Sunday, May 30, 2010



Paul Jay's new blog post on
May 28, 2010

Hello TRNN viewers,

Paul Jay, Senior Editor of The Real News Network has a new blog on, one of Canada's busiest news websites.  Please click through to read the blog and help drive up the views.

Below is an excerpt from Paul's third blog post;

A billion for G20 security "is worth it" - just who and what are they afraid of?

According to AP, Canada's Conservative government said Thursday the nearly $1 billion it plans to spend on security at the G-8 and G-20 summits next month is "worth it". The Canadian government has budgeted up to $930 Canadian (US$885 million) for the summits.

By comparison, the stated amount spent by Pittsburgh on security for last September's G-20 summit was US$12.4 million. This in a country that was actually hit by a major attack and is target number one on most terrorist hit lists.

So why is Canada spending a billion?  Where's the threat?
: 'A billion for G20 security "is worth it" - just who and what are they afraid of?'

A shabby way to gut parliamentary debate


From:Richard Neumann
Subject: Re: Daily Digest MAY 29

The "Trojan Horse" budget bill currently under scrutiny in the Senate is an interesting and somewhat distasteful beast, but it is also the inevitable result of the current minority climate in Ottawa.  This is not the first time a budget bill has been used in this fashion, and of course it would be preferable that it were not so from a strictly democratic perspective, but it is the reality in the Ottawa we, the voters, have chosen.
The fact that the Libs were not all over this in the House is simply a testiment to their weak position right now.  They don't want to start a fight that they will inevitably lose, and if they aren't prepared to back things up by forcing an election over the issue, they are going turtle on it.  Unfortunately for Ignatieff, this only serves to reinforce the ever growing conclusion that he is weak, and growing weaker in opposition not stronger.  I'm surprised that he did not orchestrate Senate opposition in this context, because that would be the best strategy of making a point without the risks associated with backing down.  It appears the Liberal Senate came up with this plan on their own initiative, making it even more precarious for Ignatieff when it takes his own Senators, acting independently, to come up with the best strategy in this regard.
The Conservatives want this legislation passed with minimal fuss to be sure, but in my view each of the stand alone pieces of legislation could have been argued on their own merits.  It's not as though the opposition would have spent much time on them, they are far too focussed on Jaffer and Afghanistan, and that pre-occupation has been their undoing this Spring. 
As I noted previously, neither of these issues will resonate for several reasons which I won't go into again.  Until the Libs can latch onto something more tangible ($1B for the summits was a good example), then they will not resonate with the voters.  Further, with Ignatieff holding them back they desperately need to find such an issue or several issues where he can personally take the lead in attacking the government.  Invariably, it is the minions who are out successfully criticizing the government and not Ignatieff, a strategy that absolutely confounds me.  Why is it not Ignatieff hounding the government on summit security costs instead of David McGuinty??  Why is it Ignatieff digging his heals in over the budget instead of the Senate??  It makes no sense from a strategic point of view, unless the Libs have convinced themselves that he is going nowhere...
The next big issue and opportunity for the Libs will be over the House audit by Sheila Fraser.  If the results come out in the Fall, this will provide them with an opportunity, as you know that there will be some dirt found and that the media hounds will be drooling over anything at all on this matter.  Usually, this type of thing hurts the governing party more than the opposition, even where the abuse is not confined to government MPs.  The only explanation for Ignatieff's reluctance to take the lead on the issue (an abject failure in my view), is that the Libs have something substantial to hide, potentially within their own Leader's personal expenses.  Yikes...
Ah well, perhaps one day we'll get back to actual and verifiable debate on the issues that really matter, but given the complete incompetence of the opposition and the pleasure the PM gets from both talking loudly and wielding a big stick, me thinks it will be some time yet...
Richard Neumann

From: "Mahmood Elahi" <>
To: <>,<>
Cc: <dgardner@thecitizen.canwest ...snip...>
Subject: Climate change is a reality

The Editor
Financial Post
Copy to: Mr. Andrew Nikiforuk, Author of Tar Sands: Dirty Oil and the Future of a Continent.
Mr. Dan Gardner, with reference to your Op-Ed: "Weighing the evidence" (The Ottawa Citizen, May 28).
Climate-change is a reality:
We must find a way to reduce our reliance on oil - a major producer of greenhouse gas
Re Letter: "Petro states are dysfunctional states," by Andrew Nikiforuk and Editorial: "Green elites meet the people," by Lawrence Solomon (May 29).
In his highly contrived editorial, Lawrence Solomon is absolutely wrong when he says: "In all these countries, the shoddiness of scientific claims linking man to dangerous climate change has finally been publicized, thanks to the release of the Climategate emails which showed that scientitists had cook books on climate change." Nothing is further from the truth (And super-rich corporate CEOs and their well-paid acolytes are the worst elites).
As Dan Gardner, noted columnist for the Ottawa Citizen, in a devastaing exposure of climate-change deniers, wrote a day earlier: "But reasonable, open-minded, evidence-based disagreement is the exception among those who dispute the scientific orthodoxy on climate change. For the most part, they are zealous, dogmatic, self-righteous, ansolutely unyielding -- the mirror image of the extreme environmentalists they loath. ... Two investigations of the leaked emails were launched, one by the British Parliament, the other by the University [of East Anglia]. Combined, they represented one of the most thorough reviews of scientific work ever conducted. Neither found misconduct. ... While those who deny climate change cling to any scrap of dubious evidence that 'proves' their position, the real scientific facts keep piling up."
It is clear that climate change induced by human industrial activities is taking place at a rapid pace. Common sense tells us that hundreds of millions of cars spewing carbon dioxide in the environment are adding to greenhouse gases, raising the global temperature. To deny this would be to deny the fundamnental law of science. Last week, the U.S. National Research Council, which is the research arm of the National Academy of Sciences -- one of the most prestigious scientific organizations in the world -- released three major reports commissioned by the U.S. Congress. One report on climate change says: "There is strong and credible body of evidence, based on multiple lines of research, documenting that climate is changing, and that these changes are in large part caused by human activities."
The environmental and economic devastation caused by the Gulf of Mexico oil spill should serve as a wake-up call for all. It is time to take immediate measures to replace oil as a major source of energy. The wind turbines and solar solar panels are increasingly becoming  viable sources of energy. A major replacement of oil may be liquified coal. During the Second World, Germany, facing an accute shortage of petrol due to Anglo-American blocade, turned to liquified coal to power its cars, trucks and planes. After the war, the technology was abandoned due to surging supplies of low-cost oil. With oil prices rising and its environmental impacts becoming untenable, liquified coal can serve as an alternative source of energy, especially for the aviation industry.
Although coal also produces carbon dioxide, liquified coal can have less environmental impact. It can be transported as solid coal to be liquidied near the market. Moreover, the coal extraction is done onshore, without threatening the marine life. Coal is also cheap and plentiful and can replace oil as an economic source of energy. Of course, we will have to replace non-renewable energy with renewable energy in the long run. To begin with, we must abandon dirty oil sands of Alberta.
2240 Iris Street, Ottawa.

From: Rebecca Gingrich
Subject: I wonder if our MPs will have such 'creative' excuses if we are ever lucky enough to have them audited???,8599,1992886,00.html

Since it was formed three weeks ago, Britain's new Conservative-Liberal Democrat coalition government has been touting itself as the herald of change. But some things, it seems, always stay the same. In a near re-run of the scandals that had been battering Westminster for over a year before the country's May 6 election, one of the government's most senior and respected cabinet ministers resigned on Saturday following revelations that he had broken parliamentary rules regarding expenses. It's the first major scandal David Cameron has had to deal with since becoming Prime Minister. And it could prove to be the incident that puts the first crack in the coalition's fragile unity and undermines its attempts to claim it is pioneering a "new politics". (See the top 10 most outrageous MP expense claims.)
After a story appeared in The Daily Telegraph on Friday, Chief Secretary to the Treasury David Laws, a Liberal Democrat and number two to Chancellor of the Exchequer George Osborne, admitted to claiming back tens of thousands of pounds of taxpayers' money through a housing allowance for a property he shares with his male partner. The wealthy Laws, who has claimed around £950 ($1,370) a month for the past eight years, insisted he had kept the arrangement secret because he did not want to reveal his sexuality to friends and family.
His explanation attracted some sympathy in Westminster, and both Cameron and his deputy, Lib Dem leader Nick Clegg, suggested Laws may return to government in the future. But the revelations ultimately made it impossible for him to continue as Chief Secretary to the Treasury, whose main task is to implement more than £6 billion ($8.5 billion) of cuts to the public sector.
This latest scandal comes soon after a months-long expose in the Daily Telegraph, which over the course of last year chronicled the widespread and systematic abuse by MPs of all parties of their taxpayer-funded allowances. The scandal undermined voters' trust in their politicians ­ which led to a series of moves to crack down on expenses abuse by both the current and the previous Labour government.

Subject: Paul Hellyer on monetary and banking reform
From: Richard Priestman

To friends of monetary and banking reform:

Canadians concerned about the creation and control of money would like to see this issue get as much publicity as possible prior to the G20 meeting because it is a fundamental problem affecting all government policy decisions.

Paul Hellyer, who has worked on this matter for many years and has written half a dozen books on the subject, is trying to get  the G20 meeting to adopt 3 changes to our financial system namely, reduce the money created by commercial banks, increase the money created by government and re-instate reserve requirements for the commercial banks.  He has written to every member of the G20 and sent them copies of two of his recent books.  On May 20 he held a press conference in Ottawa and on Friday, June 18, he plans to speak about it in Toronto at Trinity-St. Paul's Church (beginning at 7:15pm).

The problem of money creation and control is enormous.  Canadians paid $170-million per day (over $62-billion) in 2008/09 in unnecessary interest on federal, provincial and municipal debt.  The cost for 2009/10 and subsequent years will likely be higher.  These costs are reflected in taxes, fees, cut-backs in public services such as education and medicare, training and support of laid-off workers and deterioration of infrastructure such as roads, sewers, water lines, affordable housing and the environment.  More importantly, government indebtedness to private financiers gives that sector undue influence on government policy leading to decisions which benefit the interests of the private sector foremost rather than that of the community as a whole. 

Friends of monetary and banking reform are asked to consider what they can do to support Paul's efforts to get G20 members to adopt his proposals.  As he said, "The G20 meeting is the best opportunity we have had in decades to educate both leaders and rank and file about the vagaries of the monetary and banking system."

If you can attend on June 18, good.  If you can inform others about it, better.  If you belong to social action groups, are concerned about the environment, are a trade unionist or are involved with other community minded groups and can bring them to the meeting, better still.  "Unless governments agree to take back some of their power over the creation of money .... they just won't have the financial flexibility to prevent global warming" or respond to the needs of their people as they should. 

Paul hopes we can get a million e-mails or letters in Canada and the U.S. sent to our members of Parliament, prime minister, the president and members of Congress in the two or three weeks leading up to the G20.  "At least we can make them aware that we want them to start thinking outside of the box and not just try and patch up the old unstable and unsustainable system", he said.

This meeting is being organized without a budget.  It will be free, but donations will be accepted at the door to cover expenses.  John Riddell is doing the leg work to get the hall set up.  If you would like to help you can contact John at < >.

Richard Priestman

From: The Natroses
Subject: Re: Daily Digest MAY 29,

Hi Joe,

Bill C-9, a Trojan horse is a apt name for it. As Senator Murray has stated, it is not way to run a government, a parliament or a democracy. Putting in non-budget items within a budget is one thing, but not allowing debate on the items is quite a different kettle of fish.

As the Star article suggests, "An "omnibus bill" may be a mouthful, but it is now a talking point because of a political sleight-of-hand that effectively muzzles debate. Bill C-9 is a piece of legislation that bundles together a wide range of issues, including parts of the budget, in an unwieldy 904-page document. Because it contains budget measures, the minority government would fall if the opposition parties joined together and voted against it.

Supremely confident that the opposition would dare not vote down Bill C-9, Prime Minister Stephen Harper has effectively denied opposition MPs the opportunity to properly assess the bill's 23 sections and 2,208 clauses. The bill was quickly given second reading, with enough Liberals MPs absent to allow it through. Then it was studied at warp speed by the Commons finance committee in a single day and sent back without amendments to the full House."

The talking points on the 4,
  • "Giving the environment minister unilateral authority to decide on environmental assessments for any project.
  •  Allowing cabinet to sell all or part of Atomic Energy of Canada Ltd.
  •  Regulating the payment network for credit cards nationwide. 
  •  Scaling back the exclusive rights of Canada Post to collect letters by permitting outside carriers to do so within our borders."
Among the many items, are items that will impact Canadians and their futures, and should like all other things be debated until the questions that all MPs have are answered. Giving an environmental minister carte-blanche to the the final say on all environmental assessments for any project, is allowing to put the authority and power in one set of hands, and it is open to abuse.  It is open to abuse each and every time, because of the lack of knowledge and expertise that the environmental minister has. Our grandchildren and great-grandchildren will end up footing the bill for environmental clean-ups, that was decided by one minister. It is open to abuse, when non-government groups, are saying quite the opposite, as oppose to the government experts, whose salaries are paid by the taxpayers. The minister is likely to go by the words of government staff, rather than wading deep into the science. I have seen this far too many times, on the provincial level in education policy, and our citizens are paying a steep price in terms of producing students who are poor readers and writers, after 12 formal years of schooling. Policies that are decided for political reasons, and not what is in the best interests of the students.

Scaling back the exclusive rights of Canada Post to collect letters by permitting outside carriers to do so within our borders, is another item, that should be debated. It may do more harm than reduce the cost of letters and parcels that Canadians are charge.It already cost a pretty penny to send a parcel from NL to Ontario, that is under 2 pounds. If it is an odd size parcel, Canada Post charges more for it. As for letters, allowing others into the game,  will it lead to better service in terms of quicker deliver? Will letter delivery to the door or the post boxes, be composed of multiple mail service, including the post office? It would be hard to fathom, that delivery of different monthly bills could be delivery by 5 different mail services, including Canada Post. Would mail service be reduced to the whims and wishes of the powers-to-be, and where the demands ordering the Canadian to pick up their mail, at a place, that will cost them in transportation and time to do so. There is so many questions, what the Harper government intentions are concerning mail service, because opening the door for other mail service companies, is the foot in the door that is needed to make some of what I posed above, come true. Likewise, this should be truly hashed out in Parliament, and debated like the other non-budget items.

More on above:
1. " For Canada, the lessons from the Gulf of Mexico oil disaster are bleak. The United States may have stumbled into the worst ecological disaster in its history. But we have deliberately chosen to head in the same direction. American regulation of the offshore oil industry has been revealed as a sham. Our regulation of drilling in the far harsher North Atlantic and Arctic is said by experts to be even weaker. And thanks to what is in effect a conspiracy between the governing Conservatives and opposition Liberals to avoid an early election, Canada's environmental rules are about to be further gutted."

2. " The federal government is moving ahead with plans to grant new offshore oil-exploration licences in the Arctic, despite the U.S. government's expanding freeze on offshore drilling in the wake of the Gulf Coast leak. Moreover, any company granted an exploration licence in Canada's portion of the Beaufort Sea will be subjected to less environmental scrutiny than those wishing to explore on the U.S. side, critics say."
Read more:

3. "Ward Elcock is the bureaucrat who is buying nearly a billion bucks worth of security for the G8/G20 summits and, to hear him tell it, that's money well spent. Protecting world leaders “requires a lot of people and people are expensive,"Ottawa's security czar told The Globe and Mail in an interview. He denied allegations of profligacy, saying that Canadian taxpayers have to understand the logistics of deploying thousands of federal agents. Also, he said, other countries lowball their own costs."

4. "Foreign companies would gain unprecedented access to municipal water services and perhaps even a claim to the water itself under the free trade deal now being negotiated between Canada and the European Union, a new report says. While the federal government has touted the economic upsides of the trade pact, a legal analysis claims it will likely have big implications for municipalities by forcing them to open their contracts to European firms."

The senate cannot do much in the last 4, but it sure can used the senate power and traditions, to act as they should, sober second thought on issues that will impact all Canadians, because it is obvious our MPs and the sitting government are not willing to do so in the House of Commons.

From: "Serge Crespy"
Subject: Serge Crespy / Collingwood, ON   Re: Daily Digest MAY 29

Dear, Joe:
Is it yet not obvious to the public that BP will accomplish the feat of completely sealing their well-pipe only when the two "relief pipes" have become the alternate method of continuing to retrieve the oil?  
Should there be success in sealing the oil-pipe, at this point in time, the public's uproar would force politicians to prevent allowing any further drilling (including pressure-relief drilling), for a long, long time.
"ABSTRACT" - (Suggestion / Possible Solution)
A piston-like plunger with a long stem (allowing for a required degree of pivot action) inserted into the well-casing and directed from, and under pressure, from two super-tankers (side by side), on the surface; such a piston's end having an inflatable tough-rubber baloon, which seals the matal casing's bottom edge .    Additionally, there could be several expandable rings mounted on such a piston, to further seal the pipe.   At this point in time, the cement could be poured into the casing to permanently seal all ...... 
Best Wishes,
Serge Crespy
Collingwood, Ontario

From: Rebecca Gingrich

Joe--This issue is just more proof that  'democracy' and 'good governance' is the furthest thing from the minds of those taxed with democracy and good governance.  That the Opposition would be absent to make sure the government doesn't fall, rather than do what is best for the country, is despicable.  They are allowed to do this because of some words on paper.  And as usual we have no recourse other than to pay millions for an election that will not accomplish any change no matter who gets elected.  And sadly the NDP is playing the game very well.  They feel secure in voting against this Bill because their good buddies, the Libs, will vote with the government.

How many more incidents will we need before we wake up and realize that we are living in a farce?  Our government has become nothing more than an episode of Yes Minister, that famous Brit comedy.  Except none of us are laughing. 
Hopefully the Senate will come through for the people.   And then the words should be written that a Budget means a Budget, and not anything else that the head dictator wants passed.  And we voters must have a voice in decisions.  We write to our MPs and PM and don't even get a response, or we get a bunch of meaningless words that prove that our message has not even been read.  Governing by polls is disgusting.  That is not the voice of the people but the manipulation of our thoughts to control the message by those who hire the polls done.  We need Referenda.  But our governments are afraid of that since the Charlottetown Accord.  We did not go quietly into the night as the government wanted.  Therefore we are just here to pay for the games that are being played.  Just shut up and let the nobility run things?

From: "John Feldsted"
Subject: Twenty years around the Bloc

The BQ existed for a decade and a half through hidden subsidies from the Liberal Party of Canada. When Jean Chretien knew that his retirement was inevitable, he created political party allowances which have pumped $17,462,241 taxpayer dollars into the BQ over the past 6 years.
Proportional representation is a cure worse than the disease – the scheme will perpetuate a commons made up of quarrelling factions and minority governments, much like what we have at present. Removing the allowances will end the viability of the BQ and Greens, who enjoy nominal support from people who will not commit funding for their chosen political party.      
Twenty years around the Bloc
Winnipeg Sun Editorial
May 28, 2010

It was 20 years ago that Lucien Bouchard ­ or Benedict Bouchard to some editorialists of old ­ got in a hissy fit over suggested changes to the Meech Lake accord, abandoned federalism and his pal Brian Mulroney, and took some sovereigntist Tories and two Liberals to the dark side of Canada's two solitudes.

Hence, the formation of the Bloc Quebecois.

Excuse us if we do not celebrate its anniversary.

For those who would argue giving the separatists a vote in Ottawa has somehow kept this country together, we would argue a one-trick pony show with a one-province fixation has no place throwing its pile of politics into the federal mix.

What next? A federal Wild Rose party should Diane Ablonczy, for the sake of argument, suddenly decide to pull a Bouchard in Alberta?

The Blocquistes have it too good, and they know it.

As the longest-serving leader on the federal stage, Gilles Duceppe gets to cash his substantial federal pay cheque while working against the very country that has made his life so comfortable.

Is there any better gig than that?

Lucien Bouchard was a turncoat.

Duceppe, meanwhile, is what he is: A single-minded opportunist.

The Bloc Quebecois of today is on the wane, with its popular vote undeniably shrinking. As a result, no politician in his right mind will resurrect the Quebec "problem" simply because no "problem" exists ­ not since Prime Minister Stephen Harper's 2006 appeasement declaration that "the Quebecois form a nation within a united Canada."

But how do you make the Bloc go away so our federal democracy can once again become a true federal democracy, with better than long-shot odds of having an occasional majority government without the PM being from Quebec?

Throughout the last six elections, the Bloc has averaged in the low 40s in the popular vote but has nonetheless laid claim to two-thirds of Quebec's seats in the House of Commons.

Proportional representation would cut those seats almost in half. It would be the beginning of the Bloc's end, and a return to a truly federally-minded democracy.

For a one-trick pony show, 20 years has been 20 years too long.

The Bloc belongs in the history books.

Subject: Neocon Vampires
From: Jacob Rempel

Neocon Vampires Sink Their Fangs Into the Tea Parties

By Ira Chernus
"This is the playbook for the resurgence
of the conservative movement," says none
other than Dick Cheney, on the book jacket.
It's "a must-read for conservatives who want
our movement to dominate," exclaims a blurb
from Karl Rove.

From: Larry Kazdan
Subject: Letter to Editor re:  Mexico sides with Canada on bank tax,  Brian Milner, May. 28, 2010

Re:  Mexico sides with Canada on bank tax,  Brian Milner, May. 28, 2010

Maybe a bank tax whose proceeds would return to the banks in a future crisis is not an idea everyone can support.  But there is no reason to oppose a bank tax to raise money for keeping government services intact during a time of severe recession.  Better to provoke a few squawks from big bankers than having to deal with riots in the streets as we see in Europe.

Subject: Fwd: New Finance Canada document notification
From: Robert Ede

--------- Forwarded message ----------
From: <>
Date: Fri, May 28, 2010 at 11:33 AM
Subject: New Finance Canada document notification

The following Fiscal Monitor has just been posted on the Finance Canada Site.

The Fiscal Monitor

La Revue Financière

From: Zeb Landon
Subject: Canadians deeply divided on crime, punishment - Winnipeg Free Press

Re: Canadians deeply divided on crime, punishment - Winnipeg Free Press

I am glad to see that a sensible distinction is finally appearing in the press -- between "punishment" and "prevention" in the matter of criminal jail sentences.

This is a step forward.  Many other steps are needed, however, most of the rhetoric being over-simplistic.

From: "Brian D. Marlatt"
Subject: Hiebert defends spending while irate residents call for audit

(Incidently, the title of the hard copy version of this article is "Hiebert 'should give it back'")

From: John Duddy
Subject: YouTube - John Fitzgerald Calls for New Truly Independent 9/11 Investigation
Cc: Joe Hueglin <>

From: The Natroses

Hi Joe,
I noticed a theme in today's DD. Whether it is the selling off of public assets, to Quebec's reeling and dealing in the language wars, to crime issues and everything in between, the federal government crosses over all issues.  Does a province really have any type of control over their future?  Or is it that provinces do not want to use their power, to wrestled the control that the federal government has over the provinces and its citizens?  Most provinces seem to be working within the system, without taking advantage of other tools that are available to them.
Take note on Premier Williams of NL, where other premiers should take notes on how to fight the powers to be using their own policies against them. The first link is the video, showing  another side of Williams, with his passion tempered down, to explain why Quebec courts are kangaroo courts.
The second link is the CBC article, and the video link.

As for the citizens of NL, we are 99.9 % behind our NL government. We do have a very small faction, that insist it is best to swallow the bitter medicine of the federal government, NAFTA agreements, and other policies that creates economic hardship for our province. Confederation has not been kind to NL, nor has it been kind to the other provinces. Ontario could learn a few lessons from NL, and if they did, there would be no need of selling off public assets, to American corporations, or dealing with Quebec and their regulations concerning hydro, and the right to wheel power through their province.

Here is a few more headlines, where provincial governments do little if any screaming at the federal governments. How about having the federal government start dancing to the tunes of the provincial governments, rather than the provincial governments dancing to the tune of the federal government?

1. No, minister - "Over the weekend, the government of Prime Minister Stephen Harper quietly changed the way that political staff are accountable to committees of the House of Commons"

2. PM tries again to set rules - " Deprived of a majority in the House of Commons ­ and consequently of the luxury of settinng his own agenda unfettered ­ Prime Minister Stephen Harper is tryiing instead to undermine the very institution he cannot dominate. First came the defiance of Parliament on the examination of Afghan detainee documents, which finally ended in a reasonable compromise. Then on Tuesday, the government announced it would exempt its political staffers from testifying before parliamentary committees. From now on, the relevant cabinet minister will be dispatched to answer all questions for underlings." Â

3. $40 per taxpayer is too much for G8 meet - "We're tempted to suggest that the actual elected leaders just set themselves up a Facebook group; we know plenty of young people who seem to keep in touch perfectly well that way. But let's give this thing the benefit of the doubt: If these meeting really are worthwhile, let them be held at some permanent and secure site: Fort Knox, someplace like that."
Read more:

4. Dam is breaking on MPs' expenses - " It is encouraging to note that at least one party leader can read a poll: 88 per cent of Canadians (including 91 per cent of Quebecers) want Parliament's books, including MPs' expense-account spending, to be open."
Read more:

5. Alarm sounds over feds' murky water data - " The government has only murky information about Canada's water supply and it's putting Canadians' health and the economy at risk, an unpublished federal report warns. The paper, by a group of senior bureaucrats, also says the knowledge gap widens as climate change and development strain the water supply."

6. Toronto councillor calls on Ottawa to pick up tab for G20 property damage - "The federal government [] won't compensate property owners in downtown Toronto for damage sustained during next month's G20 summit."

Why don't we here each and every premier talking about issues that impacts the economic welfare of their provinces, on federal policies and federal decisions and where the provincial governments are forever readjusting their policies to fit the federal governments and their needs?  Why leave it to media?

From: "Merle A. Jacobs."
Subject: Fw: CC4FB member on hunger strike - Burma

FYI - Hi Joe: I know you like to news. Finally the Burmese people outside are trying to get attention for the plight for those inside. I have been out since 1965 so lost touch and now am trying to put my knowledge to use to help them help themselves. This is one sad story - like so many others in the world. So far the Harper government and other all party MPs have been supportive. Have a good weekend. Merle

----- Forwarded Message ----
From: "" <>
Sent: Fri, May 28, 2010 8:41:19 AM
Subject: Re: CC4FB member on hunger strike

Aung Moe asked me to express his appreciation to everyone for your support.
He's doing fine; and conducting the interviews with various media while he's on a hunger strike. Yesterday, they delivered a letter to the President Obama. Burmese activists and American supporters join him daily as this week is a sad 20 year anniversary of NLD's landslide election victory in May 1990. He and supporters are distributing letters demanding the inquiry commission to investigate war crimes and crime against humanity in Burma.
He is working with other activists to stage a three days mass demonstration (from Sat to Monday) in front of White House since this weekend is American long weekend.

On Fri, May 28, 2010 at 12:03 AM, U K <> wrote:
He is being well done!
Ashin Kawwida
--- On Thu, 5/27/10, <> wrote:

Today NCGUB Prime Minister Dr. Sein Win visited him and offered their support.
On 5/27/10, <> wrote:
> We mentioned in the previous meetings about the action plan of our friend
> Aung Moe @ Myo Lwin Aung to ask UN and world leaders to support
> establishment of inquiry commission to investigate war crimes and crime
> against humanity in Burma committed by the junta.
> I'd like inform you the developments.
> - We expected to stage his hunger strike at UN HQ in NY but decided to move
> the location to White House due to logistic challenges.
> - This Monday, he staged the hunger strike in front of the White House with
> support from DC area Burmese American activists. There was about 30
> supporters gathered with him in front of White House. He received media
> interviews such as Voice of America, Democratic Voice of Burma. Mike from
> US
> Campaign also came to support him.
> Please wish him luck.
> Thanks