will take time and money. Are manufacturers prepared to pay? Now as much as I am concerned about the high amount of deaths regarding choking. But wouldn’t it just be common sense to cut up your child’s food into really tiny pieces?

For most of the blog I agreed with what Angela was saying, because she is right. She made excellent points about the issue,

“Hot dog choking is not an issue that has just occurred. This has happened for years. However, with any type of product, there should be a warning label. Manufactures shouldn’t be held accountable for an incompetent parent who feeds their child a hot dog, and not to mention where is the nutritional value?”

But when it got down to her conclusion she made the statement, “Parents should start taking more responsibility for their children, and stop blaming the manufacturer.” Now I don’t know if she read a study or read another article, but this would be an assumption. It didn’t state anywhere in the article that parents were blaming the manufacturer. That’s a big statement, whether or not parents are blaming the manufacturers for their child choking is a jump and rather ridiculous. It wouldn’t make any sense for a parent to complain or blame the manufacturers, because parents should know what they’re giving their children and the risks. If a parent knows a food is risky for their child to eat, either cut it up, or don’t give it to them.  Education is key; people need to realize that you can just give a kid hotdog without cutting it up. Yes, a hotdog doesn’t hold a lot of nutritional value, but it is sure damn good.

I can understand how a hotdog can be a high risk food, it’s small and if you’re not chewing properly it can be wedged in there. But it all comes down to common sense, if parents don’t want to cut up their food, they shouldn’t be giving the food to their child anyways. I agree with the warning labels, sometimes people just don’t know. As much it is common sense to cut up food, if a redesign of a hotdog is going to better the chances of a child not choking, why shouldn’t there be a redesign?

A Delaware pediatrician is being charged with serial molestation of 103 children. Investigators are urging any former patients or parents to come forward. A grand jury returned a 160-page indictment Monday against Dr. Earl Bradley of Lewes, Delaware of 417 counts of sexual crimes. Bradley’s office closed in 2005 after he was under investigation. Eugene Maurer, Bradley’s attorney said, he would like to seek to move the trial out of Sussex County, but the “real battleground” in the case will be Bradley’s mental state, not what is seen on videotapes seized from Bradley’s home and office.
Attorney General Beau Biden said all the alleged victims were caught on more than 13 hours of video recordings, some dating back to 1998. Bradley also faces charges of rape, sexual exploitation of a child, unlawful sexual contact, and continuous sexual abuse of a child, assault and reckless endangering.  Bradley was arrested in December and was originally charged with 29 felony counts of allegedly abusing nine children. His bail is set at $2.9 million. His medical license was taken away permanently by the state Board of Medical Practice last week. The indictment alleges Bradley was videotaping his sexual exploitation of patients as far back as December 1998. The indictment also contains the fact there is a gap of more than a year from October 2004 to June 2005, which there were crimes committed. Authorities have ordered reviews, which will determine whether doctors, hospitals, state agencies or law enforcement authorities failed to comply with a state law. The state law requires reporting to the medical licensing board in 30 days if they believe a doctor has acted in an unprofessional manner. The aim is to determine, “how this physician could lurk in our midst for as long as he did,” said Biden.

This may have happened in the United States, but this can happen anywhere. The disturbing reality of this issue is the fact, it could happen to anyone. According to the Institute of Marriage and Family Canada, for every 100,000 young persons under the age of 18, three hundred and thirty-four were victims of physical or sexual violence by a friend or acquaintance. A doctor may not be a friend, but he /she is someone a person trusts because he/she is the doctor. An unfortunate incident like this affects everyone, and EVERYONE should be aware!

Makes. Me. Sick. To. My. Stomach. I hope this man rots in prison for the rest of his life. There are other details regarding the case in the Toronto Sun, but I did not have the heart to type them. The vile and disgusting acts should never be afflicted upon anyone. The unfortunate thing is it happens all the time, and in this case, it was a doctor. Someone who any person will trust because it is your doctor, someone who is supposed to have your best interest at heart.

Bradley’s lawyer was quoted in the paper. Now it was a logical statement but it angered me nonetheless,

“I’m sure they have their reasons for including all these different victims in the indictment,” said Maurer, noting that under state law, a single conviction of rape would be enough to put Bradley behind bars for life.

Yes, the prosecution should include all the victims because the public should be made aware of the affect this man has had. The innocent children he has victimized. Yes, one rape conviction would put him behind bars, but this man shouldn’t be let off easy! Regardless of his mental state, horrifying acts such as these should never happen.

There are no words to describe what I’m feeling right now. There are plenty of facilities that help victims with sexual abuse. But there is a bridge that needs to be crossed, many are afraid to come out and tell anyone. Or the fact often times nothing is done or the perpetrator is given a slap on the wrist. On the Ontario Women’s Directorate site there were statistics done by Statistics Canada, only 6 percent of all sexual assault victims are reported to the police. Of the 6 percent of sexual assaults that are reported, only 40 percent result in charges being laid. Of those cases where charges are laid, two-thirds result in conviction. What hope does that give to victims? What does that say?  You can make up your own mind about that. But something needs to happen and those who are in the government should really stop and look at these statistics and think to themselves, how can we change it? Regardless of where this article is from, this affects everyone, and everyone should be aware of case such as this. All of those children will have their justice.