Tuesday, April 05, 2011

Daily Digest April 5, 2011


The DAILY DIGEST: INFORMATION and OPINION from ST. JOHN'S to VICTORIA.
ARCHIVED at http://cdndailydigest.blogspot.com/

PAPERS PAGEs

ST.JOHN'S TELEGRAM - CORNER BROOK WESTERN STAR - CHARLOTTETOWN GUARDIAN - CAPE BRETON POST - HALIFAX CHRONICLE HERALD - SAINT JOHN TELEGRAPH-JOURNAL - MONTREAL GAZETTE - OTTAWA CITIZEN - KINGSTON WHIG STANDARD- TORONTO STAR - GLOBE & MAIL -
NATIONAL POST - SUNS - ST. CATHARINES STANDARD - K-W RECORD - WINDSOR STAR -
Mental health
SUDBURY STAR - THUNDER BAY CHRONICLE JOURNAL - WINNIPEG FREE PRESS - SASKATOON STARPHOENIX - REGINA LEADER-POST - CALGARY HERALD - EDMONTON JOURNAL - LETHBRIDGE HERALD - VANCOUVER SUN - VANCOUVER PROVINCE -
OPINION AND INFORMATION
>>>>>>>>>>INFOS <<<<<<<<<<
MARDI 05 AVRIL 2011

BELOW(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)30)30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)(30)

I get seized with issues - Canada entering into a second war, Libya, which has no direct to us
has been one of these and continues to be.  Particularly now our presence there is being used
as a justification for purchasing new aircraft for Canada's defence at the cost of many billions.

Watch the Real News Video discussing the war. Look for Canada to be mentioned.

Disagree with the Letter to the Editor should you be in agreement with our direction in Foreign Affairs.
I look forward to a debate on this issue, particularly in that it is unmentioned in the current election.


US Libya Intervention Is Aggression
Go to story | Go to homepage

To: Letter to the Editor <joe.hueglin@bellnet.ca>
From: Joe Hueglin <joe.hueglin@bellnet.ca>
Subject: F-35 purchase for offence or defence?
Cc:


Dear Editor,

The Conservatives shifting their argument for purchasing the F 35 aircraft from fear of Russian attack to current action in Libya has no credibility.

An attack by the Russians, though remote, is the only justifiable argument for purchasing newer planes for defence.  There is no other country capable of attacking Canada and little likelihood of  this occurring.

Our current planes have never been used in defence of Canada.  They have, however, been employed in two offensive actions supporting one side over the other in internal conflicts, the first in the Serb-Albanian dispute in Kosovo, the second our current involvement in Libya supporting those fighting against forces loyal to Muammar Gaddafi.

A question to be asked  of and answered by those seeking the power to decide Canada's foreign policy is this: are we going to continue to be involved in wars that do not threaten Canada directly or will focus be on developing these roles, being peacemaker where possible and being ever ready to assist others when they face natural or man made disasters by greatly expanding our Disaster Assistance Response Team ?

Never having been a colonial power, nor in dispute with other countries (aside from the Dane's over Hans Island), Canada could well develop being viewed as the world's foremost para-medic, and as such without the need for having highest tech aerial capability available for either defensive or offensive

Yours truly,

Joe Hueglin
5838 Mouland Avenue
Niagara Falls
905-356-3901

Sources of quotes and information cited:
"their public relations strategy on the controversial F-35, putting aside their previous arguments about the need for the stealth fighter to counter Russian aircraft in the Arctic, to focus now on the Libyan war as proof the multi-billion dollar jet purchase is required." http://www.ottawacitizen.com/technology/Harper+shifts+focus+jets/4552354/story.html  

'Canadian Forces Disaster Assistance Response Team
http://www.cefcom-comfec.forces.gc.ca/pa-ap/nr-sp/doc-eng.asp?id=301


«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»¥«¤»§«¤»

From: "Paul Downie"
Subject: A Useful Warning

Someone was nice enough to forward this to me. I hope you pass this on to your friends and family.

On Wednesday, Dr. Oz had a show on the fastest growing cancer in women, thyroid cancer.  It was a very interesting program and he mentioned that the increase could possibly be related to the use of dental x-rays and mammograms.  He demonstrated that on the apron the dentist puts on you for your dental x-rays there is a little flap that can be lifted up and wrapped around your neck.  Many dentists don't bother to use it.  Also, there is something called a "thyroid guard" for use during mammograms.  By coincidence, I had my yearly mammogram yesterday. I felt a little silly, but I asked about the guard and sure enough, the technician had one in a drawer. I asked why it wasn't routinely used. Answer: "I don't know.  You have to ask for it." Well, if I hadn't seen the show, how would I have known to ask?

===================================
From: Geoffrey West

IF there was still ever any doubt as to the lies, frauds and criminal negligence of 9/11 and the war in Iraq and others, maybe people best hear it from the veterans themselves?? : http://www.ivaw.org/about/why-we-are-against-wars This IS an election issue: Harper, and all in the party are complicit in crimes against humanity and should be barred from running. Mainstream media also guilty for not reporting truth.
http://www.ivaw.org/about/why-we-are-against-wars
Why we are against the Wars - IVAW.org

===================================
From: "Richard Neumann"
Subject: Daily Digest - Below 30 April 3rd

Joe:
 
In replying to the Natroses comments through you, I almost have a desire to preface my remarks by saying "Mr. Speaker".  It certainly does keep things civilized.
 
Natroses asks me what my motives are.  I am certain that I have never hidden the fact that I am a Conservative Party supporter in my posts here, so I would expect that my thoughts and views on the issue would be given consideration by the readers as coming from that perspective.  Having said that, I do not post here with the intent of promoting a Conservative agenda, I simply am scribbling my thoughts, which tend to the Conservative simply because that is who I am. 
 
Natroses is quite correct in some of his points.  There are certainly political "trolls" out there posting comments that hold very little in terms of real argument.  Some of those so-called "trolls" are conservative in form, and others are liberal or much further to the left on the old political spectrum.  Nobody has a monopoly on "trollism".  I hope that Natroses doesn't consider my posts as having been scribbled by a troll, but then again it is his right to believe so.  Everyone has a tendancy to view the variety of media sources through their own prism.  When I read the Toronto Star, I see a mainstream newspaper with a very defined predisposition towards the liberal left.  Natroses likely views this paper as fair and balanced.  The point being, I read the Star's articles when I have the time, as I recognize that Conservatives do not have a monopoly on good ideas, or a unique  understanding of the mood of the general Canadian public.  I also regularly listen to CBC radio, and occasionally switch from CTV News to the CBC to see what they are reporting on. 
 
Natroses laments Conservative attack ads that question the Liberal leader's motives in coming back to Canada, seeing them as the last refuge of a desperate campaign.  Like many informed Canadians, these negative ads do little for me personally and I'm turned off by them.  Like some of those who post here, I prefer a reasoned debate, something missing from Parliament these days.  However, I also recognize their effectiveness when aimed at a general population in establishing or influencing opinion where more detailed debate is absent. You may recall that shortly after the Conservative Party was formed, Harper was assailed by a similar negative ad campaign that became even more nasty in 2006.  Those Liberal ads questioned his patriotism as well, decrying a hidden agenda to turn us all into Americans.  Likewise, I recall the days of a vociferous attack from the aptly named Liberal "Rat Pack" in the Mulroney years, and of course the infamous PC ad from Kim Campbell's campaign which emphasized Chretien's appearance.  Perhaps this was the forebearer of things to come.  Every party is capable of getting into the mud.  Indeed, I view the entire contempt issue in the House as a more formalized version of the same thing, rather than a genuine expression of outrage as the opposition tried unsuccessfully to portray it.
 
My last few posts have dealt specifically with my thoughts on the strategic implications of the current campaign, in a very macro sense.  My comments regarding tendencies on the left to reinforce the opinions they already hold stands, not that the Fox-watching conservatives on the right are much different in that regard.  The point I was hoping to make is that a failure to get outside of the bubble you create for yourself can lead to some pretty substantial strategic miscalculations, and in bringing about an election when so far back in the polls, the Liberals may have fallen into this trap.  Time will tell, of course.
 
As for the point Natroses made about how engaged some really are in the process, and in particular how acute the social need is, I agree entirely.  Those in need, or those touched by those in need, are paying attention.  These are real people, not ill-defined special interests,  looking to their politicians and their fellow citizens for help, and to any one of them their issue is far more important than fighter jets.  It is far more important than tax cuts.  It is far more important than deficits, balancing budgets, political party financing or a host of other issues that seem to dominate debates in an election.  I recognize this to be the case, as do most Conservatives.  There are those who will never be disengaged from the process, because the process still represents the most direct means by which they can improve their lives.  There are, however, many others who live their lives quite naturally on the fringe of the political debate, becoming engaged when aroused to do so.  There are still others who will never be engaged, either because they have simply no interest in politics, or assume that even if interested, they could never make a difference.
 
As for the matter at hand, my own views as to the relative merits of this campaign will be proven correct, incorrect, or more likely a little of both after the election.  I have little doubt that the Conservatives will provide me with cause to criticize their strategy, they always have in the past.  At the same time, I won't be moderating my opinions in the hopes of swaying a few readers of the Daily Digest.  I suspect that compared to the general population, there are relatively few undecideds in this forum and if that were my goal, I'd be far more productive working the phones in our candidate's office. 
 
I am not straying from my view however, that this week will be key in this campaign.  The Liberal platform is out now, quite early from a strategic standpoint, and how it sways the general public will be interesting to follow and analyse.  My own feeling is that the race in Ontario will tighten some, as I've thought it would from the beginning.  But what is most important in my view is whether that tightening continues to be solely at the expense of the NDP, or whether Ignatieff is successful in moving the Conservatives back from that 40% mark.  If the Conservatives backtrack to the 36% range, then both Layton and Ignatieff can keep the guns squarely on Harper.  If it doesn't and it is NDP support that slips, Jack will have to train his guns on Ignatieff more often and more directly.  That would make it easier for Harper to go onto the offensive from time to time, rather than spending the entire campaign on the defensive.  That makes him sound more Prime Ministerial, and would reinforce his own leadership numbers.
 
One final point that touches on Ignatieff's ability to sell his platform.  My wife, who was one of those completely disengaged Canadians when I met her, never having cast a vote, is a good source for me when it comes to the impressions leaders set.  Make no mistake, she is quite capable of taking a nasty swipe at Conservatives as well as the rest.  But as we were watching the Liberal platform release yesterday, she said something that has stuck with me.  Although she was certainly drifting in and out of what Ignatieff was saying, she did offer that he reminded her of a tele-evangalist, or one of those tv product salesmen pushing the latest gadget.  She didn't find him believable (although, I should note that we own both Shamwows and Slap Chops, and it wasn't me who ordered them).  Time will tell...
 
Richard Neumann

===================================
From: Ray Strachan
Subject: Fw: Saskatchewan on the cutting edge!!

After having dug to a depth of 10 feet last year, Toronto scientists found traces of copper wire dating back 100 years and came to the conclusion that their ancestors already had a telephone network more than 100 years ago.
 
Not to be outdone by the Ontarian's, in the weeks that followed, a Vancouver archaeologist dug to a depth of 20 feet, and shortly after, a story published in the Vancouver Province: "BC archaeologists, finding traces of 130-year-old copper wire, have concluded that their ancestors already had an advanced high-tech communications network 30 years earlier than the Ontario claim."

One week later, the Saskatoon Star Phoenix in Saskatoon, reported the following: "After digging as deep as 30 feet in his backyard in Leask, Saskatchewan, Murray Kasun, a self-taught archaeologist, reported that he found absolutely nothing. Murray has therefore concluded that 150 years ago, Saskatchewan had already gone wireless."

Just makes you bloody proud to be from Saskatchewan!

===================================
From: Larry Kazdan

_______
Subject: Letter to Editor re:  Harper under fire for tossing Londoners out of Tory rally, Patrick Maloney, April 4, 2011

Re:  Harper under fire for tossing Londoners out of Tory rally, Patrick Maloney, April 4, 2011
http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2011/04/04/17875211.html

A local teen with a Facebook picture of Liberal Leader Michael Ignatieff was turfed from Harper's political rally in London, Ontario. Another young man was asked to leave because of an NDP bumper sticker on his vehicle. The Conservatives certainly conduct their due diligence, except in the case of Bruce Carson, a convicted fraudster, disbarred lawyer and bankrupt who was welcomed into the inner circle of Harper advisers and known as "the Mechanic" for his ability to fix tricky situations.
_______
Subject: Media must answer these questions about PM's credibility

Media must answer these questions about  PM's credibility

Bruce Carson's history as a convicted fraudster, bankrupt and disbarred lawyer are in the public record.

People who've worked at senior levels for previous prime ministers say someone in Carson's advisory position would have been subject to a thorough review by both the RCMP and the Canadian Security Intelligence Service. Carson's lawyer claims that his entire criminal record was disclosed during a security check required before he become a senior staffer in the Prime Minister's Office.

And the Conservatives are adept at ferreting information. They have obtained private information on critics of Veterans Affairs to order to undermine their credibility. They have checked Facebook pages of rally attendees so that opponents can be ejected. The Tories have also been accused by academics of investigating their backgrounds through freedom of information searches in order to intimidate.

So how plausible is it that Harper and his inner circle had such little knowledge of Carson?  Is Harper's team incompetent?  Are they inconsistent when they claim zero tolerance for crime?   And is there a pattern of lying, whenever inconvenient Conservative truths comes back to haunt?

These are questions that those who relay information and opinion to Canadians must resolve.

Larry Kazdan,
__________________________________________
Footnotes:

Bruce Carson, convicted of fraud, disclosed criminal record to PMO: lawyer, Joan Bryden and Jim Bronskill,  04/3/2011
http://www.winnipegfreepress.com/canada/breakingnews/bruce-carson-convicted-of-fraud-disclosed-criminal-record-to-pmo-lawyer-119153024.html

Tories accused of digging up dirt on 'Liberal' profs
http://www.thestar.com/news/canada/article/936704--tories-accused-of-digging-up-dirt-on-liberal-profs

Harper under fire for tossing Londoners out of Tory rally
Decision 2011: Prime Minister's spokesperson apologizes to Western student
By Patrick Maloney The London Free Press
http://www.lfpress.com/news/london/2011/04/04/17875211.html

===================================
From: Bob Taubman
Subject: Corporate Tax Cuts

Hi Joe,
 
Thought this might be of interest to some of your readers who are wary of corporations crying for further tax cuts.  Although this is a U.S. article, it probably emulates what is taking place, or could take place, here in Canada. 
 
http://www.truth-out.org/what-resistance-looks/1301814000
 
Bob Taubman,
Orleans, ON

===================================
From: Rebecca Gingrich
Subject: EPA to raise radiation limits in the USA while Canada turns off radiation detectors

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------
EPA to raise limits for radiation exposure while Canada turns off fallout detectors
http://www.naturalnews.com/031963_radiation_exposure.html


(NaturalNews) The mass radioactive contamination of our planet is now under way thanks to the astonishing actions taking place at the Fukushima nuclear facility in Japan. As of last night, TEPCO announced it is releasing 10,000 tons of radioactive water directly into the Pacific Ocean. That 2.4 million gallons of planetary poison being dumped directly into the ocean.

This water is being released because they have run out of places to keep it on land. It's too deadly to transport anywhere else, and all the storage pools around Fukushima are already overflowing. So they're dumping it into the ocean, then calling it "safe" because they claim the ocean will "disperse" all the radiation and make it harmless.

But because there's more radioactive water being produced every day at Fukushima, this process of releasing radioactive water into the ocean could theoretically continue for years, easily making Fukushima the worst nuclear disaster in the history of our world.

Seriously, see the bottom of the page: http://www.hc-sc.gc.ca/hc-ps/ed-ud/...

Learn more: http://www.naturalnews.com/031963_radiation_exposure.html#ixzz1IedG5F3Y

===================================