Sunday, September 16, 2007

Daily Digest September 16, 2007



ST.JOHN'S TELEGRAM - Osama massages his message

HALIFAX CHRONICLE HERALD - Backing out slowly in Iraq best strategy

MONTREAL GAZETTE - Believe it or not: Interesting by-elections

TORONTO STAR - Broken promises and hard choices

NATIONAL POST - The Taliban grow desperate

        The right call at the UN

WINNIPEG FREE PRESS - Global war on terror -- fact or fiction?

WINNIPEG SUN - Revving up Canadian auto sales


CALGARY SUN - It's all in the family
Governments could do more to support this vital component of society

EDMONTON JOURNAL - Soaring dollar, souring looks?

VANCOUVER PROVINCE - We need to get tough with street punks who laugh at the law


Ottawa gives Crombie a role in Caledonia standoff

Turning ragtag Afghan warriors into cops
Canada's new focus is on training willing but inept Afghans to handle the security mission

Iraq and Afghanistan two sides of same coin

Iran conundrum: a dangerous enemy, friendly population

Should your daughter get the HPV vaccine?


Quebec Liberals reject "civic nation" definition

Williams expected to call election Monday



Canadians favour current electoral system: poll

School focus playing well for Liberals
One in four polled says it is the primary issue

Tory signals he'll vote no in referendum
MMP 'Less Accountable'

Ontario Tories focus their campaign

Liberals risk a split in moderate vote, pollsters say

Greens in a good spot after first week of race

Ontario election campaign is anything but dull
The Tory proposal to extend funding to religious schools has captured spotlight

Dion cool in face of Quebec byelection challenges

Liberal heavyweights head to Outremont

Flaherty: Economy 'strongest in a generation'

MPs feast on non-issue

Biofuels not necessarily all that green

Is it too late to stop the ethanol con job?

Twenty years later, the Montreal Protocol is still making its mark
The pact was a ground-breaking deal that set the stage for Kyoto

Alan Greenspan claims Iraq war was really for oil

Fed veteran Alan Greenspan lambasts George W Bush on economy

Power, not oil, Mr Greenspan
Alan Greenspan's announcement that the Iraq war is about oil will cheer the anti-war left and confound the Whitehouse

Miss Angry's brand new target

The Liberal Party of Canada: A pattern of denial to pro-Palestinian candidates?

GST killed off deficit, Mulroney maintains

Climate change latest invasion
Inuit life has been altered by a product of industrialization and pollution in which they played a miniscule part and over which they have no control

Burka controversy tempest in a teapot

Voter identification the issue, not veils
Current elections laws closed many loopholes, but there's much room to improve

Harper's mixed messages on troop withdrawal help no one
Are we leaving in February 2009, or will we be there until we 'finish the job'?

Issues & Ideas

The New Challenge: Choice 
More On The Woman Issue Online 
Portrait Of Age 14 
'Miracle of change,' but finish line still eludes women 
'I can cuss. I drive a sports car. I own my own real estate' 
Dost My Census Deceive Me? 
Freelancing makes motherhood and feminism possible 
What about sex? 
Talking openly about sexuality no longer taboo 
Canada's manliest city 
The families left behind 
'Hard choices continue to define women's lives' 
'I'm trying to do so much': career, mother, wife, friend 
Better educated women starting to marry down 
Dinner time: women's final frontier 
The struggle between excellence and self-acceptance 
From College To The Convent 
'The problem we have now is about guilt --not choice' 
'Options have gone from almost nil to exponential' 
Trials of a homemaker 
Attempting to define feminism and equality 
Strong arm comes with a woman's touch 
Surviving and thriving in old boys' club of politics 
The family, interrupted 
Poet and novelist 'was given permission' to write 
A Day In The Life 
Freedom to be a woman 
Feminists fall silent 
The virtue of women 
Working Through The Guilt Trips 
What's in a name? 
Year of the spouse  


Le résultat des élections complémentaires donnera le ton à Ottawa cet automne

Le Bloc québécois est dans son dernier sprint avant les complémentaires

La force de l'économie canadienne calme les marchés mondiaux, dit Flaherty

McGuinty veut que l'Ontario soit mieux représentée aux Communes

La marine devra apprendre à affronter terroristes et pirates, croit un amiral

La marine canadienne relâche ses règles environnementales dans l'Arctique

Blitz final



        Once given, incentives such has tax breaks are hard to take away. The ethanol industry would collapse overnight without them, putting farmers
        and refiners out of business, costing jobs and alienating voters. Sadly, the ethanol industry is here to stay, whether taxpayers on both sides of the   Atlantic want it or not. This is Soviet-style central planning at its very worst. If ethanol were good for consumers and good for the planet, consumers         wouldn't be forced to pay for it through their taxes and forced to buy it through legislation. If you want to impress your neighbours with your green   credentials, vote for politicians - if you can find one - who vow to kill the ethanol industry.
        But despite the Afghan commander's assurance of his men's abilities, Langelier doesn't underestimate the job ahead of him in training the Afghans       to handle their own security.
        "To do the job will take years," he said in an interview. "They learn very slowly. Very few of them are literate.


"Brent Cameron"

Through you, to the denizens of the DD
I am the point person for the organization within the No MMP Campaign covering Eastern Ontario.
We have people, now, in virtually every riding in the region, but we really need all the help that can be offered.
If you live between Cobourg and the Quebec border, and outside the City of Ottawa, please contact me.
H: 613-374-2641
Cell: 613-483-0763
Brent Cameron

Robert Ede
Subject: Trusts of the Crown & Treaties

Eugene thru Joe,
I'd like to know more about these 'trusts' of the Crown
Is this a well-known concept & nomenclature (that I just don't know about)?
Eugene Parks responds: Aboriginals are understood under Canadian and Common law to be a jurisdiction of the Crown.
But note very carefully, Canada (a trust of the crown) is not the same as the trust of the crown that incorporates aboriginal title. Aboriginal and Canadian Trusts of the Crown are not the same Trusts.

Historical, legal, and geographical facts contradict your assumption that the various trusts of the Crown are the same as the Trust of the Crown known as Canada.
It is historical fiction to say that the trust that is aboriginal title is the same as the trust that is Canada. See the so-called 10 treaties and the royal proclamation of 1763.

For illustration, the Jersey Island (and Channel Islands), England, Wales, Canada etc. are jurisdictions of the Crown but they are not the same jurisdiction of the Crown.
And, Canadian law does not directly apply to say, the Cannel Islands, and likewise does not apply directly to say New Zealand, or Australia etc. 
However, via treaty Canada's relationship is defined with other jurisdictions of the Crown. Treaty defines the relationship between trusts of the Crown.

Likewise, Canada's relationship with aboriginals is defined by Treaty (and not arbitrarily by the sole actions of either party). Again see, the 10 treaties, the royal proclamation of 1763, and Canada's own constitution as examples of proclaimed treaties.

Robert Ede

From: John Anderson
Subject: Response to Eugene Parks

Hello Joe:

I don't want to get into a long exchange with Eugene Parks (Reference:
Yesterday's DD.); he is entitled to his opinions.  But I think it
worthwhile to go one step further on the subject of aboriginal

Eugene wrote, "Historically, aboriginals have not chosen to support
unaccountable leaders."  I am prepared to accept this statement as fact.

Eugene then went on to write, "Rather the government of Canada paid/pays
for and supported/supports such leaders ­ often ignoring other voices
that have legitimacy within aboriginal communities."  I think this is

My perception is that much of the recent controversy with respect to
aboriginal governance in this country stems from the attempts of the
federal government (not just the current Conservative government) to
force openness and fairness in First Nations' governance.

Indeed, the government pays huge sums to various First Nations, but the
government's attempts to force accountability for those funds is
construed as interference with First Nations' autonomy.

And now I may be accused of being political.  I would suggest to you
that the guardian of the status quo is Phil Fontaine's Assembly of First
Nations.  As I understand it, the AFN does not represent band members;
it represents the chiefs of those bands -- who have a vested interest in
defending their turf.

Occasionally we hear about efforts to, for example, have the leaders of
the AFN elected by universal suffrage, or about efforts to ensure
equality among men and women in the various bands.  But, regrettably, my
perception is that these initiatives have traction not because of the
AFN but in spite of it.

(In this respect, Eugene made reference to the policies of the Harper
government.  My perception is that Jim Prentice was an ideal choice for
the portfolio of Indian and Northern Affairs because of his involvement
with First Nations' affairs going back many years.  I am sure that he
will do a competent job in the Industry portfolio, but I was sorry to
see him leave his former portfolio.  Of course, I am looking only from
the outside ...)

Let me conclude by stating that I am not suggesting for a moment that
all First Nations' chiefs are corrupt, or that aboriginal women are
universally degraded.  (Indeed, one of the facts that I find astonishing
is the proportion of First Nations' chiefs who are women.)  But I do
think that the cause of aboriginal government and, indeed, the status of
aboriginal peoples in this country would be well-served if the AFN were
seen as an agent of change rather than as a defender of the status quo.


Wayne Smith
Subject: John Anderson's comments on Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) voting


John Anderson's comments on Mixed Member Proportional (MMP) voting
require a response.

The campaign to vote for MMP on October 10 is receiving support from
all sorts of people of all political stripes, including many who are
fed up with partisan politics as practised under our current
winner-take-all voting system.

MMP is not about what is good for any political party. MMP is about
giving voters the power to hold political parties accountable, by
giving every a voter a vote that actually helps to elect somebody,
every time.

The problem with our current system is precisely that there is zero
accountability, because the people we vote for do not get elected, and
the government that gets elected is not the government we voted for.

Proportional voting is used in over 80 countries, and has been the
normal way of voting around the world for the last 100 years, ever
since the modern political party evolved into a machine for electing
people and consolidating power.

John repeats the canard that "parliament will include people who are
not directly responsible to voters." This is NOT TRUE.

Everybody should read the final report of the Ontario Citizens'
Assembly on Electoral Reform at Find
out who these people are, what they are actually recommending, and

Those who do will likely vote for MMP on October 10.

Wayne Smith

Jacob Rempel

"Canadians don't understand what they've signed. In twenty years, they will be sucked into the U.S. economy." So said Clayton Yeutter, U.S. trade representative, after the signing of the Canada-U.S. Free Trade Agreement of 1989.

Hoodwinked: The Myth of Free Trade examines some of the less-talked-about effects of free trade and corporate globalization on Canada. It was produced by West/Dunn Productions of Ottawa

Free Trade: A Canadian Exposé

Since we signed a free trade agreement with the U.S. our standard of living has gone down, wealth is more concentrated in the hands of a few, and several noxious clauses severely limit our sovereignty. This documentary shows how "free trade" has not paid off for Canadians.

The bad news keeps coming:

Canadian Wheat Board: As David Orchard explains in Hoodwinked: The Myth of Free Trade, the Canadian Wheat Board has been a target of multinationals like Cargill and Archer Daniels Midland (Brian Mulroney sits on their board) since the inception of the free trade agreement. Now "the new Canadian government" is moving quickly to dismantle, without due process, the CWB, long an example of a distinctly Canadian, co-operative way of doing things.

Softwood lumber: The so-called softwood lumber deal ignores repeated NAFTA panel rulings (the one concession Canada fought for in the original free trade agreement), keeps over $1 billion of illegal duties, pays back the rest in devalued dollars (40% less), and ties the Canadian industry to quotas and price regulations that are the opposite of "free trade."

Foreign ownership: Even the business-oriented Globe and Mail has run a series on the hollowing out of corporate Canada following massive foreign takeovers in the mining industry. Whole sectors are becoming foreign-dominated, including the brewing industry, hotels, steel, department stores and so on.

The environment: The environmental impact of turning Canada into an energy warehouse for the North American economy is destroying our ability to meet international commitments to reduce greenhouse-gas emissions.

North American integration: September 12-14, 2006 at the Banff Springs Hotel there was another in a series of meetings by vested interests to discuss their plan for North American integration. The guest list included John Manley, Tom d'Aquino, Gordon O'Connor, Rick Hillier, Donald Rumsfeld, George Schultz and various high level Canadian, Mexican and U.S. government and business leaders.

Brad Thomson
    Mary-Sue Haliburton wrote, "The mother of all "conspiracy theory" is the 9/11 event itself."
    The person in charge of security at the World Trade Centre was one of George W. Bush's brothers. He was hired for a specified period of time, with the last date of his employ being September 11, 2001.

    Many huge explosions took place in the basements of the buildings before the planes hit. The fires in the buildings after the planes hit were small and red in colour, demonstrating that all that was burning were carpets, drapes and furniture. This sort of fire is not hot enough to melt steel.

    When the buildings went down explosions were shooting out of the sides of the buildings a few floors below the coming avalanche from above. This would not have happened unless controlled demolitions were taking place.

    The third building that fell was hit by nothing. This building contained offices of the FBI, CIA, and other secretive agencies.

    The plane that hit the second tower had no windows, it was not a passenger plane.

    Strange and secretive renovations and shifts of offices were taking place in the two towers for months leading up to September 11. When the buildings fell it was at freefall speed, in other words, without resistance from below. Impossible unless what was below was being removed as what was above came crashing down.

     The architects of the buildings stated that the design would have withstood multiple plane crashes without the buildings coming down.

    NORAD has stood down once in its entire history, September 11, 2001, on direct orders from Dick Cheney.

    A Mayor in a town in Pennsylvania stated that no plane crashed near his town. But there were witnesses at the Cleveland airport who saw it land. The passengers were taken into a building under the control of NASA. They all showed up on the list of those killed in the plane crash.

    Many of the persons alleged to have been the actual hijackers have been found alive in Saudi Arabia and other places.

    The damage to the Pentagon was completely inconsistent with a plane having hit the building, but perfectly consistent with a missile having hit it.

    The black boxes were confiscated by the authorities and their contents never revealed.

    I have only scratched the surface. The evidence is almost endless.
    I do not believe that some Arab on dialysis living in a cave with limited communications to the outside world was the mastermind behind 9/11. This is the most ridiculous conspiracy theory of all. It is more likely that Kennedy was killed by Oswald. I draw my conclusions from the evidence at hand.
    The first rule in trying to determine who committed a crime is to ask the following question: Who stood to gain? Now, more than six years later, we can ask, who did gain? The answer is clear. The military-industrial complex.

There is every reason to believe that the events of 911 were perpetrated by certain Americans upon themselves so as to have a pretext to wage any war they wanted to for the purpose of controlling the world's diminishing supplies of oil. And this is what they have done.

Osama bin Laden, like Lee Harvey Oswald, was just a patsy. But don't believe Mary-Sue or me, examine it for yourself on any number of websites or in any number of books. The truth is not always what it seems, but sadly, most prefer to remain blind rather than to face the ugliness of what is really taking place in our world. In light of the fact that Stephen Harper likes to use the events of 9/11 to justify our continued presence in Afghanistan, this is all the more important for Canadians to understand
May God continue to bless America, the land of the free and the home of the brave.
Brad Thomson