Thursday, December 06, 2007

BELOW(30) December 6, 2007

        The following posts have been ordered according to when they came into the IN BOX except when two were received and placed together.

From: "Andy Rutherford"
Subject: Fw: Bank interest is it not interesting?

Dear Joe.
From my point of view!
You have done an exelent job trying to provide info that we all need to vote properly and meaningfully but those people who conduct long discussions on off topic issues and ignore the root cause of poor politics,the creation of money,who creates it and where does it come from and all the whys and wherefores .
With borrowed money The country cannot operate efficiently and it isn't necessary.
As long as the BMO sits idle and scoundrels are allowed to forge money {That is the private banks] we will always be in financial trouble both publicly and privately.
This one issue has been neglected in the DD and it is a shame.
The banks have been given the privelege without restrictions to create the credit for all levels of the human race to save us from inflation. This part of the agreement has not been kept as almost 2% per year over the last ten years compounded is about 25% and this goes back almost 50 years. How do you expect a poor old man with his money buried in the garden to survive much longer.[Bank interest is not much better]
Death is my only out and with my record that is not to be looked forward to.[ Pardon the misplaced preposition.]

From: "Rebecca Gingrich"
Subject: Canada struggles with overt racism

I see a racheting up of the HRT after a report like this.  We will be singing the National Anthem in more languages than ever to prove we are not 'racist'!

One in five people foreign-born stats reveal as Canada struggles with overt racism

Activist calls for Bruce Allen's removal from Olympics committee

Subject: Let's be Canadians again!!!!


Bruce Allan is on the 2010 Olympic Committee and new Canadians (specifically Hindi's/ Indian's) want him fired for his recent comments outlined below;
"Subject: Our National Anthem

I am sorry, but after hearing they want to sing the National Anthem in Hindi - enough is enough. Nowhere or at no other time in our nation's history, did they sing it in Italian, Japanese, Polish, Irish (Celtic), German, Portuguese, Greek, or any other language because of immigration. It was written in English, adapted into co-founding French, and should be sung word for word the way it was written.

The news broadcasts even gave the Hindi version translation which was not even close to our National Anthem.

I am not sorry if this offends anyone, this is MY COUNTRY - IF IT IS YOUR COUNTRY SPEAK UP ---- please pass this along .

I am not against immigration -- just come through like everyone else. Get a sponsor; have a place to lay your head; have a job; pay your taxes, live by the rules AND LEARN THE LANGUAGE as all other immigrants have in the past -- and LONG LIVE CANADA !"
It's time we all get behind Bruce Allen, and scrap this Political Correctness crap.  His comments were anything but racist, but there are far too many overly sensitive 'New Canadians' that are trying to change everything we hold dear.

ARE WE PART OF THE PROBLEM !!!!  Think about this: If you don't want to forward this for fear of offending someone,will we still be the Country of Choice and still be CANADA if we continue to make the changes forced on us by the people from other countries who have come to live in CANADA because it is the Country of Choice??????

Think about it!


It is Time for CANADA to speak up. If you agree ­ pass his along; if you don't agree -- delete it and reap the ill wind because of your complacency

From: "Suan H.Booiman"
Subject: translation

Had time to read the translation (between laundry and all other
things), my answer is to that:who cares what Quebec wants,
they did not sign the constitution, so have no right to lay a claim".
In reality there is no certificate in Ottawa, that I have been]
able to find, to show that the other 9 Premiers signed anything
at the time, we only have the Constitution signed by three
                    Trudeau, Chrétien and Ouelette.
My view to all of this is that it is about time to put Quebec
in the place they belong or leave, simple, tired of their


Subject: Bernard Lord

As Christmas is high on the list
The Prime Minister shows his own twist
The Lord is coming, he said, from the east
Prepare for an independent feast
This one, Bernard is his name,
His predictions are not the same
He is going to listen and see
How bilingual we all are willing to be
No not the one you brought from home
The language enforced in a joal tone
The law states patronize the French
At most places it does not make sense.
He will be visiting seven cities we are told
Like Santa coming from the Northern cold
No presents in his hand that is for sure
It is only a political language finding tour
He will write were Graham Fraser did fail
The true story of the French language tail,
Speak French he will say or no job for you to stay,
It is bilingualism not qualifications that makes the way.
So here is the gift to this divided land
The French minority voice is your friend
Of course you have to bow in temptation
To this Nation within the Canadian Nation.
                Merry Christmas

From: "Rene & Tish Moreau" <>
To: "Canadian Federation of Students" <>,
         "Daily Digest" <>,
         "Matty Moreau" <>
Date: Tue, 4 Dec 2007 14:43:09 -0500

FYI to all-----
To Joe, and all others;
From Rene Moreau (416-489-8347)
   Editorials RSS Feed
    There comes a time when Canadians start to realize we are being fleeced. 

    By checking around, one finds that Monte Solberg's office is responsible for the Student's Loan Portfolio, and that the outsourcing of the work comes from  his office. Monte's  'advisors' include Ian Todd and Brooke Pigott. In trying to find out how it came to pass that the Student Loan job was handed off to a foreign, American company from  Cleveland, Ohio, NOT TORONTO BASED, Resolve Corporation. Don't ask Brooke, she will get quite upset.  After 8 phone calls, no one, apparently, knows the history of how it happened, or who was responsible.

    A while back, CIBC was given the outsourcing job for Loans and handed it over to another American company! 
    Yes, Resolve is the  American company that got the Gun registration job for collecting the info on where, our CANADIAN ,guns, are and addresses of the owners, and they were following the previous holder of that job, EDS, Electronic Data Services, of Dallas Texas.

    Through the wonders of 5th column and dual citizenship, and the ruling of NAFTA, 'thou shalt not discriminate against American or Mexican corporations, WE HAVE NO DEFENCE AGAINST SUCH MOVES!

Here is the letter , which I got from the Daily Digest.
Last updated at 6:27 AM on 27/11/07

Student debt milked for cash print this article
Some students are shocked by the revelation of how much money the federal government is making off student loans.

While tuition fees soar higher, you'd think the federal government would be doing whatever it could to ease the financial burden of going to university.

The federal government is charging students up to double what it costs to borrow the money from the Bank of Canada. That means the federal government could pocket $549.5 million in interest in 2009 and 2010.

That's not chump change.

About one million Canadians are repaying student loans, and the default rate is estimated to be about 25 per cent. To boot, Human Resources and Social Development Canada, the government agency responsible for administering student loans, has spent $180.8 million on collection agencies that pursue borrowers.

That money would be better spent helping to alleviate the debt load by providing interest relief. Despite what some detractors say, most of these people want to repay their loans. If they don't, they're deep-sixing their credit rating.

The feds say the higher interest rate reflects the higher risk associated with unsecured loans. They also claim that the interest only partly covers the cost - when you include writeoffs.

The feds have promised a review of the student loan program, but given their choice of who to put in charge of that, we're not confident matters will improve. The government recently awarded a five-year, $270 million customer service contract to Toronto-based Resolve Corp., which, in a previous incarnation, was responsible for the gun registry boondoggle.

For students, the joy at graduation is often tempered because they're saddled with crippling debt.

The country needs a skilled, trained and well-educated workforce, so let's make it easier, not more difficult, to achieve that.

                            Rene Moreau (416-489-8347)


re; military purchasing in Canada.
   It might be of interest for some, that trying to find out who was awarded the contract for military purchasing is an exercise in futility. Try it.
   When calling Peter McKay's office to ask, I was told that the usual procedure is to submit the request in writing. I have found that, as soon as something is in writing, it can take, at least,  6 weeks for an answer. Do you know how many Canadian taxpayers dollars can be spent  by an American purchasing company in that time?
   Some time ago, Accenture, formerly Arthur Anderson, was awarded a contract for doing purchasing for the Canadian government. Trying to find out what happened to that contract can be quite a challenge. Perhaps, Joe, some of your people  would know a way to find out?
   Could you let me know or could you have them call me?
   Letting foreign companies do the purchasing for us is asking them to supply everything from their suppliers in the States. Are we that dumb?
   A good example was how the former defense minister Gordon O'Connor was able to buy $50 million dollars worth of  American tanks, without even getting the O. K. from Canada. He has an American father, incidentally.
    Here's the translated article.

           Rene Moreau (416-489-8347)

From: "Bob Busk"
Subject: What are you doing December 8th?

I just joined a virtual climate change march for Saturday--one of hundreds of thousands of people from around the world demanding action on climate change. Please join me!

Crucial climate negotiations have started this week Bali, Indonesia and it&#039;s up to us to make sure the 192 governments there hear an urgent global outcry for action. This Saturday, December 8, a wave of protests and marches will sweep the globe--and Avaaz will make sure it hits the delegates&#039; doorstep by marching in Bali carrying your flag and a sign with the number of people who&#039;ve signed from your country. Getting involved is easy, just click on the link below to join the virtual march:  

The world knows what we need: a commitment to start working towards a new binding international agreement immediately. We must show these governments that the call to action is truly worldwide. The more people join, the more powerful the Dec 8 march will become. Send your voice to Bali--sign the petition below and become a part of the virtual march for climate action now.  

By coming together, we are creating an enormous global roar to remind world governments that they must act now to prevent the climate crisis. Itâ?Ts amazing what can happen when we work with each other.


From: Ron Thornton
Subject: Re: Daily Digest December 3, 2007

*Hi Joe:

I had just a few moments to jot down some thoughts before I caught a bus to my boys' school.  As you know, the environment is important to me, as I've grown fond of breathing, though I'm riding the bus because I don't want to drag my poor old mini-van out in this weather.  This global cooling/changing sucks.  Happens every year about this time, and I would like it to quit.   All I know is that I don't have to mow the lawn two days in a row or need to find additional room to pile up the grass.

It has recently dawned on me that my carbon footprint is much, much less than what Al Gore's will ever be.  So, my job is already done.  I would also like to thank Stephen Harper for not jumping aboard the voodoo express on the issue.  I mean, if all Kyoto offers as a solution is human sacrifices (and by gutting our economies, what other result could one expect?), then I guess I am against it.  Now, if there was some money in it for me, well, then I'd jump right on this gravy train. 
However, as I'm not a scientist dependent on government handouts, nor a washed up American politician, I'm stuck.

Other comments from the Dec. 3 Digest touched on the need to guarantee Quebec 25% of the seats in the House, even though it deserves only 23.4%.  Well, I guess Ontario should get used to being forever screwed. 
I mean, if a majority of provinces and all of the territories get more seats than they deserve, those seats got to come from somebody.  As of this moment, those somebodies are Ontario, BC, and Alberta.  Pretty simple logic here.
As for the suggestion that Greater Toronto (a misnomer if there ever was one) should be given provincial status, I wish them well when it comes to their share of natural resources...which would be pretty much limited to what is under the concrete and pavement.  I'm pretty sure the rest of Ontario would feel the same way.  As for having cities being given more taxation power, forget it.  Have you seen the band of idiots currently sitting on Edmonton city council, for example?  More power?  Hell, I'm thinking we need to remove sharp objects from their hands, never mind putting anything more in them.

By the way, it would seem mother nature did not get the memo about global warming in my neck of the arctic.  My plan is to hold out until I can grow mangoes in my backyard in February before reaching for the panic button.  If NYC, Miami, or LA goes under the waves in the meantime, we can just pass it off as a natural form of urban renewal.
Am I a global warming (as in man-made, man-solved, Kyoto now and forever) denier?  Well, I guess it is a moniker I can accept, especially coming as it does just after I accepted the heart breaking conclusions regarding Santa and other similar works of fiction.  That's right...I'm also an Easter Bunny denier.

From: "Ian Berg" <>
Subject: Re: Daily Digest December 3, 2007

Kudos to Prime Minister Stephen Harper for standing up on behalf of
Canadian economic interests at the recent Commonwealth meeting.
Developed countries will lead the way in reducing CO2 emissions
globally but is not up to developed countries alone to be committed to
targets.  The sustainability of foreign aid to developing countries
and investment in green technology depends directly on the economic
prosperity of developed countries.     And much to the consternation
of Kyoto skeptics, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has never ruled out
hard caps or targets for reduced CO2 emissions provided they are set
at more realistic levels.

Ian Berg
Calgary, Alberta

From: "Glenn Harewood"

Subject: Re: As the Fourth Anniversary of our Day of Infamy approaches.

Hello Joe:

 I have read, with consternation, of the events of the past month, and am left rather speechless as to what to say or do. In such circumstances, my "proaction" is to do nothing and stay grounded in my thoughts and beliefs.
With respect to the whole affair since December 2003, I would only quote Eisenhower:
"A people that values its privileges above its principles soon loses both."
D. Eisenhower (1890--1969) Former President of the U.S.A. 
There is no doubt in my mind that Harper, MacKay, and all those (Van Loan, Prentice,  and other former PCPCers who won seats in the 2006 election) who neatly orchestrated the collapse of our PCPC will
soon lose the privileges that they won in 2006. They have already shown through their betrayals, that they have no principles. Thus, the only thing left for them to lose is the next election.  They would do well to draw out their minority government until 2009, because their neo-con government will be a one-term minority government
It is my hope that they will not have put so much in place to wreck and damage  Canada's government, that it cannot be reversed.  In this respect, we need to be more vigilant about the changes in the beurocracy  that Harper makes rather than rules and regulations. It is easier to change rules and regulations than it is to change beurocrats.
Glenn Harewood, Ph.D. KC.

From: Paul-André Larose
To: "Rene & Tish Moreau" <>,
Subject: Re: Daily Digest December 3, 2007

Greetings René

I am afraid that by asking the question  "Are we that dumb?", we are
answering it with the affirmative.

>     Letting foreign companies do the purchasing for us is asking them to
> supply everything from their suppliers in the States. Are we that dumb?

From: Jacob Rempel
Subject: comment on  Naomi Wolf's   "The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot "
America Is Going Fascist
By Michael Nenonen
"The signs are all there for anyone to see,
and time is getting short for action." Continue

12/04/07 " The Republic" -- -- Reading Naomi Wolf's
The End of America: Letter of Warning to a Young Patriot
(Chelsea Green Publishing, 2007), I realized the hour is later
than I thought. Many of us have watched the Bush regime's
actions with a growing feeling of horror .... Continue

From: "Mahmood Elahi"
Subject: Even many Muslims find Muslim extremists scary

The Editor
The Toronto Star
Copy to: Mr. Yilmaz Alimoglu, Community Editorial Board (please forward).
Even many Muslims find Muslim extremists scary
Re "What's so scary about Muslims?" by Ylmaz Alimoglu (Comment, Dec. 4).
Given the fact that Muslim extremists are slaughtering fellow Muslims in their countries, Mr. Alimoglu should have framed his querstion differently: "Why Muslims find Muslim extremists so scary?" Then he would have found the answer in the page 4 of World &Comment  of The Toronto Star of the same date in a news report entitled: "Afghan suicide bomb attack leaves 4 dead, 6 wounded." 
The Toronto Star reports: "Herat, Afghanistan -- A suicide bomber killed four Afghans including two police officers and wounded six others in Afghanistan's western province of Nimroz yesterday, a provincial police officials said.
" 'The suicide bomber blew himself up near an Indian road construction company compound, killing two Afghan workers and two policemen in the Khash road district this afternoon,' said provincial police chief Mohammad Dawood Askaryar. Six Afghan workers were also wounded. ...
"The hardline Islamist Taliban have killed at least 200 people in more than 140 suicide attacks this year in a campaign to defeat the government of President Hamid Karzai and eject some 50,000 foreign troops from Afghanistan. Canada has about 2,500 troops serving in Afghanistan.
"Over the past two years, Afghanistan has witnessed the worst insurgent violence since the Taliban government was ousted in 2001. More than 10,000 people including 300 foreign soldiers have been killed in violence linked to militants."
In fact, the Taliban has been killing fellow Afghan Muslims while putting the blame of the U.S.-led forces. As Khaled Ahmed, a columnist for The Daily Times, Lahore, Pakistan, writes: "In Sudan and Somalia, Muslims are killing Muslims. Muslims states have been warring with Muslim states, doing far more damage than any non-Muslim could have done. In Afghanistan Muslims were killing Muslims in the civil war before the world moved in with daisy-cutters with a UN legal cover. In Pakistan, Muslims kill Muslims then blame it on India."
Yet, there are very few Muslim outcries over Muslim slaughtering Muslims in such record numbers. In fact, some moderate Muslims seem to have joined in putting the blame on the West.  Haroon Siddiqui, The Toronto Star's editorial page editor emeritus, wrote in a column refering to the Western outrage over Sudanese court's jailing a British teacher for allowing her students to name a Teddy bear as Mohammad, wrote: "Muslims, in turn, ask: Why is the West waging wars in Palestine, Iraq, Afghanistan, Lebanon and Somalia, killing thousands, and making millions holeless and destitute?"  Siddiqui fails to mention that it is always the Muslims who are waging worst kind of war against fellow Muslims in most Muslim countries.
In Palestine, Hamas, which is committed to the destruction of Israel, has been slaughtering fellow Palestinians who support its rival Fatah. During recent fighting for control of Gaza, Hamas was accused by Human Rights Watch of "violations of international humanitarian law, in some cases amounting to war crimes." These crimes include killing of non-combatans, killing inside hospitals and summary executions. According to Human Rights Watch: "Hamas military captured 28-year-old Muhammad Swairki, a cook for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas's presidential guards, and executed him by throwing him to his death, with his hands and legs tied, from a 15-story apartment building in Gaza City."
Such unspeakable brutality of Hamas toward fellow Palestinians stands in stark contrast with the moderation it has shown to kidnapped BBC journalist Allan Johnston who was released without harm. But its brutality toaward Fatah shows that Hamas is determined to destroy Fatah as an organization reprsenting a segment of Palestinians. Only few weeks ago, Hamas gunmen opened fire on Fatah supporters assembled to commemorate its founder Arafat, killing six and injuring 75.
In Iraq, Sunni extremists have been systematically slaughtering fellow Shiite Muslims. They have bombed Shiite mosques filled with worshippers during Friday prayers. They have attacked schools, hospitals and markets in Shiite areas, killing women and children.They have destroyed the Golden Mosque, one of the holiest Shiite shrines. And the Sunnis had been slaughtering the Shiites during Saddam Hussein's reign of terror. During Sdadam minority Sunni rule, the majority Shiites were rendered destitutes in their own country and when they rose in revolt in 1991, Saddam's Sunni-dominated Republican Guards massacred the without mercy. Now the Shiite militias are slaughtering the Sunnis in retaliation.
As Prof. Ishtiaq Ahmed, professor of political science at Stockholm University (himself of Pakistani origin), wrote: "Pseudo-radicalism of the left and half-baked liberalism cannot explain logically or morally why the greatest slaughters of Muslims in recent times have always been the work of Muslims. The Iran-Iraq war resulted from the uncontrollable ambition of Ayatollah Khomeini to spread his Islamic (read Shiite) revolution throughout the world clashing with Saddam Hussein's eqaully unflinching resolve to crush Shiite and Kurdish threats to his power. In the prcess, 1.5 to 2 million Muslims were killed."
And yet there is so little Muslim outrage, with few exceptions, over Muslims killing Muslims in such staggering numbers.
2240 Iris Street, Ottawa.

From: "Rosalie Piccioni"

Subject: Daily Digest December 3, 2007

Hi Joe,        Re: "Anne Dickinson" 
                        Just to respond to Rosie's comments on Holocaust deniers.
. . .. . . . . . . . .
And so it goes around the world, Sri Lanka, East TImor, many places and
people of many different backgrounds.

The danger here for all of us is in allowing hatred to flourish, and
demonizing those of a different background than our own. Every age has its

By the way, many Arabs that live in Canada are Christian rather than Muslim
, so you should not assume anything. For example, the Lebanese Festival in
Ottawa takes place every year on the grounds of a large and beautiful
Orthodox Church.

But Christian or Muslim. they are our neighbours and it is important not to
stereotype them.

Anne Dickinson
    Thanks for the response.  Yes, there are atrocities occurring
all over the world.  However, it seems fair, and not hate-
mongering, to expect peace to start at home: i.e. Canada -
because that's where we live.  Furthermore, this is the Country
where many are escaping to, from the pathos found in their
own country, to find  peace, posterity - a future.
    I am also aware that there are Moslems living here with no
intention of indulging in violence (towards any), and many
turning to Christianity. There are many, also, afraid of revealing
their sentiments against violence for fear of meeting with some
themselves.  And there is a mixture of societies coming who are
changing the very foundation of education and other social
activities.  One example is the obvious - public workers having to protect
themselves from violence.

     To remain blind to the fact that violence does exist, and to
remain deaf to voices raised in hatred, whether against a people
or whether meant to denegrade laws that keep our country
what it is, is a crime in itself.  It begets deeper hatred, crime,
and violence where once they didn't exist - simply because those
who are bent on violence are allowed on our streets and
get away with it;  such is the evil of apathy. 
    I have read much about that kind of thing, otherwise I too
would remain silent.  Once we are aware, however, there is
nothing but to warn about dangers that deliberate ignorance
ignite.  We, as Canadians in a country where our peace
should be appreciated for the haven that it is, should make
sure that what exists outside our borders and shores in causing
undue suffering, unbearable even to watch from a distance, be
kept off of our land.  One of the ways, probably the most important,
is to keep the laws made to maintain that modicum of peace.

From: Ron Thornton
Subject: Re: Daily Digest December 4, 2007

*Hi Joe:

Some interesting tidbits within the Dec. 4 Digest.  One was the article in the Belleville newspaper regarding how the human right to remain silent for one Jagrup Singh was ignored by the police.  In reading the article, I must have missed the part where it was discussed whether he was the shooter in this case, costing a 30-year old man his life, or whether he was not.  If he was not, then there is a problem.  If he was the killer, then I'm afraid I really don't give a damn.
While my conservative side seems alive and well, the odd liberal view pops up from time to time.  Comments regarding the economic boom in Alberta remind me of the hypocrisy of our provincial and civic leaders. 
We got the Premier saying he wants to solve homelessness and the Mayor and Council of good lefties claiming to want the same, but once again their words fail to match their deeds. We got a hell of a housing shortage here, but the green light continues to be given to allow rental accommodations to be transformed in to condos and the rents on those left getting jacked up at a pace that far outdistances any  taxation or upkeep concerns.  So, either these leaders are just full of crap when they huff and puff about their alleged concerns for those out in the cold, or they are simply retarded.  It is either one or the other. By the way, I can accept the argument that one should be able to do what they want with their own property, but only after they allow my city lot to be turned in to a pig farm.   Until then, maybe restrictions should be applicable in certain cases.

The John Turley-Ewart piece reminded us about the Toni Vernelli, the British environmentalist who had an abortion and got her tubes tied to reduce her carbon footprint on the planet.  Now, as much as I love the blue skies, the majestic mountains, the snow white seal pup, the polar bear that eats it, and the green grass beneath my feet, it is people that gives this ole world any value.  Should I wake up and discover the latest plague had taken all my loved ones and those who are left just don't quite measure up, then I am pretty sure the planet won't mean shit to me.  In the meantime, rather than argue otherwise, I encourage anyone who believes as Ms. Vernelli does to not have children to not only reduce their carbon footprint, but voluntarily remove any future progeny from the gene pool.
Finally, on the topic of the teacher from Sudan who allowed a Teddy Bear to be named after the greatest heavyweight boxer of all time, me thinks some folks protest too much.  To be honest, I never read anywhere that the name chosen was done so specifically as a namesake for the Prophet, but just a name that is carried by millions around the world.  So, demanding her execution seemed a little over the top.  I also wondered how one could relate to such people.  Maybe you don't.  Hey, maybe they just hate Teddy Bears.

In  the meantime, I'm kind of hoping to have a blast of greenhouse gas come down upon our heads here in the southern arctic.  Either that, or I must accept the climatic change that is winter.


From: Michael Watkins
Subject: Re: Daily Digest December 4, 2007



Why? There are many dimensions to this, but in part it is the "west"
- developed nations - which have contributed the most, by far, over
the last 100 years or so to global Greenhouse Gas (GHG) emissions.
Our societies have exploited the planet, frequently far beyond our
own borders, and are largely responsible the current problem. We
must lead in order for others to follow.

Cumulative Emissions 1850-2004 CO2 (energy)
                            Total/Rank      Per Capita/Rank
United States of America   324,603.6   (1)  29.41% 1,105.4   (3)
European Union (25)        290,856.3   (2)  26.35%   634.5  (14)
Russian Federation          90,135.0   (3)  8.17%    626.6  (15)
China                       89,243.0   (4)  8.09%     68.9  (92)
Germany                     79,450.4   (5)  7.20%    962.8   (6)
United Kingdom              67,906.8   (6)  6.15%  1,134.9   (2)
Japan                       42,696.2   (7)  3.87%    334.2  (36)
France                      31,775.7   (8)  2.88%    525.0  (23)
India                       25,167.0   (9)  2.28%     23.3 (122)
Canada                      23,930.0  (10)  2.17%    748.1   (9)

Source: CAIT,

Ah, you say, look how large China's emissions are. How dare they
avoid responsibility?!!

That would be a simplistic take using gut reaction not analysis, but
before going on, let me state that no responsible policy maker should
be, in my opinion, giving a free ride to any major producer of GHG's,
but I do contend that those who got the planet in the mess it is in
(meaning "us", the western/developed nations) have an added
responsibility to lead the way.

First some context around the raw numbers:

The U.S. produces 1/3 of all world-wide CO2 emissions and similar
percentages of most GHG's, yet has only a population of roughly 4%
of world population. Of major developed nations, Canada leads the
world in energy use per capita (8.4 tonnes oil equiv./person) with
the U.S.  just behind (7.9 TOE/p). Comparatively, China and India
rank 69th and 107th (1.2 TOE/p, 0.5 TOE/p) respectively.

Of the cumulative emissions, roughly half were produced during the
relatively short period between 1980 and 2004, with the interesting
exception of China where roughly 78% (68,417.9) were produced during
the post-Nixon trade era, and a great percentage of the production
of that era landed in western shores and thus the GHG emissions
related to this activity should be - at least mentally - but are
not, on our own tally.

To put some context around this, U.S. imports of Chinese-produced
goods soared from 1.1 billion USD in 1980 to almost 300 billion
(forecast 2007) this year, accounting for approximately 1/3 of the
this years total U.S. trade deficit. A third of a trillion dollars,
annually, contains a lot of emissions. That's roughly equivalent to
19% of Canada's entire annual gross domestic product.

Incidentally, many of the largest trade imbalances the U.S. has is
with large energy exporting nations including Canada: -73B$, Mexico:
-64B$, and OPEC nations: -105B$. CO2/GHG emissions at the source are
not transferred to the consuming nation, but to get a clear picture
of the real GHG emissions contribution of an importing country, they
ought to be, in order to recognize that some countries can hide
behind statistics driven by increased *outsourcing* of emissions
production to foreign countries.

Foreign countries such as Canada, which has a much faster rate of
total and per capita GHG emissions growth than the U.S., largely
because the U.S. is outsourcing raw materials (such as oil from us)
and finished products at increasing amounts each year.

If one were to do total cost accounting on GHG emissions, including
all emissions produced during the extraction of fossil fuel energy
as well as all emissions produced during the production and
transportation of raw materials and finished products from offshore
producers to western shores, we would see a large chunk of GHG
emissions move from foreign shores to our own balance sheets.

By any measure, western nations, particularly nations such as
Canada and the U.S., have benefited greatly from the profligate use
of cheap energy without regard to environmental consequence. Our
past behaviour is now coming back to haunt our futures.

Thus we have the responsibility to lead.

Leading doesn't mean that "massive wealth transfer" is required,
although some might argue that's exactly what the west has done over
many years, sucking in resources and cheap products on the backs of
less developed nations, often at the point of our guns or proxies
holding same.

No, leading means taking responsibility and serious effort to come up
with long term solutions. The Kyoto agreement was a first step, and
had a goal of achieving specific reductions, as well as setting the
stage for the next round of even deeper reductions.

*How* nations chose to achieve reductions - either through real,
tangible, in-country reductions of GHG emissions, or through less
tangible transfer-credits or developing-world cooperative projects -
was up to each signatory country.

Since signing, Canada has essentially done nothing. That's not
leadership of any kind.

Let us not get distracted by the finger-pointing games going on in
the House of Commons.

Those in our current government are largely the same crew who
opposed Kyoto, or any plan to reduce GHG emissions, with all the
political vigor they could. Harper, and Day and Manning before him,
repeatedly stood in the way of any attempt to create a Canadian
political consensus that real action was required. When Harper
excoriates the Liberals over "not getting the job done", he
conveniently omits the history of his party, and his former parties,
which always stood in the way of getting the job done. As for the
Liberals, even if they believed that Kyoto was necessary, they
lacked the national political will and capital to do anything real
about it.

A tangent: imagine at some point, perhaps soon, the world comes to
know and understand - perhaps by way of new data, or calamity - that
climate change is going to have a profound impact on the well being
and security of billions of people and the very viability of many
areas of the planet to sustain life.

Imagine also that, today, we are faced with four options:

  1 We can choose to act now,     2 We can choose to act now,
    and perhaps discover in         and discover that we were
    the future that the             right to act and manage
    impacts were not as             to forestall the worst of
    great as had been feared.       which is forecast to occur.
    :-|                             :-)

  3 We can choose to do           4 We can choose to do
    nothing, believing that         nothing, and be left
    nothing of consequence          with a global geopolitical
    will occur, or simply           and ecological nightmare if
    not caring.                     the worst should transpire.
    :-| or :-(                      :-(

Sound too hypothetical? We have a real life example, born partly of
our own doing:

    Armed with the best possible information, signatories to the
    Montreal Protocol of 1987/89 declared CFC's an enemy to life on the
    planet. Had they not, which of the four quadrants would we be in
    now? Our children? Their children?

Despite decades of international agreement and action, and bucket
loads of science, there are to this day those who are still keen to
pump proven ozone-destroying halocarbons (CFCs and related) into our
atmosphere, which only serves to prove that no matter how much
agreement and science might exist, there are those whose apparently
oxygen-starved brains care only about the dollars they can make
today, not the legacies they leave the world for tomorrow.

(Those people are in quadrant 3 and are most certainly not of the
"progressive conservative" variety)


I've used up my allotment of time simply addressing, in part, why we
have a responsibility to act. At some future point I'll turn my mind
more to specifics, but at a high level, what needs doing is:

* Canada make a best efforts basis to achieve what it can in terms
  of Kyoto I agreements on reductions, if for no other reason than
  to put industry and Canadians on notice that we are serious about
  tackling the problem.

* Canada shows leadership by committing to hard target binding
  reductions; Canada join forces with other commonwealth nations in
  doing so, and in particular, the anglo-axis of Great Britain and
  Australia, in order to magnify our voice when speaking to our
  neighbours the United States.

* Canada calls for a total cost accounting approach towards GHG
  emissions and non-renewable energy use;
* At home we develop policies and programs designed to foster
  consumer awareness of how their choices are as much a part of the
  problem and solution as industry's, and encourage anything which
  can help shift attitudes and behaviour in a responsible fashion.
  A poorly informed public can't be brought on board.

* Some form of taxation / tax-shifting and other economic
  encouragement will have to be devised.
Noteworthy on that last point is the Harper government's continuing
attack on the federal government's power of the purse; not only is
this a populist move, but it prevents or at least makes it much more
difficult for successive governments to implement new national
programs - including ecological programs. Hogtying the government is
a natural approach for an Alberta-centric bunch who have done their
darndest over decades to keep Canada's collective heads buried in
the sand when it comes to climate change issues.

- Michael Watkins

PS: With respect to the second article posted, "Environmentalism is the
new millenarianism", it barely deserves commentary. Propagandists on
any side of an issue commonly will aim their barbs at the extremes
within the opponents ranks, in an attempt to paint all the
opposition with the same brush.

From: Mary-Sue Haliburton
Subject: Re: Legacies?
Date: Thursday, November 8, 2007 1:49 am

Just catching up, after not being able to get to this mailbox for a few weeks. In the light of Schrieber's
recent revelations about foreign money funding the dump-Joe-Clark movement in the PC
party, is this a surprise? I had written to the CBC national news to suggest that taxpayers might want to
see a restitution plan for Mulroney to pay back that $2 million that he got by lying. Can a legal
decision stand if later evidence shows it to be based on giving false witness?

And somewhere in all that mess is the $70,000 stolen from David Orchard by the McKay
party which got in bed with the Reform/Alliance. I haven't heard that it was ever paid back to him, so it's
a bit much to hear gov't spokesmen talking about how our political system has been reformed
under Harper and that corruption can't happen anymore. There still has to be redress of past

How much interest should taxpayers get back on the 2 million since that Mulroney libel case
was awarded the settlement out of court? And I wonder how much interest David should get on
his campaign contributions after four years.... ?


From: Mary-Sue Haliburton
Subject: torture in secret? Re: CONFLICTING OPINIONS
Date: Tuesday, October 30, 2007 7:25 pm

If a tree falls in the forest and nobody hears it, does it matter? And if someone is tortured and nobody
hears about it, does it matter? I suppose this depends on one's beliefs about what constitutes
justice, and whether military secrets can or should override human rights.

In WWII there was a lot of propaganda against the German Nazis because of the prisoner
camps in which people were abused and starved, particularly the Jews who suffered all of that as well
as the ultimate indignity of racist extermination. We thought it was only being done by the Bad Guys
on "the other side", and that "our side" was better and treated POWs according to international rules.
I don't know that any Canadian soldiers tortured Germans when they were captured; I have not seen
any reported. This doesn't mean that nothing ever happened, however.

There is a disturbing account by an American remembering his WWII experience guarding German
prisoners in an open field without any shelter, and not being allowed to do anything to helped them.
However, at least the Nazis kept prisoners in barracks with bunk beds. This first-person account, from
the Journal of Historical Review, is online at: <>.

"Articles in the G.I. newspaper, Stars and Stripes, played up the German concentration camps,
complete with photos of emaciated bodies; this amplified our self-righteous cruelty and
made it easier to imitate behavior we were supposed to oppose. Also, I think, soldiers not exposed to
combat were trying to prove how tough they were by taking it out on the prisoners and civilians.

"These prisoners, I found out, were mostly farmers and workingmen, as simple and ignorant
as many of our own troops. As time went on, more of them lapsed into a zombie-like state of
listlessness, while others tried to escape in a demented or suicidal fashion, running through open fields in
broad daylight towards the Rhine to quench their thirst. They were mowed down.Some prisoners
were as eager for cigarettes as for food, saying they took the edge off their hunger. Accordingly,
enterprising G.I. "Yankee traders" were acquiring hordes [sic -- should be HOARDS!] of watches and rings
in exchange for handfuls of cigarettes or less. When I began throwing cartons of cigarettes to
the prisoners to ruin this trade, I was threatened by rank-and-file G.I.s too. "

We cannot assume a self-righteous stance if what is being done in our name crosses the line from
technical abuse of human rights into abject cruelty.

M.S. Haliburton
Ottawa West - Nepean