First, the big news.is that Alec Bruce is a grandfather. Obviously,then, the picture on his column dates back to the Lester Pearson years. But, however misleading that photo might be, it is surely heartening that a perons of his advanced years can still shuffle to the computer each day; and can still send in a column worth reading.
Section A, again, is mostly about U2, with reassurances that 60,000 litres of beer will be on hand. As usual, there isn't a owrd on fracking, though it is going one, and is kept secret by heavy security. The T&T isn't bothering to report even the lies told in "Information Meetings" staged by the gas companpy. If you want information on what is happening, the major source is one on Facebook, "New Brunswick is NOT for sale". Lots of interesting news and videos.
Oh, in fairness, the front page reports a speech on downtown development that would have been fresh and forward-looking 50 years ago. So, naturally, it made page one.
NewsToday has little, and nothing you have not seen on TV yesterday.
A local MLA for the Liberals has a good piece on Alward's broken promises - though it would be even better if the Liberals didn't have a past littered with broken promises. It also has a giggly sentence about basic Liberal values that insist on protecting the weak against the strong. Like hell they do. I suggest that Liberal MLA Chris Collins get a good dictionay, and look up the word Liberal. Liberalism has nothing to do with protecting the weak - and lord knows the NB Liberal Party has nothing to do with it. Similarly, Conservatism has nothing to do with traditional values (whatever they might be) or with responsible spending.
Quite apart from the dictionary definitions, I have seen no evidence of anything that could be called values in either the Liberals or the Conservatives.
The worst and most hypocritial item in today's paper is on the op ed page in the shape of a column on oil and democracy. It comes from the usual suspect, the big business propaganda front called "The Fraser Institute". This one argues that oil companies will increasingly rely on Canada because they prefer to deal with democracies.
Really? So how come big oil of the US, Britain and France overthrew the democracy that was Iran to install a dictator whose brutality and corruption led to the revolt that founded the present government? How come the US supports dictators in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates - and thoughtfully supplies them with weapons to put down the unrest of the "Arab Spring"?
How come virtually all American big business has supported dictators all over the world, and has frequently overthrown democracies to get dictators?
The Fraser Insitute lists Venezuela as an oil producer that is only party democratic. Yes, indeed. And the US oil industry is hostile to Venezuela precisely because it is partly democratic. It far prefers the old days when Venezuela was a trusted and servile dictatorship.
No Empre in history has ever promoted democracy. Britain gave Canada self-government only when it was obvious that holding on to control of Canada might well involve it in a ruinous war with the the US - which had something of a reputation for invading its neighbours. Similarly, Britain gave up more of othe rest of its empire only when it couldn't afford to hold it any longer.
The US has a long history of imposing dictators. The idea that it finds them "undesirable" is absurd. So why write such obvious drivel?
The Fraser Institute is a propaganda front for big business. Part of their mission iis to create a warm and fuzzy feeling by associating big business with nice things like freedom and democracy.
Dr. Geobbels did the same sort of image-making for Hitler.