...but not in the pages of The Moncton Times and Transcript.
One job of an editor is to go over reports, news items, to have a strong sense of what's going on the world, and to select those stories which best illustrate what is going on. In the whole of the Irving press there does not seem to be such an editor.
The Emir of Quatar (a very wealthy oil state) visited Gaza. Some editor at the TandT yawned, and turned to the next part, wondering if there might be a good story about a lost cat. The Emir promised Palestinians hundreds of millions in aid. (yawn.)
Apparently, it did not occur to anybody at the TandT to wonder why the Emir did that. Leaders of arab oil states have not been big on helping Palestinians. So here's why it's important.There are two parts to the story.
1. Israel has been following a policy of impoverishing and starving Palestine. Israel largely destroyed its power station. Much of the blockade is intended to keep out medical supplies and other help. It also bottles up any chance of Palestinian trade. Farmland is routinely annexed or placed out or limits for those who live in Gaza. The long-term intention is to drive Palestinians out.
2. Those arab governments, like Quatar, who have supported the US now find themselves losing popularity for their failure to challenge the western onslaught on Islam. There has already been serious fighting and killing in some of those arab states - though never in the pages of the TandT. And that is most strongly shown up in the failure of the oil states to help Palestine.
The Emirs and the kings are getting worried. As strict Moslems, themselves, they have to show support for Moslems. They haven't done it; and now they are facing serious, internal disorder. That's why the Emir of Quatar went to Gaza and promised money. This is probably an important game-changer in the middle east. It's far bigger than any story in NewsToday. But it wasn't big enough to wake up a TandT editor.
The attack on anglophones living in Quebec has reached a new level of savagery - probably because the PQ government really has no agenda for anything, so it can survive only by appealing to bigotry and hatred. Few New Brunswickers seem to have the faintest idea what is going on next door. They never have. They seem to have never heard of the hundreds of thousands who have had to flee Quebec, of the rudeness of civil servants who deal with anglophones, of the refusals to provide services in English, of the refusals to hire anglos no matter how bilingual they might be. And certainly, readers of the Times and Transcript have never heard of the two year old girl who died just a few days ago because her parents were English. The paramedic who came insisted on his right to work only in French, and refused to listen when the English parents tried to explain her illness. (The ambulance service, yesterday, defended the paramedic, citing his right to speak and listen only in French. And, yes, he was bilingual). And so a two-year old girl died.
This is not an attack on Acadians or bilingualism. Quite the contrary. It is an attack on people who are bigoted, vicious, even racist - and a majority. I see signs of that in Letters to the Editor in the Times and Transcript. New Brunswick is not Quebec, not yet. But there are anglophones who would like to make it a mirror image of Quebec. And that would be a tragedy for New Brunswick - as it has been for Quebec and as it will get worse as the PQ, with nothing useful to do, plays on the fears and ignorance of those Quebec francophones who are the equivalents of some of those NB anglos I too often see in letters to the editor.
Quebec is a horror story whose full horror has never been shown in most of our news media. And it's a horror that could well come crashing down on itself. It's worth avoiding any move to copy Quebec.
The biggest story in Section A is that Oulton's is getting a larger parking lot.
There is a political story, too. Page 1. Mike Murphy is running for the Liberal leadership. Whoopee! The opening paragraph is not a news report; it is an opinion.Doesn't even the front page editor know what the hell a news report is supposed to look like? It should not look like "Mike Murphy has a clear-eyed and unflinching assessment of New Brunswick's future if it continues along the same track it is currently travelling."
This isn't news. This is puerile gush.
It's a long story, and the gush is constant. At no point is it possible to get any idea what Murphy's policy would be on anything except duplication of hospital services. Not that it matters. After all, his party will still run on contributions from corporations - so who cares what Mike Murphy thinks?
This whole story is a travesty of journalism, a political interview written like a soft drink ad.
Alec Bruce has good column, one that suggests some serious implications.
The editorial and Norbert's column are brainless, and show a remarkable indifference to public need.Norbert says we can easily keep buses off the road while we figures transit out. Sure, Norbert. Most of the people who need the bus are poor or elderly. So who cares? Tell you what, Norbert, you write a column that your owner can wait a year for some vital service. Then see how long it takes you to be standing outside and looking for a bus.
The editorial is the same as Norbert. Both want lots of time for our city planners at their hundred thousand plus salaries to work out a better system.
What a parir of twit! Planning is what those being money receivers are supposed to have been doing for years. They're the ones who designed the mess we have. What on earth have we been paying for? What has city council been doing? Has nobody on it ever wondered over all these years exactly what the plan is? Or if there is one? If there is any planning going on in this city, I have yet to see evidence of it.
I don't necessarily blame the planners. I suspect that, like everything else in this province, the only real planning is done by land speculators and corporate head offices. And we have a mayor and city council who are either complicit or as dozy as they come.
On op ed, Rod Allen thrills us with yet another tale of his family life. Way to show that good old journalistic qualities of brains, infoming the public, and courage, Rod.
Jody Dallaire's column is one of outrage, and rightly so. I urge you to read it.
So that's it - two items worth reading - by Alec Bruce and Jody Dallaire.
Thursday, October 25, 2012
Wednesday, October 24, 2012
Oct. 24: Jim Manley and SuperSteve....
Every heard of Jim Manley? You certainly haven't read about him in the Times and Transcript. Mr. Manley is 79, retired, has never committed a crime in his life - and is now sitting in an Israeli prison. He'll be there, they say, until he signs a false confession. Why? He was on a small boat carrying dangerous things like soccer balls to Palestine. (The Israeli ship which stopped his boat and forced it into an Israeli port was acting illegally.)
Jim Manley was always a respectable man, a member of the NDP, a member of parliament for some years. In short, a Canadian of some distinction who has committed no crime is being held illegally in an Israeli prison - and Stephen Harper isn't lifting a finger; and the TandT staff would probably have trouble finding Israel on a map. We've been through this before.
When Omar Khadr was illegally held as a war prisoner and illegally tortured, Canada was the only country with a citizen treated like that who did not demand and receive custody of its own citizen. (No. We have long since lost any reputation we had in the world for honesty and integrity in these matters. Harper knows who his masters are.)
Page 1 has a long, long story about Brian Gallant who is running for the Liberal leadership in New Brunswick. I don't know why it has a long, long story. Most of the writing is a fog of trivia. As well as I could understand it, he says he stands for good things. Well, that's nice. We haven't had one of those for quite a while.
Actually, there is no story. This is just a press agent's plug. So far as I can tell the reporter didn't ask a single question. Indeed, the whole story could have been written by a pr agent. Though full of pretty, little stories, it gives little hint of what he would do about anything - and none whatever about his political principles. In sum, he's going to do something different - and he'll do what he has to do. Wow! Sounds like we have another Brian Alward here.
The reporter might have asked him what liberal means. I know the dictionary meanings. I have no idea what the word liberal means as a party name or what it means to Mr. Gallant. What are the most prominent issues New Brunswick has to deal with? What are the Liberal ways of approaching them. Why?
What role, if any, does Mr. Gallant think big business should have in government? Better still, as Mr. Irving. He has already pronounced himself a member of the government. As well, big business has a group of its appointees to "advise" the government on economic policy. Why doesn't the TandT skip the small fry like Alward and Gallant, and ask Mr. Irving what his policies are?
Like most TandT reports, this one is all just fluff and chicken bones.
______________________________________________________________________
Also on the front page is a quite asinine story. It seems city hall has announced that its highly paid planning staff with take advantage of the Transpo lockout to redesign the schedules, and make them simpler and more efficient. Won't that be great? So, for the minor inconvenience of a year or so with no mass transit, we'll have a great, uptodate system - designed by he same people who designed the last one.
It seems not to have occurred to the reporter that this is what the overpaid city staff is supposed to be doing all the time - without needing a lockout. That's what happens in real cities.
This is a remarkably silly story. So why does it appear? It's probably there to give the impression that city hall is doing something about its lockout. I mean, with those huge salaries, it has to do something. Meanwhile, it's working on a privatization plan for a much smaller and even less convenient system driven by non-union drivers. I mean, ya gotta cut somewhere to pay all those hundred thousand plus salaries.
Incidentally, if the story is that the city's bus planning staff is now going to re plan the service, what the hell has it been doing for the last several months? Playing games on the office computers?
So much for section A.
_____________________________________________________________________________
There's at least one story worth reading in Section C, NewsToday. It may well be the most important thing that has been said about shale gas so far - and it's a point that blew right by Dr. Lapierre, bless his heart. On p. C3 is a warning. We have very little time to cut the levels of carbon dioxide. Shale gas will not only do serious damage to the environment (for a very short-term gain), but concentrating on it will fatally slow work on genuinely renewable sources of energy. Shale gas is dreadfully punishing for the environment. The damage is profound and permanent. But even it it weren't, the time wasted in developing shale gas will be fatal all by itself.
_____________________________________________________________________
The only opinion column worth reading is Alec Bruce who is the one person I have seen in that paper to take a serious look at the economic times we are heading into. It's grim. And even grimmer than he says.
Ever since 1492, the wealth of the western world has depended on its military power which has used to extract cheap labour and cheap materials from the rest of the world. For Britain, France, The Netherlands, Spain, Italy, that power collapsed as a result of World War Two. The US tried to replace the old empires with its own power. But the first sign of its failure was the rise of Fidel Castro who displaced an American dictator to set an example for Latin America. And he got away with it. It worked. American power is now much reduced in Latin America - we can expect to see fighting there as the US tries to re-establish itself. (In fact, the fighting is on and has been on for decades. A quarter of a million dead civilians in Guatemala should have opened eyes to that. But most of our news media never reported it. Nor did most of them ever report that the NATO intervention in Haiti was to put that unhappy island back under the control of an American puppet.)
The US military record since World War Two has been abysmal. Despite its size and its spending, it has lost war after war against much smaller opponents. (Even Iraq will soon join the list of lost wars.) The US has tried to catch up by using mercenaries (it now has more mercenaries than it has Americans in Afghanistan), by advanced technologies, by assassination squads and special ops, by robot bombers, by sponsoring rebellions in countries like Libya and Syria. It's not working. But it is causing enormous civilian casualties and national suffering. That, in the process, has rallied and united opposition to the US and made it, once the most admired nation in the world, into the most hated.
The western empires built their wealth on military superiority. But now, so far as conventional warfare is concerned, we have lost that superiority.
Combined with that, big business, operating on pure greed, has effectively taken over control of western governments. We are watching the collapse of a world we have known for over five hundred years. Fracking for shale gas in New Brunswick will not solve the problems posed by that collapse. There's a collapse of power, a collapse of democracy, a collapse of capitalism as it is supposed to operate, a collapse of social morality.
Read at least the first two paragraphs of Alec Bruce's column. And, no, he does not exaggerate at all. This is the sort of situation that Mr. Gallant wants to tackle as leader of the Liberal party. I thank him. But I would like to see something more substantial about his agenda.
__________________________________________________________________________
I apologize to at least two readers who wrote in interesting comments. I punched the button to publish them. But they didn't appear as comments, and now I can't find the original posts, either. (I blame a cat that walks across my computer whenever I sit down to it.)
Please send your comments again - and I'll make sure to keep the cat tied up.
Oh, a piece of humour on the op ed page. Eric Lewis tells us that, as a journalist, he has to work hard to keep up on political happenings in the province. I'll bet. Tell you what, Eric,stop reading the Times and Transcript. Listen to CBC radio.
On second thought, scrap that. If you knew anything about New Brunswick politics, and wrote it in your column, you'd be looking for a job in another province within a day.
Jim Manley was always a respectable man, a member of the NDP, a member of parliament for some years. In short, a Canadian of some distinction who has committed no crime is being held illegally in an Israeli prison - and Stephen Harper isn't lifting a finger; and the TandT staff would probably have trouble finding Israel on a map. We've been through this before.
When Omar Khadr was illegally held as a war prisoner and illegally tortured, Canada was the only country with a citizen treated like that who did not demand and receive custody of its own citizen. (No. We have long since lost any reputation we had in the world for honesty and integrity in these matters. Harper knows who his masters are.)
Page 1 has a long, long story about Brian Gallant who is running for the Liberal leadership in New Brunswick. I don't know why it has a long, long story. Most of the writing is a fog of trivia. As well as I could understand it, he says he stands for good things. Well, that's nice. We haven't had one of those for quite a while.
Actually, there is no story. This is just a press agent's plug. So far as I can tell the reporter didn't ask a single question. Indeed, the whole story could have been written by a pr agent. Though full of pretty, little stories, it gives little hint of what he would do about anything - and none whatever about his political principles. In sum, he's going to do something different - and he'll do what he has to do. Wow! Sounds like we have another Brian Alward here.
The reporter might have asked him what liberal means. I know the dictionary meanings. I have no idea what the word liberal means as a party name or what it means to Mr. Gallant. What are the most prominent issues New Brunswick has to deal with? What are the Liberal ways of approaching them. Why?
What role, if any, does Mr. Gallant think big business should have in government? Better still, as Mr. Irving. He has already pronounced himself a member of the government. As well, big business has a group of its appointees to "advise" the government on economic policy. Why doesn't the TandT skip the small fry like Alward and Gallant, and ask Mr. Irving what his policies are?
Like most TandT reports, this one is all just fluff and chicken bones.
______________________________________________________________________
Also on the front page is a quite asinine story. It seems city hall has announced that its highly paid planning staff with take advantage of the Transpo lockout to redesign the schedules, and make them simpler and more efficient. Won't that be great? So, for the minor inconvenience of a year or so with no mass transit, we'll have a great, uptodate system - designed by he same people who designed the last one.
It seems not to have occurred to the reporter that this is what the overpaid city staff is supposed to be doing all the time - without needing a lockout. That's what happens in real cities.
This is a remarkably silly story. So why does it appear? It's probably there to give the impression that city hall is doing something about its lockout. I mean, with those huge salaries, it has to do something. Meanwhile, it's working on a privatization plan for a much smaller and even less convenient system driven by non-union drivers. I mean, ya gotta cut somewhere to pay all those hundred thousand plus salaries.
Incidentally, if the story is that the city's bus planning staff is now going to re plan the service, what the hell has it been doing for the last several months? Playing games on the office computers?
So much for section A.
_____________________________________________________________________________
There's at least one story worth reading in Section C, NewsToday. It may well be the most important thing that has been said about shale gas so far - and it's a point that blew right by Dr. Lapierre, bless his heart. On p. C3 is a warning. We have very little time to cut the levels of carbon dioxide. Shale gas will not only do serious damage to the environment (for a very short-term gain), but concentrating on it will fatally slow work on genuinely renewable sources of energy. Shale gas is dreadfully punishing for the environment. The damage is profound and permanent. But even it it weren't, the time wasted in developing shale gas will be fatal all by itself.
_____________________________________________________________________
The only opinion column worth reading is Alec Bruce who is the one person I have seen in that paper to take a serious look at the economic times we are heading into. It's grim. And even grimmer than he says.
Ever since 1492, the wealth of the western world has depended on its military power which has used to extract cheap labour and cheap materials from the rest of the world. For Britain, France, The Netherlands, Spain, Italy, that power collapsed as a result of World War Two. The US tried to replace the old empires with its own power. But the first sign of its failure was the rise of Fidel Castro who displaced an American dictator to set an example for Latin America. And he got away with it. It worked. American power is now much reduced in Latin America - we can expect to see fighting there as the US tries to re-establish itself. (In fact, the fighting is on and has been on for decades. A quarter of a million dead civilians in Guatemala should have opened eyes to that. But most of our news media never reported it. Nor did most of them ever report that the NATO intervention in Haiti was to put that unhappy island back under the control of an American puppet.)
The US military record since World War Two has been abysmal. Despite its size and its spending, it has lost war after war against much smaller opponents. (Even Iraq will soon join the list of lost wars.) The US has tried to catch up by using mercenaries (it now has more mercenaries than it has Americans in Afghanistan), by advanced technologies, by assassination squads and special ops, by robot bombers, by sponsoring rebellions in countries like Libya and Syria. It's not working. But it is causing enormous civilian casualties and national suffering. That, in the process, has rallied and united opposition to the US and made it, once the most admired nation in the world, into the most hated.
The western empires built their wealth on military superiority. But now, so far as conventional warfare is concerned, we have lost that superiority.
Combined with that, big business, operating on pure greed, has effectively taken over control of western governments. We are watching the collapse of a world we have known for over five hundred years. Fracking for shale gas in New Brunswick will not solve the problems posed by that collapse. There's a collapse of power, a collapse of democracy, a collapse of capitalism as it is supposed to operate, a collapse of social morality.
Read at least the first two paragraphs of Alec Bruce's column. And, no, he does not exaggerate at all. This is the sort of situation that Mr. Gallant wants to tackle as leader of the Liberal party. I thank him. But I would like to see something more substantial about his agenda.
__________________________________________________________________________
I apologize to at least two readers who wrote in interesting comments. I punched the button to publish them. But they didn't appear as comments, and now I can't find the original posts, either. (I blame a cat that walks across my computer whenever I sit down to it.)
Please send your comments again - and I'll make sure to keep the cat tied up.
Oh, a piece of humour on the op ed page. Eric Lewis tells us that, as a journalist, he has to work hard to keep up on political happenings in the province. I'll bet. Tell you what, Eric,stop reading the Times and Transcript. Listen to CBC radio.
On second thought, scrap that. If you knew anything about New Brunswick politics, and wrote it in your column, you'd be looking for a job in another province within a day.
Tuesday, October 23, 2012
Oct. 23:Disgusting
Today's headline on p. 1 of The Moncton Times and Transcript is a pretty strong example of what our North American newspapers have fallen to. It is pure propaganda for the shale gas industry. Dr. Lapierre's talk last night was set up for propaganda - and both Lapierre and his Rotarian audience must have known that - as did the Tand T. (well, okay, the Rotarians might not have figured it out.)
Why would Dr. Lapierre be on a speaking tour? Is it to explain his report to the people of New Brunswick? Of course not. To do that he would have had to be looking for large audiences - and large audiences would attract critics. What he wanted was a small audience, and an audience that has no record of ever looking for controversy or criticism. The Rotarians were perfect.
He could spew out his propaganda, assured of a warm reception, and no awkward questions. And that would give the TandT another excuse to print his very amateurish ideas.
UdeMoncton must be busting its buttons with pride. It now has at leasat two, eminent professors who can be relied on to speak for the bosses who own this province - though one of the comments in today's paper was poorly timed.
Dr; Lapierre said that fracking does carry risks; but we take risks all the time. For example, we take medicine despite the warning it may have side effects. (The Rotarians probably applauded that witty insight, and all decided to drive home with their headlights off just to show they weren't scared of risks.)What Lapierre apparently didn't know was that a scientific journal (Nature Geoscience) in its current issue carried a study of one of those risks.(Strange he didn't see it. Nature Geoscience is, after all, in a field in which Dr. Lapierre claims expertise. The article was by a scientist at University of Western Ontario.)
The study is of an earthquake in Spain that killed nine, and injured hundreds. Decades of pumping out water from the soil in that area had lowered the water table. The earthquake was a collapse of the earth in that region. Fracking, as the study points out, pumps out very large quantities of water. Yes. There is a risk. But it's not one to be compared with getting a headache from taking a pill.
I've also had time now to examine Dr. Lapierre's report in detail. I'm appalled at the amateurish, even infantile nature of it.The sample of people is so small and random that no professional would ever accept this as a valid report on anything. It's full of conclusions in areas in which he has no competence - and some that make no sense at all.
He is fond of saying things like some people were poorly informed or some people didn't trust the government. No doubt. And no doubt some people were tall and some people were short. So?
How many were poorly informed? How many were well informed? Exactly what does poorly informed mean? And what would it matter anyway when you have a sample of only 200 for the whole province?
An undergraduate who handed in a report like this would get a failing mark.
The news report does not say whether he even mentioned the report of Dr. Cleary, the chief medical officer. Well, why should he? His job and the job of the TandT is to smother her report.
As for his suggestion of an independent committee of academics to supervise shale gas development, no thanks. I could live without a committee of ten Dr. Lapierres.
I hope UdeMoncton will be getting a large, philanthropic and tax deductible contribution for all this.
______________________________________________________________________________
There is a big story that never made the TandT. It comes from a British paper, the Daily Mail, just yesterday.
A Pakistan court is hearing to demand for the extradition of a former bureau chief of the CIA, and of the top lawyer for the CIA on charges of murder. (The US will, of course, refuse to recognize the request - despite its frequent demands that other countries honour all such requests coming from it.)
The story is about the use of drones which have killed something between 3500 and 6500 Pakistanis. Of those, some 42 were Taliban leaders. At least hundreds were women and children who had no Taliban connection - as well as uncounted numbers of police, medical workers - and anybody else in the area.
Incidentally, those attacks are not just murder, they are also illegal under the US constitution. A president cannot go to war without the consent of Congress. But Obama has been using drones in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia for years with no such consent.
______________________________________________________________________________
There is nothing in NewsToday.
________________________________________________________________________________
The editorial is puerile. It's all about the importance of the retail trade and the importance of small business. I suppose the editor wrote it to cover up yesterday's story which did NOT appear in the TandT. A national report says that New Brunswick has the worst business climate in all of Canada for small business.
Advice to small enterpreneurs - don't get taken in by pretences that you are treated in the same category as big business. In reality, you're one of us. And they won't treat you any better than they treat us.
____________________________________________________________________________
There are superb columns by Alec Bruce and David Suzuki. And we are in very serious trouble under both topics they discuss. You really must read these.
Suzuki, incidentally, has some disturbing figures on exactly how much fresh water is left in this world. Couple that with another story the TandT didn't publish. Harper's omnibus bill on the budget proposes to destroy the limited water protection we have. (Well, it makes sense. All this nonsense about protecting water is just in the way of the development of important schemes like oilsands - and fracking.)
Harper is right, too. After all, we take risks all the time when we take pills. Anyway, by then we'll have a replacement for water.
So there you have it. Take a pill or take Dr. Lapierre. They're pretty much the same.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Oh, I have written to the Ministry of the Environment, under the terms of the access to information act, for information about Highfield Square. Receipt of it was acknowledged this morning.
______________________________________________________________________________
The spread of rot under the influence of big business is strong everywhere. But New Brunswick seems a special case. As a retired prof, I particularly alarmed to see it so strong in the universities. I am worse than disappointed that such a shallow and unprofessional piece of work as Dr. Lapierre's should appear in public. I hope that at least some professors at UdeMoncton are squirming.
Why would Dr. Lapierre be on a speaking tour? Is it to explain his report to the people of New Brunswick? Of course not. To do that he would have had to be looking for large audiences - and large audiences would attract critics. What he wanted was a small audience, and an audience that has no record of ever looking for controversy or criticism. The Rotarians were perfect.
He could spew out his propaganda, assured of a warm reception, and no awkward questions. And that would give the TandT another excuse to print his very amateurish ideas.
UdeMoncton must be busting its buttons with pride. It now has at leasat two, eminent professors who can be relied on to speak for the bosses who own this province - though one of the comments in today's paper was poorly timed.
Dr; Lapierre said that fracking does carry risks; but we take risks all the time. For example, we take medicine despite the warning it may have side effects. (The Rotarians probably applauded that witty insight, and all decided to drive home with their headlights off just to show they weren't scared of risks.)What Lapierre apparently didn't know was that a scientific journal (Nature Geoscience) in its current issue carried a study of one of those risks.(Strange he didn't see it. Nature Geoscience is, after all, in a field in which Dr. Lapierre claims expertise. The article was by a scientist at University of Western Ontario.)
The study is of an earthquake in Spain that killed nine, and injured hundreds. Decades of pumping out water from the soil in that area had lowered the water table. The earthquake was a collapse of the earth in that region. Fracking, as the study points out, pumps out very large quantities of water. Yes. There is a risk. But it's not one to be compared with getting a headache from taking a pill.
I've also had time now to examine Dr. Lapierre's report in detail. I'm appalled at the amateurish, even infantile nature of it.The sample of people is so small and random that no professional would ever accept this as a valid report on anything. It's full of conclusions in areas in which he has no competence - and some that make no sense at all.
He is fond of saying things like some people were poorly informed or some people didn't trust the government. No doubt. And no doubt some people were tall and some people were short. So?
How many were poorly informed? How many were well informed? Exactly what does poorly informed mean? And what would it matter anyway when you have a sample of only 200 for the whole province?
An undergraduate who handed in a report like this would get a failing mark.
The news report does not say whether he even mentioned the report of Dr. Cleary, the chief medical officer. Well, why should he? His job and the job of the TandT is to smother her report.
As for his suggestion of an independent committee of academics to supervise shale gas development, no thanks. I could live without a committee of ten Dr. Lapierres.
I hope UdeMoncton will be getting a large, philanthropic and tax deductible contribution for all this.
______________________________________________________________________________
There is a big story that never made the TandT. It comes from a British paper, the Daily Mail, just yesterday.
A Pakistan court is hearing to demand for the extradition of a former bureau chief of the CIA, and of the top lawyer for the CIA on charges of murder. (The US will, of course, refuse to recognize the request - despite its frequent demands that other countries honour all such requests coming from it.)
The story is about the use of drones which have killed something between 3500 and 6500 Pakistanis. Of those, some 42 were Taliban leaders. At least hundreds were women and children who had no Taliban connection - as well as uncounted numbers of police, medical workers - and anybody else in the area.
Incidentally, those attacks are not just murder, they are also illegal under the US constitution. A president cannot go to war without the consent of Congress. But Obama has been using drones in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia for years with no such consent.
______________________________________________________________________________
There is nothing in NewsToday.
________________________________________________________________________________
The editorial is puerile. It's all about the importance of the retail trade and the importance of small business. I suppose the editor wrote it to cover up yesterday's story which did NOT appear in the TandT. A national report says that New Brunswick has the worst business climate in all of Canada for small business.
Advice to small enterpreneurs - don't get taken in by pretences that you are treated in the same category as big business. In reality, you're one of us. And they won't treat you any better than they treat us.
____________________________________________________________________________
There are superb columns by Alec Bruce and David Suzuki. And we are in very serious trouble under both topics they discuss. You really must read these.
Suzuki, incidentally, has some disturbing figures on exactly how much fresh water is left in this world. Couple that with another story the TandT didn't publish. Harper's omnibus bill on the budget proposes to destroy the limited water protection we have. (Well, it makes sense. All this nonsense about protecting water is just in the way of the development of important schemes like oilsands - and fracking.)
Harper is right, too. After all, we take risks all the time when we take pills. Anyway, by then we'll have a replacement for water.
So there you have it. Take a pill or take Dr. Lapierre. They're pretty much the same.
_____________________________________________________________________________
Oh, I have written to the Ministry of the Environment, under the terms of the access to information act, for information about Highfield Square. Receipt of it was acknowledged this morning.
______________________________________________________________________________
The spread of rot under the influence of big business is strong everywhere. But New Brunswick seems a special case. As a retired prof, I particularly alarmed to see it so strong in the universities. I am worse than disappointed that such a shallow and unprofessional piece of work as Dr. Lapierre's should appear in public. I hope that at least some professors at UdeMoncton are squirming.
Monday, October 22, 2012
Oct.22: Just back from anti-lockout demo....
..the one by bus drivers and mechanics at city hall. There were some 30 or so protesters being quite peaceful, a squad car, and eight or so "security" guards rather amateurishly placed at considerable intervals around the perimeter. They didn't look like police. The looked more like private guards hired in a hurry, and with minimal training.
I saw no reporters. Nor had I noticed any advance notice in the TandT, though it was known from at least Friday that the demonstration would be held. Watch for minimal coverage tomorrow. Watch for no coverage of the story that lurks behind this. My strong guess is that the lockout is deliberately planned to break the union, hand over the system to private ownership - then to cost more than we are paying now.
CBC News (but not the Times and Transcript) had a report on the salaries paid to high level city hall employees - well over a hundred thousand. The big numbers would include, I suppose, the genius who planned Codiac's routes. I was never able to figure them out.
The buses in Shanghai with its population of some 20 million are easy. From the start, I rode them alone, and with no help. But the Bus routes of Metro Moncton beat me. That wasn't the fault of the drivers who, as we are told, "aren't worth what they're asking for." No, it was the fault of somebody at city hall who was getting two or three times what a driver got.
Obviously, the mayor's talent is not in deciding what people are worth.
Perhaps the only important story in a particularly dreary edition of the Tand T is buried on A8, a brief, space-filler on the widening gap between rich and poor in, well, almost everywhere, and very noticeable in New Brunswick. The report, by Brent Mazerolle who attended a meeting of the "poverty summit", is the usual stenography reporting of the TandT, so it's hard to get any full idea of what was said at the meeting on this subject. I would hope that at least two points came up.
1. That a widespread drop in income means the loss of at least a generation for New Brunswick. Children raised in very low income conditions commonly do badly in school, and drop out early. It has nothing to do with brain power, but everything to do with income and social surroundings. That means the skills they might have had and the contributions they might have made will never happen. That's a loss for all of us, and one that is likely to be continued in the children they produce.
2. The stated attitude of City Council toward bus drivers - "they aren't worth the money" as it was delicately put in a Times and Transcript column. Turning people into commodities is not only immoral, a denial of their existence as human at all. But there are practical reasons for morality. Morality is not just a lot of goody-goody stuff. To use the power of big money to strip most of the nation of its sense of humanity is also economically fatal. To take money out of most pockets and stuff it into the pockets of a few is a guarantee that recession will become depression.
That, in turn will breed violence; violence will breed repression; and repression will put an end to democracy. And that's where we're headed.
The rich, who demand ever more power and more riches,are quite incompetent to run an economy or a society. The evidence of that is all around us. But you won't find it in Mazerolle's story of the meeting.
By the way, I mentioned this is a moral issue. Too bad so few clergy make that connection in their Sunday sermons.
The lead story on page 1 is "Tidal energy 'not a big priority for N.B." Who would have guessed it? It's a long story, and that's understandable. It takes a while to explain what NB is not doing.
The big story in NewsToday is that the US is having an election on Nov. 6. Wow! Great scoop.
Alec Bruce has a solid column on the editorial page. The rest of the editorial and op ed pages are - like all the rest of the paper - pure trivia. Food for thought for the editor - if he ever does think.....this paper has nothing in it. Now, unlike a person, a newspaper really is a commodity. And, being a commodity, this one is not worth the price, not worth any price. Why should we pay for it? Let Mr. Irving pay for it. After all, it's his propaganda.
Today's Moncton Times and Transcript has a big picture of the Legs for Literacy run on its front page. That's odd because the TandT is a major force for discouraging literacy in this province. It's irrelevant stories and opinion columns (most of them) offer no reason to read at all. The Moncton Times and Transcript is the major force in keeping us uninformed and uninterested in the issues crucial to our lives. We can all run our little legs off; but this province will remain a literary death zone so long as it is dominated BrunswickNews.
And it's not simply because the staff is incompetent. (not entirely, at least.) It's because this paper is designed to discourage reading and thinking. It's the newspaper that serves those who want New Brunswickers to be in the dark, to be poor, to take the blame for all the misery forced on them by their politicians and their corporate leaders.
It was very hard to write a blog on this today because it was just so...nothing. I read every page. And the only item that caught my eye was a brief note that a rapper named Shaggy is 44 today.
I knew I was in trouble when that was all that caught my eye.
Sorry for such a boring blog today. Not my fault.
I saw no reporters. Nor had I noticed any advance notice in the TandT, though it was known from at least Friday that the demonstration would be held. Watch for minimal coverage tomorrow. Watch for no coverage of the story that lurks behind this. My strong guess is that the lockout is deliberately planned to break the union, hand over the system to private ownership - then to cost more than we are paying now.
CBC News (but not the Times and Transcript) had a report on the salaries paid to high level city hall employees - well over a hundred thousand. The big numbers would include, I suppose, the genius who planned Codiac's routes. I was never able to figure them out.
The buses in Shanghai with its population of some 20 million are easy. From the start, I rode them alone, and with no help. But the Bus routes of Metro Moncton beat me. That wasn't the fault of the drivers who, as we are told, "aren't worth what they're asking for." No, it was the fault of somebody at city hall who was getting two or three times what a driver got.
Obviously, the mayor's talent is not in deciding what people are worth.
Perhaps the only important story in a particularly dreary edition of the Tand T is buried on A8, a brief, space-filler on the widening gap between rich and poor in, well, almost everywhere, and very noticeable in New Brunswick. The report, by Brent Mazerolle who attended a meeting of the "poverty summit", is the usual stenography reporting of the TandT, so it's hard to get any full idea of what was said at the meeting on this subject. I would hope that at least two points came up.
1. That a widespread drop in income means the loss of at least a generation for New Brunswick. Children raised in very low income conditions commonly do badly in school, and drop out early. It has nothing to do with brain power, but everything to do with income and social surroundings. That means the skills they might have had and the contributions they might have made will never happen. That's a loss for all of us, and one that is likely to be continued in the children they produce.
2. The stated attitude of City Council toward bus drivers - "they aren't worth the money" as it was delicately put in a Times and Transcript column. Turning people into commodities is not only immoral, a denial of their existence as human at all. But there are practical reasons for morality. Morality is not just a lot of goody-goody stuff. To use the power of big money to strip most of the nation of its sense of humanity is also economically fatal. To take money out of most pockets and stuff it into the pockets of a few is a guarantee that recession will become depression.
That, in turn will breed violence; violence will breed repression; and repression will put an end to democracy. And that's where we're headed.
The rich, who demand ever more power and more riches,are quite incompetent to run an economy or a society. The evidence of that is all around us. But you won't find it in Mazerolle's story of the meeting.
By the way, I mentioned this is a moral issue. Too bad so few clergy make that connection in their Sunday sermons.
The lead story on page 1 is "Tidal energy 'not a big priority for N.B." Who would have guessed it? It's a long story, and that's understandable. It takes a while to explain what NB is not doing.
The big story in NewsToday is that the US is having an election on Nov. 6. Wow! Great scoop.
Alec Bruce has a solid column on the editorial page. The rest of the editorial and op ed pages are - like all the rest of the paper - pure trivia. Food for thought for the editor - if he ever does think.....this paper has nothing in it. Now, unlike a person, a newspaper really is a commodity. And, being a commodity, this one is not worth the price, not worth any price. Why should we pay for it? Let Mr. Irving pay for it. After all, it's his propaganda.
Today's Moncton Times and Transcript has a big picture of the Legs for Literacy run on its front page. That's odd because the TandT is a major force for discouraging literacy in this province. It's irrelevant stories and opinion columns (most of them) offer no reason to read at all. The Moncton Times and Transcript is the major force in keeping us uninformed and uninterested in the issues crucial to our lives. We can all run our little legs off; but this province will remain a literary death zone so long as it is dominated BrunswickNews.
And it's not simply because the staff is incompetent. (not entirely, at least.) It's because this paper is designed to discourage reading and thinking. It's the newspaper that serves those who want New Brunswickers to be in the dark, to be poor, to take the blame for all the misery forced on them by their politicians and their corporate leaders.
It was very hard to write a blog on this today because it was just so...nothing. I read every page. And the only item that caught my eye was a brief note that a rapper named Shaggy is 44 today.
I knew I was in trouble when that was all that caught my eye.
Sorry for such a boring blog today. Not my fault.
Sunday, October 21, 2012
Oct. 21: Whence and Wherefore the Liberals?
In The Moncton Times and Transcript, Bill Belliveau's weekly column is the closest thing we have to an official statement of the opinion of the Liberal Party of New Brunswick. His Oct. 20 column on shale gas, then, is one to pay attention to. In this case, it is especially so because the Liberals have been a trifle shy about what they would do if in power. The Belliveau column is more explicit.
Let's start, though, with clarifying a word that most speakers and writers (including Belliveau) have used a trifle carelessly. Moratorium, thought it sounds as though it has something to do with death and finality, is not about that at all. It is a legal term, usually used to indicate a legal postponement of a debt payment. The debt is not cancelled. It doesn't die. The payment is simply delayed.
In the case of shale gas, then, a moratorium does NOT mean that shale gas exploration is forbidden forever. It means it is forbidden until we know more about its effects.
Belliveau's column, then, in opposing a moratorium (and presuming he knows what the word means), tells us, "What the hell. Sure there's risks to life and health; but let's do it, anyway." That is exactly the meaning of his last paragraph. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it could poison people. It could poison our groundwater and destroy our land. But, he says, "Hiding our heads in the sands of moratorium will not get us out of this hole." (I shall skip lightly over the probability that taking the risks he recommends could forever bury us in this hole.)
This is the paragraph that gave me the sense he does not understand the meaning of moratorium. It does not mean burying our heads in the sands. Quite the contrary. If means delaying, simply delaying, shale gas exploration until we KNOW what the risks are. There is research still to be done - not to mention research results we have still not been told about.
Those opposed to shale gas exploration right now are not hiding their heads in the sand. On the contrary, they are using their heads to get information before making a decision. The person who advocates hiding our heads in the sand is Bill Belliveau. Just read his last paragraph.
"We owe to to ourselves to continue investigating the potential of shale gas development and, yes, the risks associated with its development. (my underlining).
So - sure - maybe some people will get sick or die. Maybe we'll get a high rate of stillborn babies, or birth defects that will affect the victims for the rest of their lives. Maybe we'll destroy the soil and the water. But, what the hell, ya gotta take risks. Right? I mean, so you get widespread illness, destruction and even death. But, hey, there could be some good jobs in this (though we don't even know much about that) - as long as it lasts. Hey. Not a second to waste. Hurry. Hurry.
This is mindless drivel.
Some health risks that we already know about (though not from reading the Irving Press) are damned serious. And there's a lot more we haven't even looked at yet. There are huge risks in the fracking process. There are risks in the use of the gas, itself. We need to know more before we go ahead.
Nor, given its record, is there the slightest hope that the oil and gas industry will ever give the smallest damn about what happens to us, to our children and grandchildren, or our lands and waters, or that they will ever tell us the whole truth.
Read Belliveau's column. That is almost certainly what is to be the Liberal policy - and it's exactly what the Conservative policy is now.
The industry has already objected to even the regulations we have posted now. And, despite the dimwit opinion of our Minister of the Environment, that does not prove he's on the right track. He almost certainly knew before he ever drew up regulations that the industry would oppose them. He and industry leaders almost certainly had discussed the strategy. He proposes regulations that are inadequate and/or lacking adequate research. They pretend to be angry, though they have been assured that most of the regulations won't be enforced.
And so we play our round of just pretend - just to give the Irving Press some fiction to write about and call it news. It's like a game of hockey. And we're the puck. The only difference is that under hockey rules, there are some things you're not allowed to do with the puck.
Belliveau is correct about one thing, though. The are broad similarities between the Cleary Report and the Lapierre Report. But the difference is one hell of a big one.Cleary says we had better learn more before we put our lives on the line. And Dr. Cleary, as chief medical officer, is quite qualified to make that recommendation.
Dr. Lapierre recommends going ahead. First, he had no mandate to make such a recommendation. Secondly, he has no qualification to make such a recommendation. However distinguished his career might be, he is a biologist. Such a recommendation is well beyond his expertise. And if he is a person of any intelligence or ethics at all, he knows, he should never have made such a recommendation.
And if our universities had any sense of ethics, they would be public in criticism of what he has done. But they won't. The university administrations will kiss up to gas the industry in hope of getting grants with which they can buy each other more awards and titles. The only profs who will speak at all will be the usual "rent-a-profs".
Meanwhile, Professor Lapierre will hit the lecture circuit, aiming in particular at those groups who think they are all just great folks and real movers and shakers - when they are really second and third rate. The Rotarians spring to mind. What the Rotarians think doesn't really matter. But the speeches will give The Times and Transcript an excuse to play up Lapierre - and to further ignore Dr. Cleary. That's the way the real world turns.
Conclusion? If you really don't give a damn what happens, you can safely vote either Liberal or Conservative. There is really no difference between them on shale gas - or any other issue.
If you do care, and you still vote Liberal or Conservative, then I guess you deserve what you get. Too bad, though, that everybody else is stuck with getting it, too.
_________________________________________________________________________________
What's really interesting about the fracking debate (propaganda campaign) is what nobody has mentioned. Why on earth are we even thinking of allowing private companies to develop what is ours? We lose all the profits - not just in the sense that a big business gets them, but in the sense that they almost all the money leaves the province. (And, of course, we lose on taxes when private business does it because it insists on sweetheart terms.) All we get for our resource is a minimal tax and a handful of jobs - for as long as it lasts.
If shale gas is going to be developed, why on earth don't we do it ourselves, and get full value for our money?
Oh, I know why. It's because corporation people are smart and efficient, and know things we don't.
Look. Quebec took over hydro power from private business and put it under public ownership over fifty years ago. Quebec Hydro is a lot bigger than NB shale gas. And guess what? It's been a huge success. In fact, it's common all over the world for governments to own and operate power projects. The drive to privatize them is fairly recent - rather like the attempts to privatize all education and even (no kidding) to privatize ownership of the rain that falls.
Public ownership works very well - and it distributes the wealth from what are, after all, our resources in a way that private ownership does not. There's nothing radical about it. Canada has over a century of experience of public ownership. And it's worked well. Meanwhile, large, private ownership is more noted for ripping us off. That's why we have some a huge income gap in this country. And it's a major reason why the world is slipping even deeper into recession.
___________________________________________________________________________
Among the student columns on Saturday's Whatever section, I would very strongly recommend the one by Sabrina Stace.
____________________________________________________________________________
Interesting to read the list of church events for the week - teas, beef dinner, bazaars. Lots for the stomach. Lots for cheap shopping. Nothing for the mind.
Let's start, though, with clarifying a word that most speakers and writers (including Belliveau) have used a trifle carelessly. Moratorium, thought it sounds as though it has something to do with death and finality, is not about that at all. It is a legal term, usually used to indicate a legal postponement of a debt payment. The debt is not cancelled. It doesn't die. The payment is simply delayed.
In the case of shale gas, then, a moratorium does NOT mean that shale gas exploration is forbidden forever. It means it is forbidden until we know more about its effects.
Belliveau's column, then, in opposing a moratorium (and presuming he knows what the word means), tells us, "What the hell. Sure there's risks to life and health; but let's do it, anyway." That is exactly the meaning of his last paragraph. Yeah, yeah, yeah, it could poison people. It could poison our groundwater and destroy our land. But, he says, "Hiding our heads in the sands of moratorium will not get us out of this hole." (I shall skip lightly over the probability that taking the risks he recommends could forever bury us in this hole.)
This is the paragraph that gave me the sense he does not understand the meaning of moratorium. It does not mean burying our heads in the sands. Quite the contrary. If means delaying, simply delaying, shale gas exploration until we KNOW what the risks are. There is research still to be done - not to mention research results we have still not been told about.
Those opposed to shale gas exploration right now are not hiding their heads in the sand. On the contrary, they are using their heads to get information before making a decision. The person who advocates hiding our heads in the sand is Bill Belliveau. Just read his last paragraph.
"We owe to to ourselves to continue investigating the potential of shale gas development and, yes, the risks associated with its development. (my underlining).
So - sure - maybe some people will get sick or die. Maybe we'll get a high rate of stillborn babies, or birth defects that will affect the victims for the rest of their lives. Maybe we'll destroy the soil and the water. But, what the hell, ya gotta take risks. Right? I mean, so you get widespread illness, destruction and even death. But, hey, there could be some good jobs in this (though we don't even know much about that) - as long as it lasts. Hey. Not a second to waste. Hurry. Hurry.
This is mindless drivel.
Some health risks that we already know about (though not from reading the Irving Press) are damned serious. And there's a lot more we haven't even looked at yet. There are huge risks in the fracking process. There are risks in the use of the gas, itself. We need to know more before we go ahead.
Nor, given its record, is there the slightest hope that the oil and gas industry will ever give the smallest damn about what happens to us, to our children and grandchildren, or our lands and waters, or that they will ever tell us the whole truth.
Read Belliveau's column. That is almost certainly what is to be the Liberal policy - and it's exactly what the Conservative policy is now.
The industry has already objected to even the regulations we have posted now. And, despite the dimwit opinion of our Minister of the Environment, that does not prove he's on the right track. He almost certainly knew before he ever drew up regulations that the industry would oppose them. He and industry leaders almost certainly had discussed the strategy. He proposes regulations that are inadequate and/or lacking adequate research. They pretend to be angry, though they have been assured that most of the regulations won't be enforced.
And so we play our round of just pretend - just to give the Irving Press some fiction to write about and call it news. It's like a game of hockey. And we're the puck. The only difference is that under hockey rules, there are some things you're not allowed to do with the puck.
Belliveau is correct about one thing, though. The are broad similarities between the Cleary Report and the Lapierre Report. But the difference is one hell of a big one.Cleary says we had better learn more before we put our lives on the line. And Dr. Cleary, as chief medical officer, is quite qualified to make that recommendation.
Dr. Lapierre recommends going ahead. First, he had no mandate to make such a recommendation. Secondly, he has no qualification to make such a recommendation. However distinguished his career might be, he is a biologist. Such a recommendation is well beyond his expertise. And if he is a person of any intelligence or ethics at all, he knows, he should never have made such a recommendation.
And if our universities had any sense of ethics, they would be public in criticism of what he has done. But they won't. The university administrations will kiss up to gas the industry in hope of getting grants with which they can buy each other more awards and titles. The only profs who will speak at all will be the usual "rent-a-profs".
Meanwhile, Professor Lapierre will hit the lecture circuit, aiming in particular at those groups who think they are all just great folks and real movers and shakers - when they are really second and third rate. The Rotarians spring to mind. What the Rotarians think doesn't really matter. But the speeches will give The Times and Transcript an excuse to play up Lapierre - and to further ignore Dr. Cleary. That's the way the real world turns.
Conclusion? If you really don't give a damn what happens, you can safely vote either Liberal or Conservative. There is really no difference between them on shale gas - or any other issue.
If you do care, and you still vote Liberal or Conservative, then I guess you deserve what you get. Too bad, though, that everybody else is stuck with getting it, too.
_________________________________________________________________________________
What's really interesting about the fracking debate (propaganda campaign) is what nobody has mentioned. Why on earth are we even thinking of allowing private companies to develop what is ours? We lose all the profits - not just in the sense that a big business gets them, but in the sense that they almost all the money leaves the province. (And, of course, we lose on taxes when private business does it because it insists on sweetheart terms.) All we get for our resource is a minimal tax and a handful of jobs - for as long as it lasts.
If shale gas is going to be developed, why on earth don't we do it ourselves, and get full value for our money?
Oh, I know why. It's because corporation people are smart and efficient, and know things we don't.
Look. Quebec took over hydro power from private business and put it under public ownership over fifty years ago. Quebec Hydro is a lot bigger than NB shale gas. And guess what? It's been a huge success. In fact, it's common all over the world for governments to own and operate power projects. The drive to privatize them is fairly recent - rather like the attempts to privatize all education and even (no kidding) to privatize ownership of the rain that falls.
Public ownership works very well - and it distributes the wealth from what are, after all, our resources in a way that private ownership does not. There's nothing radical about it. Canada has over a century of experience of public ownership. And it's worked well. Meanwhile, large, private ownership is more noted for ripping us off. That's why we have some a huge income gap in this country. And it's a major reason why the world is slipping even deeper into recession.
___________________________________________________________________________
Among the student columns on Saturday's Whatever section, I would very strongly recommend the one by Sabrina Stace.
____________________________________________________________________________
Interesting to read the list of church events for the week - teas, beef dinner, bazaars. Lots for the stomach. Lots for cheap shopping. Nothing for the mind.
Saturday, October 20, 2012
Oct. 20: Transit lockout: The reason wny...
The story doesn't appear in The Moncton Times and Transcript. You had to be listening to the CBC that Norbert despises to be able to catch it. Mayor Leblanc has suggested that the solution to the problem of Moncton's transit system might be to privatize it. It might take a year or so to get it done. But that's okay. Mayor Leblanc has a car.
Now, the basic problem of the system is the same as the problem for mass transit systems all over the world. Ridership fluctuates wildly in the course of a day, so that buses often run close to empty. That usually means losses in operation which are made up by municipalities.
Automobile manufacturers don't mind that at all. They have often lobbied city governments to maintain terrible mass transit systems in order to boost car sales. The most notorious case is Los Angeles in which residents can expect to spend half their lifetimes in traffic jams on eight lane highways, crammed with cars.
So mayor Leblanc thinks privatization would solve all our problems..... Whoever made his head must have carved it out of a particularly thick coconut shell.
The city can't afford to run a transit system? A private company which has to operate a system PLUS make a profit can do it? Where is the common sense in that Mr. Leblanc?
Is it your thinking that private business is more efficient and effective, Mr. Leblanc? Wake up an smell the coffee. Look around you. That whole world economy is in crisis. That crisis is the direct consequence of the incompetence and dishonesty of private business. Indeed, big, private business in the western world survives now only on the the bailouts of of big government, and the power of big government in making the poor pay for the recession they didn't cause, and the power of big government to cut taxes for the rich.
And we have not yet begun to see the extent and depth of that collapse.
Privatization will solve the problem? What an idiotic statement!
But I think I understand now what this lockout of striking drivers and mechanics is all about.
For well over a century, big business has been pushing the myth that only it is efficient, that big business is what freedom is all about, that government is bad, government is, by nature, incompetent, that government regulation of business is bad, that competition is good (though the competition we have is largely mythical).
To get the general idea, read any of Norbert Cunningham's rants.
That idea has been pushed particularly hard since World War Two. You see, in the emergency of World War Two, a good deal had to be controlled by government - and big business had to accept it because it was necessary and it worked. But it was determined to return to its old world of piracy just as soon as the war ended. That's why corporate bosses created think tanks like AIMS and Fraser Institute.
The gospel this institutes hammered home was that only privatization was good, that ALL industries had to be privatized, from schools to energy to water supply --- to mass transit.
Where all this has taken us is deep into an economic crisis that gives no sign of getting better, that for countries like the US, Britain, Greece, Spain will almost certainly never get better. We are not watching declines. We are watching collapses.
But the gospel is still out there - government is bad; private business is good; everything must be privatized. It really is that sort of religion we call an ideology. We don't need proof. We just have to believe. It's the mirror image of Mao's and Stalin's communism.
And that, I suspect, is what the transit lockout is really all about. Break the union by closing down Codiac transit. Privatize to some friend of the government - with lots and lots of government 'incentives'.
Will it give us a better transit system? Of course not. In fact, it will give us a far worse one. After all, a private company has to make a profit. Obviously, it can't do that my operating the present service. The only way it can do it is by cutting back the service - and pay its employees as cheaply as possible, thus taking money in the form of profits out of Moncton, and leaving us all poorer. Then they can do the same with the other unions and the other services.
Did mayor Leblanc figure this out all by himself? I doubt that very much. In my time in Moncton, I have seen no evidence that mayor Leblanc could find his own belly button using both hands. This was put up to him.
Meanwhile, it will mean many more months of severe hardship for some students, for the elderly, for those whose low wage jobs make car ownership impossible. But not to worry. Our mayor has his own car - with a reserved parking space.
The TandT did carry a front page SPECIAL REPORT on the lockout by Eric (Scoop) Lewis. It didn't even mention the mayor's statement - or anything else we haven't known for weeks.
A3 has a long story about a Christian business leader addressing the annual mayors' prayer breakfast. His topic was the perfect storm awaiting us in reliance on technology, declines in morality, etc. He did it without once mentioning among those problems the corruption of politics, the anti-morality of big business, the lying
and propagandizing by most of most of our news media, the deliberate creation of poverty to enrich a few,....
Instead, he prefers to focus on the safe topics like the increase of rudeness, decline of church attendance. Though I am religious, I plead guilty to contributing to that decline in church attendance. And it's precisely because I detest listening to namby-pamby preaching like that. I'm sure, though, that the mayors found it inspirational. It reminded me of the first school principal I ever worked for. It was the first day of the Cuban missile crisis when it seemed likely the whole world would be destroyed at any moment. He spoke to a school assembly to deliver this message, "Now, wouldn't this be a better world if people were just nice to each other?" Food for thought.
Otherwise, Section A is a wipeout.
NewsToday has no news for today. There is, however, an extremely foolish story on language in the section. It presents a 'scientific' study showing that the French sector of health care is better supplied than the English sector.
For openers, the study is extremely unscientific -and very casually dismisses the lack of certain equipment in the French sector. It also ignores the number of anglos (like me) who use mostly the French sector. An article like this is of no scientific value. It will be resented by French who will feel they are being talked down.
to. It will encourage anger and bigotry among those anglos who already have plenty of both. What a foolish thing to publish!
The editorial is just silly. It babbles about the great beauty of Wesley United church. Nonsense! It was a massive but quite uninspired pile of dull, red brick. It reflected the style of no age except, perhaps, the drearier years of the 1930s. The editorial writer should learn what the word 'heritage' means.
Brent Mazerolle wonders why so few show up at council to protest the bus lockout, while so many protested changes to traffic lanes on Salisbury Road at a local church. Hint, Brent - the church was local, and the protestors, almost by definition, had cars. City Hall is not so generally convenient, and those who would protest don't have cars to get there.
Read Gwynne Dyer. He writes about something that is almost certain to happen.
Then there's Bill Belliveau. But I've written too much already. And Belliveau's column demands special attention. I'll write it up on Sunday morning - instead of going to church where all I'll be told is that the important thing in life is not to be rude.
Now, the basic problem of the system is the same as the problem for mass transit systems all over the world. Ridership fluctuates wildly in the course of a day, so that buses often run close to empty. That usually means losses in operation which are made up by municipalities.
Automobile manufacturers don't mind that at all. They have often lobbied city governments to maintain terrible mass transit systems in order to boost car sales. The most notorious case is Los Angeles in which residents can expect to spend half their lifetimes in traffic jams on eight lane highways, crammed with cars.
So mayor Leblanc thinks privatization would solve all our problems..... Whoever made his head must have carved it out of a particularly thick coconut shell.
The city can't afford to run a transit system? A private company which has to operate a system PLUS make a profit can do it? Where is the common sense in that Mr. Leblanc?
Is it your thinking that private business is more efficient and effective, Mr. Leblanc? Wake up an smell the coffee. Look around you. That whole world economy is in crisis. That crisis is the direct consequence of the incompetence and dishonesty of private business. Indeed, big, private business in the western world survives now only on the the bailouts of of big government, and the power of big government in making the poor pay for the recession they didn't cause, and the power of big government to cut taxes for the rich.
And we have not yet begun to see the extent and depth of that collapse.
Privatization will solve the problem? What an idiotic statement!
But I think I understand now what this lockout of striking drivers and mechanics is all about.
For well over a century, big business has been pushing the myth that only it is efficient, that big business is what freedom is all about, that government is bad, government is, by nature, incompetent, that government regulation of business is bad, that competition is good (though the competition we have is largely mythical).
To get the general idea, read any of Norbert Cunningham's rants.
That idea has been pushed particularly hard since World War Two. You see, in the emergency of World War Two, a good deal had to be controlled by government - and big business had to accept it because it was necessary and it worked. But it was determined to return to its old world of piracy just as soon as the war ended. That's why corporate bosses created think tanks like AIMS and Fraser Institute.
The gospel this institutes hammered home was that only privatization was good, that ALL industries had to be privatized, from schools to energy to water supply --- to mass transit.
Where all this has taken us is deep into an economic crisis that gives no sign of getting better, that for countries like the US, Britain, Greece, Spain will almost certainly never get better. We are not watching declines. We are watching collapses.
But the gospel is still out there - government is bad; private business is good; everything must be privatized. It really is that sort of religion we call an ideology. We don't need proof. We just have to believe. It's the mirror image of Mao's and Stalin's communism.
And that, I suspect, is what the transit lockout is really all about. Break the union by closing down Codiac transit. Privatize to some friend of the government - with lots and lots of government 'incentives'.
Will it give us a better transit system? Of course not. In fact, it will give us a far worse one. After all, a private company has to make a profit. Obviously, it can't do that my operating the present service. The only way it can do it is by cutting back the service - and pay its employees as cheaply as possible, thus taking money in the form of profits out of Moncton, and leaving us all poorer. Then they can do the same with the other unions and the other services.
Did mayor Leblanc figure this out all by himself? I doubt that very much. In my time in Moncton, I have seen no evidence that mayor Leblanc could find his own belly button using both hands. This was put up to him.
Meanwhile, it will mean many more months of severe hardship for some students, for the elderly, for those whose low wage jobs make car ownership impossible. But not to worry. Our mayor has his own car - with a reserved parking space.
The TandT did carry a front page SPECIAL REPORT on the lockout by Eric (Scoop) Lewis. It didn't even mention the mayor's statement - or anything else we haven't known for weeks.
A3 has a long story about a Christian business leader addressing the annual mayors' prayer breakfast. His topic was the perfect storm awaiting us in reliance on technology, declines in morality, etc. He did it without once mentioning among those problems the corruption of politics, the anti-morality of big business, the lying
and propagandizing by most of most of our news media, the deliberate creation of poverty to enrich a few,....
Instead, he prefers to focus on the safe topics like the increase of rudeness, decline of church attendance. Though I am religious, I plead guilty to contributing to that decline in church attendance. And it's precisely because I detest listening to namby-pamby preaching like that. I'm sure, though, that the mayors found it inspirational. It reminded me of the first school principal I ever worked for. It was the first day of the Cuban missile crisis when it seemed likely the whole world would be destroyed at any moment. He spoke to a school assembly to deliver this message, "Now, wouldn't this be a better world if people were just nice to each other?" Food for thought.
Otherwise, Section A is a wipeout.
NewsToday has no news for today. There is, however, an extremely foolish story on language in the section. It presents a 'scientific' study showing that the French sector of health care is better supplied than the English sector.
For openers, the study is extremely unscientific -and very casually dismisses the lack of certain equipment in the French sector. It also ignores the number of anglos (like me) who use mostly the French sector. An article like this is of no scientific value. It will be resented by French who will feel they are being talked down.
to. It will encourage anger and bigotry among those anglos who already have plenty of both. What a foolish thing to publish!
The editorial is just silly. It babbles about the great beauty of Wesley United church. Nonsense! It was a massive but quite uninspired pile of dull, red brick. It reflected the style of no age except, perhaps, the drearier years of the 1930s. The editorial writer should learn what the word 'heritage' means.
Brent Mazerolle wonders why so few show up at council to protest the bus lockout, while so many protested changes to traffic lanes on Salisbury Road at a local church. Hint, Brent - the church was local, and the protestors, almost by definition, had cars. City Hall is not so generally convenient, and those who would protest don't have cars to get there.
Read Gwynne Dyer. He writes about something that is almost certain to happen.
Then there's Bill Belliveau. But I've written too much already. And Belliveau's column demands special attention. I'll write it up on Sunday morning - instead of going to church where all I'll be told is that the important thing in life is not to be rude.
Friday, October 19, 2012
Oct. 18: Visions vs. mirages....
For the second day in a row, The Moncton Times and Transcript has a front page story on the demolition of Wesley Memorial United Church. As others of this paper's twice-told stories, it says nothing of substance in the first appearance, and rather less in the second.
This time, it's geegollywhiz, what a great chance to develop a new vision of St. George St.. Vibrant. that's what it will be - vibrant.
Now, I hold no brief for the preservation of that church. Architecturally, it is boring. Its physical departure is no loss to the street. In fact, it's replacement by a pile of rubble gives it a kind of unity with the rest of St. George St. Maybe we should keep it that way. But I do wish the TandT had someone who could see the significance of what has happened.
The demolition is a sign of something more profound that is happening. All the TandT can see is a chance for developers to make some money (almost certainly with our tax money. If St. Peter's in Rome were to collapse, I can see the TandT headline. "Vision Rome sees opportunity to develop tourist cafes, enliven downtown Vatican City".)
Look. Something profound is happening in our society. Religion is disappearing. That's why Wesley closed in the first place. Like it or hate it, religion has been a central feature in the societies of this world for millenia. It's ending. Locally, New Brunswick does not operate on any religious principles I can think of. That's a huge change, even bigger that building a hockey rink to revive Main St. It will have a profound effect on the world we live in, certainly far more profound than any of the visions, schemes, plans I have seen from all of our governments, private developers and business leaders put together.
In our society now, it is virtuous to be greedy, to make others suffer so that you can be rich. Killing and torture are to be admired. Covet? Bloody right. Coveting is what makes the world go around. Love your neighbour? Hey! If your neighbour isn't loved, that's your neighbour's problem. Forgive? No bloody way.
Maybe that's good. But it's still a profound change. That change is the story of Wesley United. It's more than a story. It's a subject for a good deal of discussion and commentary. It may well be the most important event we're living through. The roots of medicare lay in religious thinking. That is true for most of our social programmes.It is, or was, the basis of our criminal code and legal system. It lies at the base of the concept of human rights.
But all we're getting is - duh - they're tearing an empty building down - duh - great chance for a promoter.
This may explain why (on A2) our schools don't yet have their annual budget. I mean, who gives a damn about kids? There will, however, be lots of money to send pro-shale gas people on speaking tours around the province.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P. C3 has "Health costs weigh on fiscal woes: analyst". This one is a report from somebody hired by a "non-profit" organization, The Macdonald-Laurier Institute". The gist of it is we can't afford all them there people on medicare. And we are, as usual, assured that we can trust the Macdonald-Lauier Institute becaue it is "non-profit".
Like hell it's non-profit. Like the Atlantic Institute of Market Studies, it was founded by Brian Cowley. Both groups are really hired hands for big business to produce propaganda reports that will make profits for big business.The institutes themselves don't make the profits. But they sure make profits for the people whose boots they lick.
We can't afford medicare? Actually, we can't afford private care. Private care, as in most of the US, is far, far more expensive than medicare, and far, far less efficient. It's the leading cause of bankruptcy among American seniors, and produces close to third world results in life expectancy and health. But, oh, it make money for a few people. Nothing could demonstrate the collapse of morality better than the push of big business to end medicare.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is the usual sort of editorial which appears to have been written by the village idiot.
Otherwise, the editorial and op ed pages are very solid. (I do wish, though, that Norbert would be more critical in his reading. The world is on the brink of the Third World War, perhaps a nuclear one. There is fighting and disintegration going on it a great deal of it. There are official and unofficial wars going on. Yet Norbert continues to bow to Stephen Pinker who says the world is more peaceful than ever. 1. Pinker is a psychologist, for Pete's sake. 2. he has a reputation for gaining attention by making sensational claims.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A quick roundup of what did not make the Moncton Times and Transcript:
1. Yesterday's Globe and Mail published a study showing that Public/private partnerships (as in roadbuilding and maintenance) are expensive, far more expensive that Public only operations are. In fact, they are up to 19% more expensive. Of course. They're nothing efficient about big business. It's generally over-priced and over-profitable.
2.Drones used by the US in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia kill only small numbers of militants. Some 80% of the dead are quite innocent civilians. (Ever notice the TandT never carries a story on who dies in drone attacks?)
3.Forty-five percent of babies in Iraq are still-born. Of those who live, half have birth defects. This has a good deal to do with the toxic effects of tons of exploded munitions with long-lasting effects - as depleted uranium artillery shells. It also has to do with the destruction of hospitals, daily and long outages of electricity, and general failure to rebuild much of anything despite huge payments to contractors friendly to the government.
4. The US now has more mercenaries than US army soldiers in Afghanistan. The hired thugs outnumber the American soldiers by some 30,000.
5.Thanks to our interventions in Libya, Syria, Yemen and Somalia, Africa and the middle east are now flooded with weapons donated by the west. These include sophisticated anti-tank and anti-aircraft rockets. Many, perhaps most, of these weapons have found their way into the hands of those the papers tell us are our enemies.
6. In Britain, the government has presented legislation to force internet companies to keep copies of all internet use by their customers. These are to be freely available to police and other authorities. Police state, here we come.
7. In the US, a congressional report shows that 2,400 American households with annual incomes of one million dollars a year eacn are collecting unemployment insurance.
8.Yesterday's report of a terrorist trying the blow up the Federal Reserve building in New York is a bit misleading. Ever since 9/11, the FBI has been on the lookout for young Moslems who seem not very bright. An agent befriends the target, pretends to be a terrorist agent, talks the target into a terrorist attack, supplies the bomb. Then, at the last minute, other FBI agents appear just before the crime is committed - and announce that America is saved once again. (Actually, the bomb wouldn't have worked, anyway.)
Almost all "terrorist" arrests in the US since 9/11 have been of this sort.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally - for another day. Let's talk about shale gas and shale gas developers. I'm not in favour of shale gas under any circumstances. But, it we must have it, we been talking only about the silliest way of developing it. I'll have to touch on this soon because it's a sure thing neither the Times and Tribune nor the Atlantic Institute of Marketing Development will.
This time, it's geegollywhiz, what a great chance to develop a new vision of St. George St.. Vibrant. that's what it will be - vibrant.
Now, I hold no brief for the preservation of that church. Architecturally, it is boring. Its physical departure is no loss to the street. In fact, it's replacement by a pile of rubble gives it a kind of unity with the rest of St. George St. Maybe we should keep it that way. But I do wish the TandT had someone who could see the significance of what has happened.
The demolition is a sign of something more profound that is happening. All the TandT can see is a chance for developers to make some money (almost certainly with our tax money. If St. Peter's in Rome were to collapse, I can see the TandT headline. "Vision Rome sees opportunity to develop tourist cafes, enliven downtown Vatican City".)
Look. Something profound is happening in our society. Religion is disappearing. That's why Wesley closed in the first place. Like it or hate it, religion has been a central feature in the societies of this world for millenia. It's ending. Locally, New Brunswick does not operate on any religious principles I can think of. That's a huge change, even bigger that building a hockey rink to revive Main St. It will have a profound effect on the world we live in, certainly far more profound than any of the visions, schemes, plans I have seen from all of our governments, private developers and business leaders put together.
In our society now, it is virtuous to be greedy, to make others suffer so that you can be rich. Killing and torture are to be admired. Covet? Bloody right. Coveting is what makes the world go around. Love your neighbour? Hey! If your neighbour isn't loved, that's your neighbour's problem. Forgive? No bloody way.
Maybe that's good. But it's still a profound change. That change is the story of Wesley United. It's more than a story. It's a subject for a good deal of discussion and commentary. It may well be the most important event we're living through. The roots of medicare lay in religious thinking. That is true for most of our social programmes.It is, or was, the basis of our criminal code and legal system. It lies at the base of the concept of human rights.
But all we're getting is - duh - they're tearing an empty building down - duh - great chance for a promoter.
This may explain why (on A2) our schools don't yet have their annual budget. I mean, who gives a damn about kids? There will, however, be lots of money to send pro-shale gas people on speaking tours around the province.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
P. C3 has "Health costs weigh on fiscal woes: analyst". This one is a report from somebody hired by a "non-profit" organization, The Macdonald-Laurier Institute". The gist of it is we can't afford all them there people on medicare. And we are, as usual, assured that we can trust the Macdonald-Lauier Institute becaue it is "non-profit".
Like hell it's non-profit. Like the Atlantic Institute of Market Studies, it was founded by Brian Cowley. Both groups are really hired hands for big business to produce propaganda reports that will make profits for big business.The institutes themselves don't make the profits. But they sure make profits for the people whose boots they lick.
We can't afford medicare? Actually, we can't afford private care. Private care, as in most of the US, is far, far more expensive than medicare, and far, far less efficient. It's the leading cause of bankruptcy among American seniors, and produces close to third world results in life expectancy and health. But, oh, it make money for a few people. Nothing could demonstrate the collapse of morality better than the push of big business to end medicare.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
There is the usual sort of editorial which appears to have been written by the village idiot.
Otherwise, the editorial and op ed pages are very solid. (I do wish, though, that Norbert would be more critical in his reading. The world is on the brink of the Third World War, perhaps a nuclear one. There is fighting and disintegration going on it a great deal of it. There are official and unofficial wars going on. Yet Norbert continues to bow to Stephen Pinker who says the world is more peaceful than ever. 1. Pinker is a psychologist, for Pete's sake. 2. he has a reputation for gaining attention by making sensational claims.
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
A quick roundup of what did not make the Moncton Times and Transcript:
1. Yesterday's Globe and Mail published a study showing that Public/private partnerships (as in roadbuilding and maintenance) are expensive, far more expensive that Public only operations are. In fact, they are up to 19% more expensive. Of course. They're nothing efficient about big business. It's generally over-priced and over-profitable.
2.Drones used by the US in Pakistan, Yemen and Somalia kill only small numbers of militants. Some 80% of the dead are quite innocent civilians. (Ever notice the TandT never carries a story on who dies in drone attacks?)
3.Forty-five percent of babies in Iraq are still-born. Of those who live, half have birth defects. This has a good deal to do with the toxic effects of tons of exploded munitions with long-lasting effects - as depleted uranium artillery shells. It also has to do with the destruction of hospitals, daily and long outages of electricity, and general failure to rebuild much of anything despite huge payments to contractors friendly to the government.
4. The US now has more mercenaries than US army soldiers in Afghanistan. The hired thugs outnumber the American soldiers by some 30,000.
5.Thanks to our interventions in Libya, Syria, Yemen and Somalia, Africa and the middle east are now flooded with weapons donated by the west. These include sophisticated anti-tank and anti-aircraft rockets. Many, perhaps most, of these weapons have found their way into the hands of those the papers tell us are our enemies.
6. In Britain, the government has presented legislation to force internet companies to keep copies of all internet use by their customers. These are to be freely available to police and other authorities. Police state, here we come.
7. In the US, a congressional report shows that 2,400 American households with annual incomes of one million dollars a year eacn are collecting unemployment insurance.
8.Yesterday's report of a terrorist trying the blow up the Federal Reserve building in New York is a bit misleading. Ever since 9/11, the FBI has been on the lookout for young Moslems who seem not very bright. An agent befriends the target, pretends to be a terrorist agent, talks the target into a terrorist attack, supplies the bomb. Then, at the last minute, other FBI agents appear just before the crime is committed - and announce that America is saved once again. (Actually, the bomb wouldn't have worked, anyway.)
Almost all "terrorist" arrests in the US since 9/11 have been of this sort.
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Finally - for another day. Let's talk about shale gas and shale gas developers. I'm not in favour of shale gas under any circumstances. But, it we must have it, we been talking only about the silliest way of developing it. I'll have to touch on this soon because it's a sure thing neither the Times and Tribune nor the Atlantic Institute of Marketing Development will.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)