Opinion: An American embraces the spirit of Canada
'The Hall of Gods,' exclaimed Mary Schaffer in 1929 as she boated across Alberta's Maligne Lake, with its turquoise waters and sculpted mountain peaks. The first European to behold his land of wonder, she was told by First Nations people there that the very small land mass at the lake's centre was to them 'Spirit Island'.
Article content
My wife and I arrived in Alberta on July 2 with two questions: Was Jasper National Park as beautiful as I remembered from a 1970s visit? And second, how has the Canadian spirit responded to threats of annexation from the United States?
Article content
Article content
Article content
We had heard at least one American tour company was skipping Jasper—citing logistical concerns, but perhaps also with doubts that the area had recovered from last year's wildfires. The park indeed lost some forest. Guides estimated that three to five per cent of parkland was affected. As Canadians undoubtedly know, we learned that the town of Jasper, however, suffered much more—nearly 30 per cent of its property was destroyed.
Article content
Article content
Yet, the spirit of Alberta is one of resilience. Some residents are still in temporary shelters, but are awaiting permanent housing; some businesses haven't reopened; others feared a loss of tourists. But visitors from all over the world are hearing that Jasper remains a magical place, not a site to be avoided.
Article content
On June 29, three days before we embarked for Calgary, the American president once again told Time magazine that he intended to annex Canada as the 51st state. An American friend of ours wondered whether Canadians only tolerate American tourists for their money.
Article content
Article content
We found the opposite. People in Alberta were eager to share one of the most beautiful places on Earth —wanting us to share in the spirit of adventure that the Canadian Rockies offer. Though we mostly avoided politics, I did say 'I'm sorry' to two Canadians, neither voiced anger at the sovereignty-attacking words by our president.
Article content
Canadians appear to like understatement. One example came from a historical marker by the Bow River. A sign recounted how a hiker fell into a ditch. He reportedly told his mates, 'It would be good to deal with this situation with haste.'
Article content
That gentle understatement felt quintessentially Canadian — echoing Britain's enduring 'stiff upper lip' influence. Another example: a wildlife guide telling us of a tourist trampled by an elk, commenting: 'We find a range of intelligences here.'
Article content
What amazed me most in terms of Canadian attitude was what we didn't see: there were no protest signs, no anti-American buttons or stickers. At least in the parts of Alberta we visited, political expression was invisible. Had the situation been reversed, fierce anti-Canadian protest messaging would be very prominent, and I would fear for the safety of Canadians visiting the States.
Try Our AI Features
Explore what Daily8 AI can do for you:
Comments
No comments yet...
Related Articles
Winnipeg Free Press
35 minutes ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Company advised by Trump sons said it hoped to benefit from fed money, then took it back
NEW YORK (AP) — A public document filed by a company that just hired President Donald Trump's two oldest sons as advisers included a sentence early Monday that said it hoped to benefit from grants and other incentives from the federal government, which their father happens to lead. But when The Associated Press asked the Trump family business about the apparent conflict of interest, the document was revised and the line taken out. Eric Trump and Donald Trump Jr. are getting 'founder shares' worth millions of dollars in New America Acquisition 1 Corp., a company with no operating business that hopes to fill that hole by purchasing an American company that can play 'a meaningful role in revitalizing domestic manufacturing,' according to to the filing. The president has geared his trade policy toward boosting manufacturing in the U.S. The original version of the securities filing said the target company should be 'well positioned' to tap federal or state government incentives. That reference was taken out of the revised version of the filing. The Trump Organization didn't reply to a question about whether New America still planned to benefit from government programs or why the line was cut. But the outside law firm Paul Weiss that helped prepare the document sent an email to AP saying it was 'mistake' made by 'scriveners,' an old term for transcribers of legal papers. Kathleen Clark, an expert in government ethics, said any excuses are too late because the Trumps had already tipped their hand. Monday Mornings The latest local business news and a lookahead to the coming week. 'They just deleted the language. They haven't committed not to do what they said earlier today they were planning to do,' said the Washington University law professor and Trump critic. 'It's an attempt to exploit public office for private profit.' New America is what's know as a special purpose acquisition company, or SPAC. It's a publicly traded company that exists solely to use its funds to acquire another company and take the target public. New America plans to raise money by selling stock on the New York Stock Exchange at $10 a share. That will hand the two Trump sons a total of $5 million in paper wealth on the first day of trading. The company hopes to sell enough shares to raise $300 million, which it then plans to use buying a yet unidentified manufacturer. A press release issued by New America saying it was focused on 'American values and priorities.' It made no mention of the aim to get government incentives. The filing to New America's potential new investors to Securities and Exchange Commission was explicit about what it was looking for in target company. It said, among other things, it would that can ride 'public policy tailwinds' by benefiting from federal or state 'grants, tax credits, government contracts or preferential procurement programs.'
Toronto Sun
an hour ago
- Toronto Sun
Letters to the Editor, Aug. 5, 2025
UNPOPULAR VOTE This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. THIS CONTENT IS RESERVED FOR SUBSCRIBERS ONLY Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. SUBSCRIBE TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Subscribe now to read the latest news in your city and across Canada. Unlimited online access to articles from across Canada with one account. Get exclusive access to the Toronto Sun ePaper, an electronic replica of the print edition that you can share, download and comment on. Enjoy insights and behind-the-scenes analysis from our award-winning journalists. Support local journalists and the next generation of journalists. Daily puzzles including the New York Times Crossword. REGISTER / SIGN IN TO UNLOCK MORE ARTICLES Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account. Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments. Enjoy additional articles per month. Get email updates from your favourite authors. THIS ARTICLE IS FREE TO READ REGISTER TO UNLOCK. Create an account or sign in to continue with your reading experience. Access articles from across Canada with one account Share your thoughts and join the conversation in the comments Enjoy additional articles per month Get email updates from your favourite authors Don't have an account? Create Account Re 'Clever counter to longest ballot stunt' (Lorne Gunter, July 30): Gunter hits the nail on the head with his column describing Elections Canada's move to mitigate the disastrous effects of the self-appointed, non-democratic, Longest Ballot Committee in the coming byelection in Battle River-Crowfoot. If these yahoos are serious about changing the Canadian electoral system, get the votes in Parliament to make the change democratically — let all Canadians have their say, not just a disgruntled few. Duane Sharp Mississauga (We vote for Gunter's opinion) HUSH, HUSH Re 'Canada's left shows they don't support free speech' (Brian Lilley, July 28): Free speech in Canada? Just like free trade with the U.S. A mirage. Canada has no free speech and no free trade. Never did. Never will. We are muzzled unless we pay tribute to our social controllers. Anything outside the approval zone is declared hate speech, prosecuted, persecuted and shut down. We need an attitude adjustment. Consider this quote attributed to Voltaire by English writer S.G. Tallentyre (pseudonym of Evelyn Beatrice Hall): 'I disapprove of what you say, but I will defend to the death your right to say it.' Never happens in demented and delusional Canada. This advertisement has not loaded yet, but your article continues below. LD Cross Ottawa (Make sure to read Jerry Agar's column on the adjacent page) CRIMINAL ONSLAUGHT After 10 years of brutal Liberal dictatorship that the Canadian Constitution and the Canadian Charter of Rights offer Canadians no protection against extreme political ideology. About the only thing that I can find is the legal obligation of the governing party to provide safety and security for Canadians. Now, clearly, the Liberals are not doing this. Crime is up; criminals, terrorists and cartels are flooding into Canada. Why have there been no charges laid against federal politicians? Glenn William Cunningham Calgary (Canada's judges are too busy supporting those politicians by coddling criminals) Opinion Columnists Weird Wrestling Toronto & GTA
Winnipeg Free Press
2 hours ago
- Winnipeg Free Press
Bondi moves forward on Justice Department investigation into origins of Trump-Russia probe
WASHINGTON (AP) — Attorney General Pam Bondi has directed that the Justice Department move forward with a probe into the origins of the Trump-Russia investigation following the recent release of documents aimed at undermining the legitimacy of the inquiry that established that Moscow interfered on the Republican's behalf in the 2016 U.S. presidential election. Bondi has directed a prosecutor to present evidence to a grand jury after referrals from the Trump administration's top intelligence official, a person familiar with the matter said Monday. That person was not authorized to discuss it by name and spoke on condition of anonymity to The Associated Press. Fox News first reported the development. It was not clear which former officials might be the target of any grand jury activity, where the grand jury that might ultimately hear evidence will be located or which prosecutors — whether career employees or political appointees — might be involved in pursuing the investigation. It was also not clear what precise claims of misconduct Trump administration officials believe could form the basis of criminal charges, which a grand jury would have to sign off on for an indictment to be issued. The development is likely to heighten concerns that the Justice Department is being used to achieve political ends, given longstanding grievances over the Russia investigation voiced by President Donald Trump, who has called for the jailing of perceived political adversaries. Any criminal investigation would revisit one of the most dissected chapters of modern American political history. It is also surfacing at a time when the Trump administration is being buffeted by criticism over its handling of documents from the Jeffrey Epstein sex trafficking investigation. The investigation into Russian election interference resulted in the appointment of a special counsel, Robert Mueller, who secured multiple convictions against Trump aides and allies but did not establish proof of a criminal conspiracy between Moscow and the Trump campaign. The inquiry shadowed much of Trump's first term and he has long focused his ire on senior officials from the intelligence and law enforcement community, including former FBI Director James Comey, whom he fired in May 2017, and former CIA Director John Brennan. The Justice Department appeared to confirm an investigation into both men in an unusual statement last month but offered no details. Multiple special counsels, congressional committees and the Justice Department's own inspector general have studied and documented a multi-pronged effort by Russia to interfere in the 2016 presidential election on Trump's behalf, including through a hack-and-leak dump of Democratic emails and a covert social media operation aimed at sowing discord and swaying public opinion. But that conclusion has been aggressively challenged in recent weeks as Trump's director of national intelligence and other allies have released previously classified records that they hope will cast doubt on the extent of Russian interference and establish an Obama administration effort to falsely link Trump to Russia. In one batch of documents released last month, Tulsi Gabbard, the director of national intelligence, disclosed emails showing that senior Obama administration officials were aware in 2016 that Russians had not hacked state election systems to manipulate the votes in Trump's favor. But President Barack Obama's administration never alleged that votes were tampered with and instead detailed other forms of election interference and foreign influence. A new outcry surfaced last week when Sen. Chuck Grassley, the Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee, released a set of documents that FBI Director Kash Patel claimed on social media proved that the 'Clinton campaign plotted to frame President Trump and fabricate the Russia collusion hoax.' The documents were part of a classified annex of a report issued in 2023 by John Durham, the special counsel who was appointed during the first Trump administration to hunt for any government misconduct during the Russia investigation. Durham did identify significant flaws in the investigation but uncovered no bombshells to disprove the existence of Russian election interference. His sprawling probe produced three criminal cases; two resulted in acquittals and the third was a guilty plea from a little-known FBI lawyer to a charge of making a false statement. Republicans seized on a July 27, 2016, email in Durham's newly declassified annex that purported to say that Hillary Clinton, then the Democratic candidate for president, had approved a plan during the heat of the campaign to link Trump with Russia. But the purported author of the email, a senior official at a philanthropic organization founded by billionaire investor George Soros, told Durham's team he had never sent the email and the alleged recipient said she never called receiving it. Durham's own report took pain to note that investigators had not corroborated the communications as authentic and said the best assessment was that the message was 'a composites of several emails' the Russians had obtained from hacking — raising the likelihood of Russian disinformation. The FBI's Russia investigation was opened on July 31, 2016, following a tip that a Trump campaign adviser, George Papadopoulos, had told a Russian diplomat that Russia was in possession of dirt on Clinton.
