Tuesday, August 12, 2014

August 14: Sorry to be late with this one....

real life keeps getting in the way.
Monday's paper, section A, p. 1.  Big story of the day, "Metro cyclists, drivers have room to grow..." I have no idea what the point of this story is, why it is the lead headline, or why it should be in a newspaper at all.

At the bottom of p. 1 is an even bigger story. A new barber shop has opened in Moncton.

Moving right along to p. A3, there's a real story. A company in New Brunswick has asked for permission to dump fracking waste water to holding tanks in Dieppe, from there to be dumped in Dieppe's sewage system, then Moncton's, then Riverview's., then into the Petitcodiac River.

But not to worry, the plan has to be approved by the New Brunswick government which, as we know, has high standards.

Apparently, it never occurred tot he reporter to ask questions - such as - Why can't they get permission to dump it in Nova Scotia?

And that's pretty much it for section A.
Newstoday covers a few, very few, international stories. It has a long story on Iraq which does not include the rather important information that the Isis movement which is raging through Iraq, killing people of other religious groups in the the thousands, was organized, paid for, trained, and equipped by the US government. That's the same United States government which is now arming the Kurds to attack Isis, and sending aircraft to kill Isis militants.

Isis is also moving in to fight against Syrians on both sides of the Syrian civil war - which was begun, financed, and equipped by Saudi Arabia and the US. It really makes  you wonder who's in charge in the US.  Quite seriously - American foreign policy moves are often so self-contradictory that one wonders how one person could be in control.  The answer may well be that one person isn't.  The US has so many power groups in its police-state, assassination, espionage domestic and foreign, drone bombing, its monster military all with huge budgets and almost no oversight over them or their budgets that any number of people could be running their own shows.

We think of democracy ending with a clear-cut dictatorship. But that's not always true. It can end, perhaps it has, with a swarm of uncontrolled agencies which tax payers pay for - but know nothing about.
B4 has an important story on protests against the shooting of an eighteen-year-old boy (who was not armed) by police. Since then, it has developed into more than a protest. If violent protests spread across the US, as I think they will, this might well be how they begin. The causes will be distrust of government, severe suffering as the US economy declines and as the rich continue to eat up most of what money is available. But the spark may well be fired by racism.

Racism runs deep in the US. (And often in Canada. But we prefer not to notice it.) African-Americans have a dismal history. Kidnapped from their native lands for hundreds of years, dying in transit in their millions, thrust into a completely alien society as slaves, and given no help in adapting to a new environment that took away all the values and beliefs they had.

And they were not really freed in 1865. In practical terms, most had no vote, were publicly subordinated to white people (even stepping off the sidewalk as a white man passed), frequently hanged and terrorized almost as a sport, and, in the northern US, sent into slums by the low salaries that were the only ones  they could get, living in poverty, with schools that were far inferior, so that they grew up in an environment that militated against any advance through education. Now, in recession, it is African-Americans who suffer the most. The US is on the edge of serious and widespread violence - and it could well be sparked by centuries of a people cut off from their cultural roots, and with no chance to find any other.

Oh,  yeah - and also written off in American history. For example, how many African-American cowboys have you seen in western films? Despite a life saturated with cowboy films, I can think on only one. In reality, a large number of cowboys were African-Americans. Of course. Cowboys were just cheap labour.
B5, bottom of the page, has the story that should have been on p.1. "Keystone climate impacts could be higher than previous studies: estimate"  The Stockholm Institute, a quite respected environmental organization says US State Department studies on the feasibility of a pipeline to carry crude oil from Alberta to Texas was faulty.  It left out a standard examination in such tests of the effect of putting more oil on the market. But the State Department didn't do it. As a result, it is likely the project will cause a far, far greater impact on world climate than the State Department estimated. The only industry answer, as reported, is gobbledy-gook.

And running a pipeline from Alberta to New Brunswick would have the same effect.

So why are we so eager to pump even more greenhouses gasses into the air when we know they will destroy us? Well, it's because  pumping out more greenhouse gasses makes some people very rich. And, where money is concerned, they don't give a damn how many die. They intend to keep pumping until world catastrophe stops them, and keep raising the supply before that catastrophe hits.

Forgive me for suggesting these people are stupid, and utterly without any moral standards....and then you have the ones who say, "Duh. We need the jobs."
We have no fewer that two columns on the burning issue of whether soccer should be played on grass or on artificial turf.

Norbert Cunningham is more than usually ignorant and even despicable in his propaganda.

This time, he pours out his venom on the unemployed, the poor, pensioners. We've got to make cuts in all that spending to balance the budget. Yes,  all them there poor and elderly people who feel entitled. They're the ones who caused the recession.. Make them pay for it.

There's not a word about the super rich and the damage they did with reduced taxes, government favours, hidden piggy banks, exploitation of the world's really poor (that's what free trade is largely about.) What the hell is that, Norbert, if not a sense of entitlement?

It was not that long ago that Mr. Irving pronounced himself a member of the government - despite the fact that nobody had elected him.  He also got the power to place his own hacks as advisors in the Finance ministry. What the hell do you call that if not a sense of entitlement? And that's the gang that sent the budget through the roof.

But Norbert says the poor and the elderly and the sick are the ones who have to pay.

Then he rattles on about how the hospitals have to face severe economies. It's obvious  he knows nothing whatever about the structures or economics of a medical system. But he rants, anyway.

That's because he knows the boots he licks every day are worn by a man who would love to see private medical care re-established.

This is not just ignorant journalism. It's disgusting, crawling, ass-kissing irresponsibility.

Oh - I notice this province always discusses things starting with cost.  (Unless it's a new hockey rink. Then we're told it really won't cost anything.) So here's a hint to the news media and the politicians of this province. Government and news are about people. So any issue should being with a discussion of human needs. Then you go to costs. Not the other way around.

Then, when we discuss costs, let's remember to include what we expect in taxes and self-dependence from the people we all have made very, very rich.
Two letters to the editor worth looking at. One is "Letter distorted history of conflict". It's a good example of a common mistake in studying foreign affairs - to start the story in the middle.  In this case, the letter writer argues a case for Israel in its wars starting with Hamas rockets, and then starting again with the 1967 war.

The trouble with that is that the struggle began much earlier. Some would say 1948. I would say it began in the 1930s with our failure to react to Hitler's treatment of Jews.

In any case, pointing the blame finger will get nobody anywhere. To think of this as a world in which they are bad and we are good is a waste of time. There's lots of good and bad on both sides of many issues.

Then there's "Computer upgrades needed in N.B. schools"  It's by Joseph Caswell of Sackville who is just about to enter grade 8. You should especially read it if you are a person who gripes about the schools. This boy can write - I mean really well. And he's intelligent. This is first rate.
It's late. I'm going to publish this August 14 edition having completed just the Monday half of it. I'll deal with
the Tuesday paper later tonight.



  1. multiple power centers, with no central command...finally, something that explains the madness.
    The USA seems to be running on sheer inertia these days.
    there is a great blog by an actuary by the name of Gail Tverberg. She is terribly pessimistic, and unfortunately very persuasive in her arguments about the coming collapse of the USA, and western civilisation in general. Fun stuff

  2. Good article, I still think you should do a macro that would enable you to do it quicker. I think the format is partly why it takes you so long.

    But anyway, the only problem I have with this blog post is the idea that ISIS was created by the United States. That needs a LOT of evidence because it flies in the face of virtually EVERYTHING that every media reports.

    First, you can see their rifles in many early pictures, which are Kalashnikovs, a common rifle in the middle east which is patented in Russia.

    Second, you should be clearer IF what you mean is that many of the people who joined ISIS MAY have been trained in the Iraqi military when they were there, and then left the military. I haven't seen ANY evidence they are equipped by the US, unless, again, you mean the fact that the Iraqi troops essentially ran away when confronted by ISIS, and after looting several banks are now in possession of many US made machines, and at least half a billion dollars. However, you make it sound like the americans are responsible for their creation and maintenance,which, again, needs at least SOME evidence or at least a footnote somewhere. That the US is ultimately responsible for the fiasco because of the invasion as well as the support it gives an unrepresentative Iraqi government which shuts out Sunni groups altogether, I think goes without saying (even though its rarely said anymore). However, your statement certainly indicates something else.

    Loved the comment about the fracking water and the obvious question that wasn't asked.

  3. http://www.pri.org/stories/2014-06-17/where-are-islamic-militants-iraq-getting-their-weapons-answer-surprised-us

    The above site is only a partial answer to your question. I know I should write down more sources. I just don't have time. I don't know that I say that is going to be questioned, so I would have to keep a file of sources for every column I write.

    The US has flooded the region with weapons, some of them very sophisticated. So has Russia. Many of those weapons end up in the hands of Al Quaeda. (just as many end up in the hands of the Taliban in Afghanistan where the US has lost track of billions of dollars in weapons.)

    These are glorious days for the US defence industries.

    In addition, Turkey, Saudi Arabia and the emirates are throwing big money at Isis to create a solid block of Sunni states - and I won't even pretend to know how that works.

    But there are sources showing direct involvement of the US in providing training for Isis. In fact, what is really striking about this army is its military skill. This is quite different from the random actions of terrorist groups. I'll keep an eye out for those sources, and send them on.

    As for the Isis bank account, much of it comes from Saudi Arabia and the Emirates. Billions mean nothing to them.

  4. Oh, it is very, very unlikely that the American press would publish anything about American involvement.

  5. Sure ISIS was created by the real axis of evil; which is Washington, London, Tel Aviv, and possibly Qatar, and the Saudis.

    I have seen no legitimate evidence ISIS was ever a grass roots born entity as has been suggested.

    Instead, what we witnessed was another coordinated effort by western media to suddenly spring this new entity onto the world stage. A new boogeyman entity along with another Osama type, Dr.No character ... Baghdadi.

    Reminds me of the silly names of Jimmy Carters 1979 would-be assassins; Raymond Lee Harvey, and Oswaldo Espinoza Ortiz.

    Anyway, the media quoting government sources and/or western intelligence services for info on ISIS is blatantly transparent and unreliable if we expect to hear the truth.

    The media is simply made up of well paid, well groomed actors, who are government, and corporate spokespeople.

    Washington along with Zionists working in key positions in its administration, has always staged false flags to get into all its wars.

    The list is quite long by now.

    From the declassified Gulf of Tonkin incident that never actually took place but was used as a false catalyst to launch the Vietnam war...

    Non-existent weapons of mass destruction in Iraq...

    To instigating and allowing the Pearl Harbor attack for WW2...

    And the sinking of the Lusitania for WW1, though in the days ahead, Germany had taken out newspaper ads in New York warning would-be passengers the west were planning on illegally placing war munitions on a passenger ship.

    There's many more examples.

    So, yes, of course, if we've learned anything, it's the simple fact you can barely trust a word that comes from the mainstream media especially on anything regarding the national scene, or anything in the geo-political arena.

    ISIS is no different.

    Recently, Tel Aviv created another false flag to suggest to the world Hamas was once again attacking Israel.

    It's always been the same game.

  6. Well, the above is indicative of what I've seen: “ISIS, like all Syrian opposition groups,” he says, “enjoys a strong level of support from Turkey, from Qatar, from Saudi Arabia."

    Now, saying that because these countries are allies of the US somehow means that the US is supplying them, created them, or is financing them is quite a leap.

    But I haven't seen ANY sources 'showing direct involvement', in fact in that article you source, they can't even show 'direct involvement' of Saudi Arabia, Quatar, and Turkey, who all maintain that they have laws prohibiting such supplies.

    As for the last line, "what is really striking about this army is its military skill" I don't agree with that, in fact your own link doesn't agree with that and call them a 'classic militia', and maintain that "ISIS destroyed much of the heavy equipment that it captured last week in Iraq — weapons like M1 tanks, M113 armored personnel carriers, MRAP heavy armored trucks, and other multi-million dollar pieces of equipment. He suspects they’re well aware they can’t operate and support these systems."

    If they are only using small arms and can't even operate larger machinery, that says they aren't particularly well trained and we've seen nothing that shows any mark of 'military skill'. And of course even such training can be easily found even online, all of the US forces training manuals are easily available.

    Their progress isn't particularly surprising, for the past couple of weeks all we've heard about is that the Iraqi forces are dropping their weapons and fleeing. You don't need any particular skill to pick up weapons from a fleeing enemy. The fact they didn't even bother to try to SELL the equipment they captured or attempt to find others who could operate it certainly indicates they aren't that particularly skilled or connected.

    I searched and couldn't even find any references about money. Given the fact we know very little about ISIS and its operations, how much money it has or where it comes from seems to me to be a pretty suspicious claim. Heck, even here in Canada we can only hazard a guess as to how much money the Irvings have.

    That half a billion dollars goes a long way towards supplying ammunition,and no doubt once everybody flees a place you have ready supplies. Since they are mainly using small arms, it really doesn't take that much money.

    As for munitions suppliers, I agree about COMPANIES quite willing to profit from virtually anybody who will buy from them, even if they know they are straw men who will then sell to crooks (which is usually the destination of virtually ALL arms).

    Sweden is one of the world's largest weapons suppliers, as is Canada, where Harper has no problem selling armoured vehicles to Saudi Arabia, which could ultimately be selling them elsewhere, or at the very least using them to keep oppressing their own people.

    But like I said, its just that one paragraph you wrote that is WAY out in conspiracy land. Like the 911 theories, I can well believe that policy planners in the US KNEW that the probable outcome of policies which shut out Sunni's will ultimately result in civil war, numerous pundits have pointed this out, and war protestors long before the Iraq war started were saying that this would be the probably outcome. If thats what you mean, it doesn't come across very well, it sounds like you are saying that while the US supports the Iraq government, it is also funding, training, and supplying the people who want to destroy it. Thats a pretty bold statement and needs some heavy evidence.

    1. The say that Isis is using "militia" tactics does not mean it is amateurish. It means it prefers not to use weapons that are complex and maintenance heavy.

      Using relatively light and simple weapons is not a sign of lack of training. Indeed, they have certainly outfought the Iraqi troops who have had years of training from the US.

      I'm glad to hear the Saudis say that they would never supply weapons or training to a force like Isis because that would be against the law. And that's your evidence they didn't do it?

  7. This is as close as I could find, from one of those conspiracy websites:

    "In fact, there is a direct link between those terrorists and the U.S. foreign policy. Last year, Spiegel declared that Americans were training the Syrian rebels in Jordan to oust Assad.[8]

    The link, of course, doesn't work. And training rebels to oust Assad is a little different than training ISIS, as even a little research shows, ISIS is a seperate organization which even Al Queda doesn't like, and notice they say "US foreign policy".

    "But the evidence went back to 2012: “Members of the Islamic State of Iraq and the Levant, or ISIS, were trained in 2012 by U.S. instructors working at a secret base in Jordan, according to informed Jordanian officials.

    Notice that there is no footnote to the 'informed Jordanian officials'. This is an article written by an american, so he'd either have to source it somewhere, or else we are to believe that he's been talking to Jordanian officials, which is pretty unlikely.

    “The officials said dozens of ISIS members were trained at the time as part of covert aid to the insurgents targeting the regime of Syrian President Bashar al-Assad in Syria. The officials said the training was not meant to be used for any future campaign in Iraq"

    Again, anonymous officials who are talking to reporters we don't even have links to. And even in this pretty unbelievable (and not because its outragious, just because the facts of the case are presented so badly) story, they admit that any ISIS training was an unintentional offshoot. They claim 'dozens' of ISIS, which isn't that large a group, but that in an area where 'identities' seem pretty fluid, that some guy who says he is fighting Assad would then switch allegiance and go join ISIS isn't unbelievable-but it does need SOME evidence other than 'unnamed Jordanian sources'.

    Anyway, even the extreme paranoid conspiracy theorist websites aren't making the claim that "the Isis movement which is raging through Iraq, killing people of other religious groups in the the thousands, was organized, paid for, trained, and equipped by the US government".

    Mainstream media outlets such as the Daily Beast are indirectly saying the same thing. “As ISIS takes over town after town in Iraq, they are acquiring money and supplies including American made vehicles, arms, and ammunition.”[9]

    1. It is quite common for Americans to talk to Jordanian officials And there is nothing unusual about unnamed sources.
      Again, you are looking for information which is deliberately kept secret. Of course, you aren't going to get something from Obama, signed, saying "We have have been training Isis."
      It's not a question of agreeing with Isis. It's a question of how to maintain chaos and weakness in certain countries.

  8. "Sen. Rand Paul (R-Ky.) said Sunday that the Sunni militants taking over Iraq have quickly gained power because the United States has armed their group in Syria.

    “I think we have to understand first how we got here,” he said on CNN’s “State of the Union.” “We have been arming [the Islamic State in Iraq and Syria] ISIS in Syria.”

    ISIS, an al Qaeda offshoot, has been collaborating with the Syrian rebels whom the Obama administration has been arming in their efforts to overthrow Syrian President Bashar al-Assad, Paul explained.

    The administration has reportedly assisted the moderate opposition in Syria, but details about the dissemination of those resources are unclear."

    However, other articles I found stated that the US has only very moderately supplied even the Syrian rebels, so even Paul's assertions may be a stretch-its not like its hard to find weapons in the world.

    OK, thats enough on that. Like I said, out of the whole article that's the only thing that stands out to me as needing serious backup.

    1. The traffic in weapons is an extremely complex one. Of course, the US is not anxious to publicize its role in arming some very dangerous people. That's why the distribution is not commonly handled by the government itself, but by one of its intelligence agencies.
      As well, Saudi Arabia, Turkey, and the emirates - all playing their own games - are commonly used as conduits.
      Nobody has a clear picture of where those weapons come from.

  9. Marvin P. Bush, the president's younger brother, was a principal in a company called Securacom (now Stratasec) that provided security for the World Trade Center up until 9/11 when the the three towers fell.


    On the weekend of 9/8 and 9/9 there was a noted power-down condition in the towers for maintenance.

    And, ther was an upcoming huge price tag to remove and replace asbestos insulation heat shielding from around the steel superstructure members.

    Larry Silverstein first order of business as the new owner was to change the company responsible for the security of the complex.

    The new security company he hired was Securacom .

    George W. Bush's brother, Marvin Bush, was on its board of directors, and Marvin’s cousin, Wirt Walker III, was its CEO.

    According to public records, not only did Securacom provide electronic security for the World Trade Center, it also covered Dulles International Airport and United Airlines — two key players in the 9/11 attacks.

    Silverstein also insured the towers for terrorist attacks for $7 billion.

    As in keeping with family history, a now ten-year-old Guardian article obtained confirmation from files in the US National Archives that a firm of which Prescott Bush was a director was involved with the financial architects of Nazism and Hitler.


  10. Geez, I forgot about you, I shouldn't have mentioned 911!

    I got a rock that I paid $100 for to keep tigers away. My wife says it was a waste of money, but guess what? No tigers. Thats how much sense your 'coincidences' make.

    As for the other, the US links to fascist Germany have been known a long time, only people who never bothered learning any history find this as 'news'. It was maybe 'news' when it was reported ten years ago! Its always interesting to read people who post things that were in the mainstream media as if they were 'secrets' or something. And almost in the same breath talk about how mainstream media is rubbish and you can't trust anything they say.

    Hitler, of course, was democratically elected, and virtually every country in the free world 'was involved with the financial architects of nazism' because the country was a basket case that would have gone bankrupt.

    You might want to read some on IBM, Ford, or any of another dozen US firms which were involved in building a nazi government. Dude, this was old news twenty years ago.

    Although PS, being a director in a company usually means zilch. Frank McKenna is a director on dozens of companies, usually they are payola.

  11. Information on US links to the Nazi Germany has been available for some time, it's true. To make the connection that most people know it is untrue. I have read lots on the roles of IBM, Ford, and Jewish producers in Hollywood in connections with helping Hitler. But we are a long way from that being general knowledge.

  12. There's lots of information that has been known for a long time that isn't common knowledge, in fact probably most of it. Maybe I missed it, but the blog post didn't even mention nazi's, and I only anecdotally mentioned 911. I doubt posting it on a blog is more likely to make something like that more 'common knowledge' than when it appeared in The Independant over ten years ago.

    Just as an aside on that, what I've read about Hollywood was not that they were 'helping Hitler' but only that they were protecting their German market, which was a huge consumer of Hollywood movies. I saw an interview with John Cleese awhile ago who complained that he was cut out of the James Bond franchise because they wanted 'less talking, more action' in order to satisfy the asian market. That doesn't mean that Hollywood is 'trying to help Burmese leaders', only that they are doing what is necessary to protect a market. An excellent article on it here:


  13. Sorry, I missed your comments in between mine.

    I never said ANY of those things, I didn't say they were amateurs or badly trained, I have no idea-neither do you. We are both gleaning information from various sources, and even your own source that you link says only that a dozen ISIS members were trained by US forces which were training Syrian rebels to topple Assad and then left to join ISIS.

    As for Saudi Arabia, I didn't say ANYTHING, I quoted a source given at your link. And it said quite clearly that even though Saudi Arabia 'officially' has regulations to prohibit supplying terrorists, it still happens. Canada has lots of regulations on offshore tax evasion, that certainly doesn't mean it doesn't happen.

    Your own source says that there was never an intention that this training would be used in Iraq, and your link isn't exactly to Robert Fisk or the Independant, or even Fox News.

    Do you seriously think that the guy who wrote that article on a free website, a guy who isn't even a journalist, was phoning Jordanian insiders who were talking to him secretly??

    Even if that were true, that story doesn't say what you were saying. Claiming that its all terribly complex isn't the same as providing evidence. Even the far out stories I quote above aren't saying that, and these are people who are well acquanted with how complex arms deals are and are pretty quick to use the 'reverse onus' of proof any time it suits them.

    I can well imagine that you may have read something somewhere that seemed to indicate your conclusion and maybe you didn't have time to follow it up, you put a LOT of information in your posts, so there's certainly nothing wrong with adding a mea culpa to a story. But to stick with this storyline based on the fact that 'arms deals are complicated and of course the US wouldn't admit this' is really putting you in conspiracy land, and thats someplace you don't want to be. But to each his own, its just too bad, because most of your stuff may be 'ideological', but it can also be easily backed up. This one can't.