Dr. Matthew S. Johnston

But What Do I Know? . . . Miracle on Grass, Adam Stern, Steve Green, Jacques Doucet - Cooperstowners in Canada My weekly Canadian baseball news and notes column discusses the Miracle on Grass, Adam Stern, Steve Green, Jacques Doucet and Rheal Cormier.

20 years ago today, an underdog Canadian team led by Adam Stern (London, Ont.) defeated a U.S. squad that included Derek Jeter, Ken Griffey Jr. and Chipper Jones 8-6 in the 1st World Baseball Classic.

In Canadian baseball circles, we call it the "Miracle on Grass."

I wrote about it:

is.gd/hPDrRI

Happy 66th Birthday to Joe Carter!

His Blue Jays resume:

- 203 HRs (5th in Jays' history)
- 736 RBIs (5th in Jays' history)
- 5-time All-Star
- 2 Silver Slugger Awards
- 2 World Series rings
- One walk-off World Series-winning HR
- 2003 Canadian Baseball Hall of Fame inductee

I do not have confidence in the Canadian PM when he speaks about this, nor trust the accuracy of what he’s saying. He’s been all over the map, and it’s frustrating, confusing, and frightening, knowing what’s at stake. I voted for decisive, confident leadership. That isn’t this so far. He needs help.

“And when you pray, do not be like the hypocrites, for they love to pray standing in the synagogues and on the street corners to be seen by others. Truly I tell you, they have received their reward in full” (Matthew 6:5).

Sage Journals: Discover world-class research Subscription and open access journals from Sage, the world's leading independent academic publisher.

Latest research article (Open Access): “Is it who you know? A qualitative exploration of informal relationships in policing.” journals.sagepub.com/doi/10.1177/...

Liberal MPs to hold call Friday as caucus raises concerns about Carney's shifting Iran position | CBC News Foreign Affairs Minister Anita Anand is set to brief Liberal MPs on Friday morning about the government's position on the war that has now engulfed Iran and surrounding countries in the Middle East, a...

I am glad to see there is concern, questions raised, and organizing in the Liberal caucus.

NDP have the biggest opportunity they’ve ever had to resurge and capture political momentum. We’ll see what they do with that, but their leadership race should turn focus to the one pressing issue on Canadians’ minds — a focus the party seems united around.

“Military expansion stokes political momentum, fueling the drive toward intervention. Governments pouring resources into their military forces increasingly see the use of that power as an inevitable course.”

Carney sold Defence spending to Canadians for sovereignty, not aggression. Big difference.

Do you agree with this? bsky.app/profile/matt...

Oh that I agree with, but as you know, wars escalate and our pathway to that needs to be exceptionally defined

Second, Canadians won’t be on the sidelines very long if our troops — who are the families of Canadians — fight this war.

No. You can’t bring in the spectator argument. If there’s more information I need to form a public opinion as a private citizen, it’s the duty of the PM and government to share that information. I work like you with what I have. I won’t suppress my own opinion because they know more than I do.

It’s not a reduction! It’s a position generated through democratic debate prioritizing ethical (not just economic or diplomatic) reasoning. Any approach at the expense of this can be dangerous. We have every right to criticize how he’s navigating the reality, with unclear messaging and contradiction

How can you simultaneously respect international law and a war that violates it? That’s not a “balanced” position, it’s a contradictory one. Legitimacy isn’t determined by saying competing things, it comes through an established process driven by the rule of law. Carney hasn’t reconciled that.

They’re morally and ethically wrong. You realize agreement isn’t, according to most forms of logic, a strong sign what you’re saying is correct and true? You realize not every middle power (i.e., Europe) takes Canada’s position? Suppressing debate on this matter because “trust govt” is undemocratic.

bsky.app/profile/matt...

PM Carney needs to come back to Canada and make his case for supporting Trump and Netanyahu to the Canadian people.
He is not a CEO. He is our democratically-elected representative. In this moment of global crisis he must explain his position and take direction from the people.

Any military involvement by Canadian Armed Forces in the Middle East should be approved in Parliament, by a ***free vote***, from all MPs. This is a matter of conscience, not partisan interest, and MPs should consult their ridings extensively and engage in systematic, open debate before voting.

Canadian defence minister calls slain Iranian leader ‘force for evil,’ urges ceasefire They were David McGuinty’s first public remarks since the war broke out Saturday, delivered as Prime Minister Mark Carney and the Canadian delegation arrived in Sydney.

Source: www.thestar.com/politics/fed...

Mark Carney refuses to ‘categorically’ rule out military involvement in Middle East conflict Speaking in the Australian capital, Carney appeared to harden Canada’s stance on the war, saying it’s too soon to call for an immediate ceasefire.

Only two days ago, Canada’s Defence Minister called for a ceasefire. Now this. PM Carney has aligned Canada with ruthless world leaders whose chaos, incompetence, disregard for international law, and war will only worsen. If it’s too soon for a ceasefire, then when??? www.thestar.com/politics/fed...

“We implore all parties, including the US and Israel, to respect the rules of international engagement” (PM Carney).

So what is Canada’s position when they don’t? How, if at all, does our position change? What is our responsibility in the new international order when this rule is violated?

“We implore all parties, including the US and Israel, to respect the rules of international engagement” (PM Carney).

So what is Canada’s position when they don’t? How, if at all, does our position change? What is our responsibility in the new international order when this rule is violated?

That’s what you’re doing after I offered you an opportunity to quote him directly and offer something much more substantive to illegal war debate than “it’s complicated”. I am very willing to engage.

No. As a general rule of principle, I don’t endorse illegal wars that violate international law because it’s “complicated”. That doesn’t make me a “simpleton”, it makes me a compassionate human being who has empathy for the terrified people losing their lives and families, that includes soldiers.

Carney said “acting” because the reality is the “action” IS an attack and war and he said it right after they attacked Iran. You are intentionally obfuscating what is an obvious position to most Canadians. I’m not buying it. Carney used that language intentionally so folks like you could defend it.

Point me to sentences, paragraphs, direct quotes in the speech that actually refute what I’m saying and answer my questions. Show me, I am not seeing that. Don’t say “the speech” and assume you won this debate. Tell me what Carney is saying specifically, that justifies his initial statement. Waiting

No. As a general rule of principle, I don’t endorse illegal wars that violate international law because it’s “complicated”. That doesn’t make me a “simpleton”, it makes me a compassionate human being who has empathy for the terrified people losing their lives and families, that includes soldiers.

I’m not the Canadian PM nor the individual endorsing the illegal war. But the onus is on me? Carney IS THE ONE making this statement. He’s the one who said Canada supports this use of force. He’s the one who cannot adequately explain the significance of this on international law. I’m the problem???

Every time he says “civilians must be protected”, I wish someone would ask him “how” and wait for a coherent answer. How, in this escalating war you endorsed “to secure Canada’s future” and “act decisively” — can civilians be protected? Is that how these wars turn out? “Take shelter” doesn’t suffice

Every time he says “civilians must be protected”, I wish someone would ask him “how” and wait for a coherent answer. How, in this escalating war you endorsed “to secure Canada’s future” and “act decisively” — can civilians be protected? Is that how these wars turn out? “Take shelter” doesn’t suffice