Sunday, April 17, 2011

Daily Digest April 17, 2011



Canada's F-35s: Engines not included
Government will be required to provide powerplant for stealth fighters, documents show. The multi-million dollar F-35 stealth fighter that the Conservatives want to purchase comes with all the accoutrements of a high-tech aircraft ­ everything, that is, except an engine. MORE...
Harper raises the specter of a PQ government

>>>>>>>>>>INFOS <<<<<<<<<<



Will Canada engines have to be paid for adding more billions?

Whose figures are accurate to have planes to - do what again?

Intrigued I googled and came up witj what the Finns are doing.

Seems like a good move to me but never heard of it as an option.

What do you think" Up grade our existing 98 planes or buy 65 new?

"After the upgrades the aircraft are to remain in active service until 2020–2025 "

The Harper Government's stated cost, let alone those projected, or, what they may finally arrive at (that is if the programme is not cancelled as out of the reach of the US Government finances ) are all far above what has never been broached in Canada as an option: Mid-Life Upgrade (MLU)

Particularly with the new concern as to whether or not engines are included in the stated price, following the Finnish direction has advantages, does it not?

What are the arguments that would be raised against this cost saving measure being followed as rapidly as possible with a portion of our fleet? The other portion would remain operational and may well be upgraded to a higher level than available at present in the future.

Would it not be most interesting to obtain the Government of Canada's reaction were this raised in the media as an in process direction taken by another country and an option for Canada?

For your information:

Finland is upgrading its fleet of F-18s with new avionics, including helmet mounted sights (HMS), new cockpit displays, sensors and standard NATO data link. A number of the 63 Hornets remaining are going to be fitted to carry air-to-ground ordnance such as the AGM-154C JSOW, in effect returning to the original F/A-18 multi-role configuration. The upgrade includes also the procurement and integration of new AIM-9X Sidewinder and AIM-120C-7 AMRAAM air-to-air missiles. This Mid-Life Upgrade (MLU) is estimated to cost between €1-1.6 billion and work is scheduled to be finished by 2015. After the upgrades the aircraft are to remain in active service until 2020–2025 . [44] [45]

Canadian CF-18A Hornet off the coast of Hawaii. Note the "false cockpit" painted on the underside of the aircraft, intended to confuse enemy pilots during dogfights.
Main article: McDonnell Douglas CF-18 Hornet

Canada was the first export customer for the Hornet, replacing the CF-104 Starfighter (air reconnaissance & strike), the McDonnell CF-101 Voodoo (air interception) and the CF-116 Freedom Fighter (ground attack). The Canadian Forces Air Command ordered 98 A models (Canadian designation CF-188A/CF-18A) and 40 B models (designation CF-188B/CF-18B).

In 1991, Canada committed 26 CF-18s to the Gulf War, based in Qatar. In June 1999, 18 CF-18s were deployed to Aviano AB, Italy, where they participated in both the air-to-ground and air-to-air roles in the former Yugoslavia.

62 CF-18A and 18 CF-18B aircraft took part in the Incremental Modernization Project which was completed in two phases. The program was launched in 2001 and the last updated aircraft was delivered in March 2010. The aims were to improve air-to-air and air-to-ground combat capabilities, upgrade sensors and the defensive suite, and replace the datalinks and communications systems on board the CF-18 from the F/A-18A and F/A-18B standard to the current F/A-18C and D standard. [37] [38]

In July 2010 the Canadian government announced plans to replace the remaining CF-18 fleet with 65 F-35 Lightning IIs, with deliveries scheduled to start in 2016. [39]

 The intention to sign a future sole-sourced, untendered contract and the government's refusal to provide detailed costing became one of the major causes of the finding of contempt of Parliament and the subsequent defeat of the Conservative government through a non-confidence vote on 25 March 2011. This directly lead to the F-35 purchase becoming an issue in the Canadian 2011 federal election . [2] [3] [4] [5] [6]

The Canadian government has only stated an intention to purchase the F-35, no contract will be signed until at least 2013. If Canada were to decide not to proceed with the contract there would be no cancellation fees, although Canadian aerospace contractors might lose future F-35-related contracts as a result. [7]

.From: Tom Brewer

Someone need explain! Is it true the aircraft touted for purchase do NOT
have engines?  If this be true then WHAT is the total cost to Canadians to
see them fly? The Minister of Defense needs to tell us, now! The do not tell
the whole story is deplorable... Heck lets buy ships with no propulsion!!!
We sure look good but do not expect much, right?

This little problem is only one that needs addressing. Is it true these
aircraft could not be refueled in flight without  other add-ons? Is is true
a host of landing sites could NOT handle these aircraft? Gee, are we as
taxpayers to accept the need for new aircraft yet there are other problems
not answered? It is time Harper and his merry bunch got off their backside
and told the facts. At this rate all the jails might not have bars BUT then
why not? Yup a known criminal gets access to the Prime Minister yet a MP is
barred the result of what... Unproven accusations? Lets get a grip on our
government people. If criminals can work in the PM's office what next?
Tom Brewer

From: Vern Bretin

Hi Joe:  We're in a sad state of affairs, aren't we.  Our 'law & order' establishment fails to be able  to charge & penalize political wrong doers, white collar crime, or to understand what treasonable action constitutes---and we, the unwashed and mentally impaired populace, seem to be left with no one to vote for that will diligently pursue measures so important to the welfare of current & future generations of Canadians.  Does Canada require a coup de grace to take place under the eyes of Mr. Harpers gathering of professional law enforcement troops apprenticed at the G20 shenanigans?  The video cries out for deeper understanding of the political rot we're in---but it fails in suggesting how we can get out of it.  We're left in limbo!  A feeling of frustration & helplessness. 
So appreciate the work you're doing to enlighten those who follow the DD.  Thanks for sending out the video---should switch some from voting conservative.  Best regards, Vern

From: Robert Ede
Subject: organizational chart PCO
Robert Ede,

From: Ron Thornton

*Hey, Joe:

Just some random things that popped into my head as I read the recent Digest. In reading Zeb Landon's comment about extravagant military spending, I too am not a fan of over-priced jets with increasing price tags. However, I must admit at least someone is finally spending money on our military. When a Cessna flies over, I no longer joke that what we are witnessing is our air force in formation. One can't accept the total protection offered by the US Armed Forces, then bitch about the Americanization of this country.

If I'm reading it right, it would appear that Geoffrey Laxton is not in favor of a Harper majority. If not Harper, then  who...and why? If his first order of business would be to cut the political parties off the public trough and force them to raise funds on their own, then that would be one hell of a start.

Larry Kazdan figures the F-35's would be in tough to land in the north. However, the Joint Strike Force aircraft was designed in three models; "one is a conventional takeoff and landing variant, the second is a short take off and vertical-landing variant, and the third is a carrier-based variant." However, Larry is right when he wonders why the damn project was not put up for bid. The lowest prices does not always mean the best buy, but one must at least try to get the best bang for their buck.

Glenn Harewood is correct when he questions how the entire Guergis affair has been handled. I think it comes down to a sleaze factor, where Guergis and Jaffer were viewed, rightly or wrongly, as just too greasy to be involved with. When you consider all the politicians out there, that is saying something. I think she should have been suspended from caucus until the matter was cleared up, then brought back when it was cleared up. For some reason, that was not how this was handled.

There were other interesting points of view mentioned on a variety of other subjects, but I think that is enough pontificating from me for the moment.

Thanks, Joe.

Ron Thornton

From: Geoffrey Laxton
Subject: Sentinel Dispatch: Report: Elderly Man Kicked Out Of Harper Rally

From: Larry Kazdan
Subject: Letter to Editor re:  Leaked repo rt tests Harper's claim of transparency, former auditor says, April 12

Re:  Leaked report tests Harper's claim of transparency, former auditor says, April 12

During the debate, the Prime Minister tried to dismiss the Auditor General's G8 report because of its draft status, but unfortunately for Harper there is already a compelling body of damning evidence, or to use the Latin term, habeas gazebo.
The diversion of the border security appropriation into a slush fund for a Tory riding, the increase in pay for Tory staffers during a time of restraint, and the stuffing of Conservative cronies into the Senate each demonstrate that Harper and his crew are here first and foremost for themselves, with the welfare of Canadians running a distant second.

Subject: Letter to Editor re:  There are  chinks in Harper's economic armour,  RA LPH SURETTE,  Apr 16

Re:  There are chinks in Harper's economic armour,  RALPH SURETTE,  Apr 16

Too much dependence on resource exports is damaging our economy, and proposed but unspecified billion dollar budget cuts threaten our social services and health care. In addition, our democracy is under stress by a government  which breaks election spending rules, restricts media access and has been ruled in contempt of Parliament. Stephen Harper may think this election is unnecessary but it will allow Canadians to vote on Conservative stewardship. Harper may try to disguise himself as an economic wizard, but underneath is a glib salesman selling toxic snake oil distilled from the Alberta tar sands.
Subject: Letter to Editor re:  It's time for Canada to lead on the world stage,  Fred Litwin,  04/16/2011

Re: It's time for Canada to lead on the world stage,  Fred Litwin,  04/16/2011

If Canada is to lead on the world stage with a program of democracy promotion, we will need a new cast of characters who are not mouthing words they don't really believe. The Harper Conservatives have been found in contempt of Parliament, Tory operatives have been charged with breaking election spending rules, government watchdogs have been silenced, and the press restricted from asking too many questions. Canada deserves better than slick actors whose performance fails to impress both at home and abroad.
Subject: Letter to Editor re:   Economic pain awaits citizens to curb deficit,   Joe Jeerakathil,  April 15, 2011

Re:  Economic pain awaits citizens to curb deficit,   Joe Jeerakathil,  April 15, 2011

While there may be a heavy dose of economic pain regardless of which party forms the next government, who actually bears the brunt of the pain may well depend on who is elected. The Conservatives have promised boutique tax credits and income splitting that will likely benefit those who are more affluent, have reduced corporate taxes across the board, and have campaigned as the low-tax party. So will they increase taxes to reduce the deficit or are they more likely to cut government services that will impact most heavily on those of low income?  Since Harper believes Canada "is a Northern European welfare state in the worst sense of the term", social services and health care will almost certainly be on the chopping block.

From: Real Gagne
Subject: Canada Election 2011


Thanks for posting this.


HS Sims wrote:
> An interesting site for Daily Digest readers.
> Hank

From: Rebecca Gingrich
Subject: non-Canadians voting--democracy-you gotta love it

The first year my son was of voting age we went to the voting hall.  In front of us was a brown woman who 'had forgotten her voter's card and id at home!'  She was handed a ballot with no problem, no id or anything else.  My son had to show all the id he owned plus his voters card.  
When I lived in Alberta an elderly friend phoned to say she had gotten cards to vote at four different voting stations.  I phoned EC about that for her--they hung up on me stating that everyone knows they can only vote once.  
No wonder the 'ethnic vote' is being courted by the Parties.  The only thing the governments really pay attention to is if we paid our taxes in full or not.  Other than that they don't give a damn.

Elections Canada has been sending out voter cards to people who are ineligible to vote. (Sun file photo)
Subject: I thought we had GW?????

Cold weather destroying ozone in the Arctic
BBC ever so subtly tries to blame humans
MSNBC uses a hammer
Subject:  These are the evil that Canada is leading the bombing mission to 'protect'???
Libya Rebels Execute, And Behead Gaddafi Soldier

- WARNING - Video depicts the reality and horror of War and should only be watch by a mature audience.
Subject: what a deal, eh???
The multi-million dollar F-35 stealth fighter that the Conservatives want to purchase comes with all the accoutrements of a high-tech aircraft — everything, that is, except an engine. By DAVID PUGLIESE, The Ottawa Citizen April 17, 2011
Read more:

From: Vern Bretin
Subject: FW: LTE Unanswered Questions

Hi Joe:  Here's a LTE sent out to the Leduc Rep which might be of some interest to DD followers. 

Best regards, Vern

Dear Editor:

Unfortunately, our political candidates seem prevented in answering questions vital to Canada and the well being of future generations.  A brief listing of examples will illustrate the type of questions being avoided on the election trail:

       1.  Which party will prevent the go-ahead of the Keystone Pipeline project planned to carry bitumen/crude to Texas & other U.S. refineries for processing?
          Any Canadian advocating the long term export of Canadian jobs such as would occur if an approval for export through this or other similar project should  receive approval, should be subject to charges of treason.
       2.  Which party advocates suspending any further approvals for export of under-processed, unrefined oil and gas petrochemical products?  This restriction                would create thousands upon thousands of jobs for Canadians, generations to come, designing, building, operating, maintaining the upgrading                         facilities on Canadian soil.  Treasonous hesitant Canadian politicians?
       3.  Which party advocates a law to ban the export of bulk water from Canada?  Seems hesitant politicians prefer to have future Canadian generations begging for their water.  Canada would loose its ability to sustain its own food production requirements.  Treasonous hesitant politicians?
       4.  Which party advocates a law requiring 'large' volume water consumers to treat/condition their effluent to a quality level equal to, or better than, their                 intake?  Imagine the jobs created to design, build, operate, monitor, and maintain the quality of effluent from cities to villages, mining, forestry, oil/gas extraction, refining, petrochemical plants, food processing facilities, +.  Hesitant politicians treasonous?
       5.  Which party advocates our armed forces take on peacekeeping an humanitarian duties as opposed to participating in combat missions?  No further                    requirement for F-35 pedestrian killing aircraft, or the needless loss of Canadians in questionable combat missions.  Canadian designed & built search & rescue aircraft and patrol vessels would provide a positive way for taxpayer funding.  Hesitant politicians armed forces murderer
       6.  Which party will put a stop to Canada Subsidizing our U.S. neighbours by not having them pay GST on their imports of our resource products, while                   Canadians must pay this tax when paying for the same products/commodities?  (See NAFTA Article 314)  Hesitant politicians on the take?
       7.  Which party advocates the use of our Bank of Canada as the prime source of required government funding for operations, as opposed to borrowing from the private banks & financial institutions?  Interest paid to the Bank of Canada returns to the Canadian treasury, less minimal handling fees.  This, opposed           to interest going to pay Bankers, financiers, and shareholders their exhorbitant earnings/bonuses/severances/pensions---on the taxpayers tab!  Billions of             dollar savings for Canadians are available with the stroke of a pen!  Hesitant politicians in the pocket of Bankers & insurance companies?
        8.  Which party will eliminate the foolish security checks at airports for passengers boarding domestic flights?  Job losses galore!
This very brief listing might prompt some Canadians to realize that political wannabees and the highly controlled media prefer not to have them addressed publicly, but rather behind closed doors while in consultation with the likes of Perrin Beatty, CEO for the Canadian Chamber of Commerce, or John Manley, CEO of the Canadian Council of Chief Executives, who seem to advocate against any and all of the above.
The Canadian Economy will be fixed and we'll be struggling to find ways to buy Canadian to keep the activity in Canada.  Think Beatty & Manley care about the social and economic good of future generations of Canadians?  So which candidate will you vote for?

Respectfully submitted,  Vern Bretin   R.R.2, Leduc, AB, T9E 2X2