Reverse order from most recent to ten days ago.From: "John Halonen"
Subject: Re: Daily Digest October >>27, 2007
Let`s be truthful
Time to face some realities. There are many out there that wish the world was a better place to live in, but for the vast majority it really does come down to an "US" vs "THEM" mentality for those that currently are in the "HAVE" bucket.
Take "GLOBAL WARMING" for instance, here in North America, CANADA has shelved Kyoto, and the USA do not even consider it important. Much better that we as nations and citizens play the role of non-participants in solving this problem. Don't want to say that there are those that consider it important, but the vast majority continue to vote in governments that will represent immediate needs.
The "WARS IN IRAQ & AFGHANISTAN" is another cop-out. Certainly nothing has been solved here, nor is it apparent that will change soon. Much better to have destructive battles fought miles away rather than close to home. Again it is the citizens who have made this choice as they continue to elected politicians that portray this future.
The "SPP INITIATIVE" even though representing a major shift in Sovereignty is allowed to continue to benefit the Elite & Business Corporations. Many believe that our futures rely on having a COMMON country that can retain our current lifestyles. Certainly this is a point of contention, but it would be helpful to have an honest and forthright debate on the issue. Politicians do not always appear to represent their constituents.
Just some musings from a rainy Sunday afternoon.
From: J. Edgar Robertson
Subject: Fw: kikin
A farmboy gets in trouble at school and he's pretty upset about it 'cause he has to walk all the way home and so he comes in the front gate and slams the gate behind him. There's some chicks and hens running around in the front yard and he kicks one of them as he walks by. He stomps in the backyard and slams the gate behind him and there's some little piglets running around in the backyard there and he kicks one of them. He stomps up the back steps into the kitchen and as he slams the kitchen door, his mother, washing dishes as she looks out the window, says, "I saw that. I saw you kick those baby chickens and I saw you kick those baby pigs and until you learn how to treat animals, you will get no chicken and you will get no eggs and you will get no bacon and you will get no ham, do you understand me young man?" And in a huff Johnny stomps out to the back porch and slumps in a sulk on the steps. His mother comes out drying her hands on a dishtowel just as his father, having milked the cow, comes out of the barn with a giant pail of milk, and as he walks the milk is sloshing over either side of the pail. Some kittens have tangled themselves up in his feet trying to get the spilled milk and the farmer takes a kick at one of them and the boy looks up at his mother and says,
"Do you want to tell him or should I?"
From: Henry Atkinson
Subject: News for Liberals
This from a scholarly friend .
"Quemadmodum gladius neminem occidit, occidentis telum est"
("A sword is never a killer, it's a tool in the killer's hands")
Lucius Annaeus Seneca "the younger" ca. (4 BC - 65 AD)
From: John Dowson
Sent: Friday, October 26, 2007 2:51 PM
Subject: Harper's election threat
Joe Steve is an extremely shrewd political animal and doesn't do anything without calculating each move. He doesn't care about the Liberal polling numbers in this country they are meaningless. What he is watching are the polls for the Bloq, the NDP and the Greens. When the National polls report the Greens are at 10 pts, the NDP is at 15pts, and the Bloq is 15 pts ( 30 plus in Quebec) He'll pull the plug. Our election system will guarantee that when the vote is split between three major parties, and throw in another 5 points for the local fringe parties the Conservatives will form a majority government with 37% of the popular vote.
He's not waiting for the Liberal vote to go down he's waiting for the other parties to come up, and when it does it will be the Perfect Storm. You can print that John Dowson
. . . very insightful.
Harper has always stated "Canadians don't vote for anything they vote against it" Watch for it. John Dowson
From: Joseph Common Ground
Subject: now if someone steals your lawn elf of puts a firecracker in yer mailbox remember al -quaida did it
al-quaida did it .while listening to a talk radio show i couldn't believe my ears as the host and his paranoid callers insinuated that terrorists were setting the fires in california .so now if someone steals your lawn elf of puts a firecracker in yer mailbox remember al -quaida did it.
Thanks for the comment, it made me laugh !
('cept it aint't funny, it's too, too true in too many minds)
Subject: What is behind President Bush's warning about WW III?
What is behind President Bush's warning about WW III? view
(There is a video debate)
From: "Claudia Hudson" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
Subject: try this new website re your rights
From: "Mahmood Elahi"
Cc: "Letters to the Editor" <email@example.com>,
Subject: United Empire Loyalists transformed the character of Canada
The Toronto Star
Copy to: Mr. Daryl Currie, President, Governor Simcoe Branch, United Empire Loyalists Association, Toronto (please forward).
United Empire Loyalists transformed the character of Canada and Loyalist Day will recognize their contribution
Re: "Looks like Loyalists are already recognized," by Daryl Currie (Letter, Oct. 19).
It may be recalled that after the British conquest of Canada in 1759, Governor Sir Guy Carleton thought Canada would always remain a French-speaking country. "The Europeans who migrate," he asserted, "will never prefer the long inhospitable winters of Canada to the more cheerful climate and more fruitful soil of His Majesty's southern provinces, so, barring tragedy shocking to think of, this country must, to the end of time, be peopled by the French-Canadian race."
This was not to be. Within a decade and half, came a crowd of American royalists, driven into exile by revolutionary upheavals in their own country. They were North America's first political refugees who fled to Canada to escape persecution in the hands of so-called Patriots for their loyalty to the British crown.
The influx of American royalists, known as the United Empire Loyalists, signalled the transformation of Canada. It could no longer be contended that Canada would remain French to the end of time. A substantial and growing population of Anglo-American stock had been planted in Quebec and areas next to it what was to become Ontario. And this also triggered a process in which the francophones became a minority in the country founded by them.
But for the Loyalists, Sir Guy Carleton's prophecy might have proved correct and Canada would have remained a predominantly French-speaking country. For bringing this profound transformation, it will be most appropriate to have a Loyalist Day in Ontario.
2240 Iris Street, Ottawa.
From: "Rebecca Gingrich"
Subject: RE: N.S. Tory riding executive suspended for defiance
This reminds me of Mannings statement when we did not agree with his
destruction of Reform--"Mark them well and leave them behind"!!!
Subject: Who helps the victims--obviously our tax dollars only help the criminal?
Providing a last chance for pedophiles
Circles Of Support; Monitoring, mentoring, cuts risk, group says
From: Jacob Rempel
01:55 AM 22/10/2007
Subject: an ignorance which fancies it knows everything and therefore claims for itself the right to kill."
"The evil that is in the world always comes of ignorance, and good intentions may do as much harm as malevolence, if they lack understanding. On the whole, men are more good than bad; that, however, isn't the real point. But they are more or less ignorant, and it is that we call vice or virtue; the most incorrigible vice being that of an ignorance which fancies it knows everything and therefore claims for itself the right to kill."
..... Albert Camus: The Plague, Modern Library Edition, p. 120
Read this newsletter online http://tinyurl.com/dy6yy
In every issue of his Information Clearing House digest of articles, Tom Feeley calls on us to "Work Towards Peace & Joy". He opens one issue with Albert Camus' above remarks about evil.
With all due respect to the wisdom of Albert Camus, I believe that in our present situation, it is actually a combination of two leadership groupings, the ignorant "good"and the knowingly bad.
One group is the aggressively self-righteous ignorant ideologue leaders with presumed "good intentions" as one half of the evil violence. The other half is the self-serving rich and powerful establishment who are not ignorant, but who are wilfully evil and malevolent in their violent grasp for greater wealth and power. The two leadership factions, in an uholy alliance, manipulate their respective two constituencies of citizens in the USA, thereby leading their nation into aggressive, acquisitive imperialist wars.
Unhappily for us, propaganda from this American leadership has too much influence in Canada.
"Like Tom Feeley, I call on us all to "work toward peace and joy
...Jacob Rempel, Vancouver, Canada. firstname.lastname@example.org
To: "You Need To Know": ;
From: Charles Tupper
Subject: Watch This -- It'll resonate with all Mums out there (Dads too)
William Tell -- Mum Says
Everything a Mum says in a day, condensed into 2 min 55 sec!
From: Michael Watkins
Subject: Re: Daily Digest October 18, 2007
Re The Province editorial linked in DD, Oct 18, "Let's not add to
mountain of global-warming hype" - this piece is written in the
well-known style of the climate-change denial camp.
First off, the "editorial" uses the deliberately misleading
terminology "global-warming", a misnomer which no serious climate
scientist would employ. The use of "global warming" in an article
is a red-flag warning that the writer is either badly mis-informed,
or intentionally engaged in disinformation.
Climate-change on a global scale is what we face, not "global
warming", and reasonable, scientific, appraisal of the issue
suggests that the planet will endure gross distortions of climatic
patterns, exacerbated if not wholly caused by human activity.
The article uses ridicule to convey its point - how could the earth
be warming if a Swiss glacier managed to grow by a couple of meters
in thickness earlier this decade?
The observation that an ice-field happened to grow a couple of
meters in thickness over a couple of years does not allow for any
conclusions whatsoever to be drawn. For mountaineering folks like
myself we call this variation the simple result of "weather".
Taking a measurement at a point in time captures only a single data
point. One doesn't build a scientific argument - as the Province
editorial attempted to infer - off a single point. Trends are made
from many such measurements; global trends need to take in a global
view to have meaning. The editorial does none of this.
Quoting a scientist is a favorite of both sides of this climate
If the Province editorialists wished to look deeper at the Alps
glacial thickness, they might easily have stumbled across this 1995
NY Times article which seems to support the argument they are putting
forward, as it notes some northern European states experienced
Or perhaps The Province's writers did not that article, and the
quotation from a Danish geologist as denying that Arctic ice was
Anker Weidick, a Danish geologist who is in charge of ice studies
for Greenland, part of which lies within the Arctic Circle, refuted
recent reports that Arctic ice was melting. He said Greenland's
"great ice towers and the main ice sheet are relatively stable or
Oops. Here in 2007, there is no denial that the Arctic is
experiencing a melt unprecedented in modern history, and as one
result, Canada now has a new shipping channel to assert sovereignty
over and defend.
So much for the 1995 assertion.
There are those that would misrepresent information as fact on both
sides of the climate-change issue, however a little careful reading
of most of the denial rhetoric will quickly underscore that the
deniers are more interested in scoring propaganda points than with
furthering an honest discussion on the topic.
One need look no further for examples than from members of the
current government both now and when they were in opposition
(opposing any action on the climate change file) even as they do
December 6 2006: "Maybe all my constituents living high up on the
West Bench, or Lakeview Heights, or the hills of Logan Lake will
soon be sitting on lakeside property as one of the many benefits of
global warming.'' -- Stockwell Day
I'll spare you the similar antics from other Reform, Canadian
Alliance, and Conservative Party of Canada MP's; they are well
documented within the press and Hansard, invariably using ridicule
How about a more learned point of view:
John Christy, professor of atmospheric science at the Global
Hydrology and Climate Centre at the University of Alabama, argues
that global temperature data collected from satellites, which is
more modern than the data collected from earth based meteorological
stations, do not support the theory of global warming. --
Preston Manning, Hansard, November 1997, arguing against the Kyoto
At that time, Professor Christy had been a favorite source of
quotations for U.S. Republican politicians. Christy may be off their
mailing lists now, for he has since come to agree with the IPCC
conclusions on human activity contributing to global climate change:
"It is scientifically inconceivable that after changing forests into
cities, turning millions of acres into farmland, putting massive
quantities of soot and dust into the atmosphere and sending
quantities of greenhouse gases into the air, that the natural course
of climate change hasn't been increased in the past century." --
Professor John Christy
Selective quoting of scientific papers is another favoured
technique. Manning, in that same speech to the House of Commons:
A 1991 study by Friis-Christiansen and Lassen and similar
studies found a correlation between solar cycle length and
global temperatures, suggesting that fluctuations in solar
radiation levels, not greenhouse gas emissions, were the
controlling factor in climate changes over the last 100 years.
-- Preson Manning
Manning has the audacity to suggest his few selected quotes
constitute "real science":
An underlying weakness of the government's approach is its inability
to sort out good science from bad, real science from pseudo-science
and basic science from science as applied by those with vested
interests in its application on either side of the issue. --
One wonders if he was aware that he was engaging in that which he
accuses the government of the day.
And what of Friis-Christiansen? Their conclusions have long since been
dismissed as their scientific method did not take into account
myriad other factors which could account for the observed climatic
change they cited, and in fact a similar study using the methodology
Friis-Christiansen employed, but with more accurate data, provided
conclusions exactly opposite. Kernthaler (1999), Krisjansson (2000),
Lockwood-Froehlich (2007 http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/uk_news/6290228.stm)
In conclusion, I'm not suggesting that debate should be stifled from
who oppose acknowledgement of or action on the climate-change file.
There are of course competing views on this significant issue - that
is normal and to be encouraged.
What is most important is the quality of the arguments and
supporting scientific data underlying each. The "anti" folks, with
little actual scientific underpinning for their arguments, tend to
lean to simple puns and rhetoric, largely designed to appeal to the
unlearned or time-challenged.
That might be a strategy for a political party whose only goal is to
win an argument and further self-interest, but its not an acceptable
strategy if the goal is to *get it right* on an issue that has a
potentially life-changing global scope.
There has developed, over many years, and as a result of thousands
of person-years of peer-reviewed science, an undeniable consensus
among scientists that human activity is having a significant impact
on the planet's climatology.
Our federal political leaders have always fought, in
lockstep with the United States, against recognizing climate-change
as an issue.
The current crop of Conservatives at the helm are every
bit as much to blame for the lack of progress on the file as the
Liberals they replaced. The Liberals might have recognized the
problem, but had no serious plan to address it, and lacked the
broad, pan-Canadian, political capital required to implement any
In opposition, the Conservative nee Canadian Alliance / nee Reform
Party had no plan other than to oppose the recognition of the issue
and development of plans.
Now in power, caught with pants down while Canada's population wakes
up to the dawning world-wide consensus that the planet is indeed in
trouble, the current Harper plan has evolved to pretend that they
take it seriously, pretend to do something about it, but to
implement little by way of substantive and proactive policy.
Surprise, that's nothing but the old Liberal plan, dusted off and
with a freshly printed blue book cover.