Our Selective Remembrance Day - and The Atlantic Charter of 1941

On November 11, we pause to remember those who died and those who were crippled either mentally or physically in battle. So we should. We sent them to risk death and crippling. The least we owe them is to remember how they suffered - and how we sent them to the suffering, and why.

The problem comes when we forget that we were the ones who sent them; and we are the ones who are sending them now and will send them in future. That forgetting happens when we get filled with propaganda that there was something glorious in what they did, something glorious in what we did in sending them -  that they died to preserve freedom and democracy.

Actually, Canada has never fought a war for freedom and democracy, and fought only one war to defend itself. That was in 1812 when the US invaded us. (Perhaps one could add the Fenian raids as well.)  Canadians died in the Boer War so that British millionaires could plunder the gold and diamonds and cheap labour of what became South Africa. World War One had nothing to do with democracy. Nor did Korea. When we went to South Korea, it was a dictatorship. And when we left, it was still a dictatorship. Afghanistan had nothing to do with us. It was not, as the US told us, complicit in 9/11. Though called Enduring Freedom, the war did not produce any freedom except of the most farcical sort. As well, it made it possible for the most corrupt government in the world (the present Afghan government) to re-establish its world dominance in the heroin trade. A hundred and fifty-eight Canadians - all sent by us through votes in parliament - died for that. There are no reliable figures on Afghan civilians who were killed. It's at least 20,000. We don't really know because that information comes from the same people who told us this was a war to save democracy.

As for World War Two,  The Atlantic Charter agreed to by Churchill and Roosevelt in 1941 was supposed to tell what we were fighting for.. Alas! Neither Churchill nor Roosevelt believed a word of what they said.

By the summer of 1941, we had lost World War Two. Churchill realized that, and later wrote of how he had thought of buying Hitler off with a piece of the British Empire. Hitler had recently invaded the USSR but, at the time, nobody expected the USSR to last more than six months. President Roosevelt of the US had his own concerns about the war in which his country was still a neutral; so he suggested that he and Churchill should meet. Churchill was ecstatic. This was something he had longed for all his life, a union of the world's English-speaking peoples to maintain the power of a Britain whose power had been slipping for seventy years. The two leaders met on an American warship in Placentia Bay, Newfoundland. Out of that meeting came an official announcement of what the war was for.

It was, they said, to bring freedom to the world, ending empires, permitting each nation to determine its own government and its own future. And it was about free trade so that all barriers to trade would be removed.

Churchill didn't like either of those. He was, to his dying day, the man who said "I did not become the  King's first minister to preside over the dissolution of the British Empire."  The wealth of Britain (and the wealth of the very wealthy British) was based on the brutal exploitation of the people and resources of the British Empire - but-

Roosevelt insisted he needed that part about freedom to get the American people to extend wartime aid to Britain. He didn't say the other reason for it; but I'm sure Churchill guessed. He hoped to pick up much of the British Empire as Britain lost it..

At the time, and after, people who should have known better said that Roosevelt had been inspired by the democracy-loving President Wilson of World War One. In fact, though Wilson had talked a good game about freedom, he invaded and installed puppet dictators in Central America in almost every year he was president. Roosevelt had inherited an empire - and he had no intention freeing anybody. (Wilson also despised African Americans, and even extended racial segregation to include the civil service.)

As a result of the war, democracy was restored to countries that had already had it. But the puppet dictators remained with the American empire. As for the British Empire, and sadly for Churchill, the Empire crumbled in the years after the war as people kicked their British masters out. And when Britain made war on Egypt to try to get the Suez Canal back, a furious president Eisenhower publicly ordered the British out. He, like Roosevelt, wanted the US to add the British empire to  their own, not to rebuild it for Britain. (To this day, it's the US, not the Egyptian people that calls the shots for the Egyptian government. .

Then there was free trade.  British wealth depended on tariffs within the empire in order control trade so that the profits would go to the wealthy of Britain. But with the world in devastation after the war, the undevastated US would dominate world trade, creating vaster wealth for its already wealthy.

Churchill was hoping Roosevelt would use the charter to warn Japan against invading British colonies in Asia. But Roosevelt refused. He had his own plans for the future of Asia.

Even at that, Roosevelt agreed only to lend money and sell weapons to Britain. He had no interest in fighting Germany. What did interest him was Japan. It was almost certain to take the British, French and Dutch colonies in Asia, and even the great prize - China. Japan was the war he wanted to fight, to get control of the European empires in Asida. That's why he cut off oil supplies to Japan. He wanted a reaction that would give him a reason to declare war. He got more than he wanted with Pearl Harbour. But it did what he wanted, to give him a reason to declare war.  At that, he never did declare war on Germany at all. Germany, weeks later, declared war on the US.

World War Two was not about rights and freedoms. It was, like most wars, about money. After the war, Vietnam was the American attempt to steal the old French colony of Indo-China. The wars in the middle east and Africa have been to replace British and French dominance, and to cut off Russia and China  from developing trade. Remember. as you remember those who paid the price, that we sent them, - to Libya, to Afghanistan and now to Ukraine and Iraq and Syria.

The United Nations, the institution that was to bring us global freedom and social order, was inspired partly by the Atlantic Charter. But the major powers made sure that it could never carry out that role. They did it by giving veto power to themselves - United States, USSR, China, France, and Britain. Anyway, the UN has since been replaced as the judge and enforcer of the world with a power given (by God, apparently) to the US. It's called American exceptionalism. Our news media don't mention it much, if at all; but the concept as embraced by both parties in the US, is that the US can do whatever it likes, invade whoever it wants to, and never be held accountable.

There's more to come, much more, and soon. We have allowed capitalism to become something quite different from what it should be in a free and democratic society. We have allowed the growth of a capitalism that is independent of our social controls, and that operates on a greed that has, as greeds do, become  short-sighted, stupid to the point of madness, and utterly indifferent to those who suffer for the greed.

Remember, by all means, remember those who paid the price to satisfy a greed that can never be satisfied. But - and hear I speak especially to our various religious leaders - don't speak as if war were glorious or a defence of rights and freedoms. And next time you vote, hold to account those politicians who voted  to send more people to be remembered on another November 11.

Oct. 11: rock bottom

The Friday and Saturday edition of the TandT for this week are the worst I have yet seen in that whole, wretched Irving press.

For Wednesday, the section A news is not just trivial; some is downright bizarre. On A2, there is a story that there's no need for an Ebola panic in NB. Okay. That's a reasonable story to report on. But the big picture to illustrate the story is of parking lot construction at the Dumont hospital. A photo, like a story, should tell us something. What the hell does this photo tell us about Ebola?

Below it is a story about roadwork in Moncton wrapping up. And there's a picture which shows even less that the one above it does, nothing but a couple of roadwork signs. What does that tell us?

By the way, the intrepid editors and reporters for the TandT don't seem to have heard of a suspected Ebola victim in Quebec (Temiskaming), even though the story is at least two days old. And all they had to do was to look at google.

Then, Friday has that silly (and large section) called A Better New Brunswick which features interviews with people telling us how to make this, well, a better New Brunswick. All of these features so far have been pretty silly and trivial. Today's  edition has an interview with a man who takes silly and trivial  to new depths with his opening headline statement, "People are province's biggest asset".  This gem comes from the mouth of a man, Brian Murphy, who had his time as MLA to make this a better province, and didn't do it. His statement reminds me of the Faith Page at its goopiest - all warm and cuddly, and quite meaningless.

Though Murhpy's "thoughts" are largely about economics, he does it without mentioning the phenomenal wage gap in this province - and without mentioning those people in this province who have the real power.

If I recall correctly, it was Brian Murphy, as education minister,  who refused to support a school principal who was under attack by parents for not playing 'O Canada" every morning. To Mr. Murphy and all those self-righteous, fist-shaking parents, it is NOT the job of the school to teach patriotism. It is the job of the school to teach thinking and understanding. And sometimes that makes one patriotic; and some times it doesn't. But in no case should the school be a propaganda centre. That's how Hitler used it. Do you stand up every morning and sing "O Canada" Mr. Murphy? If so, you should see tickets.

On the same page, there is also bad news. The Irving Chapel will close for the winter after Oct. 12. So you will have to find another church to worship the Irvings. Alas, the other church will be unlikely to have "special music".

For Friday, the editorial and op ed pages are much as usual.  The editorial and Norbert really have nothing to say.

Cole Hobson has a good topic in the problem of PTSD - though he doesn't do much with it. It's a very serious problem, indeed. And we inflict it on our military whenever we send them into action - and then Harper is notably slow to do anything about it.

Justin Ryan's column on foreign cooking seems light stuff- but it has a lot of truth to it. It's about how people of different parts of the world can come together through cooking. I developed a love for China in restaurants and homes and mealtime. I especially remember a restaurant called The Pepper Pot. On the first, few bites, my nose was running and there were tears in my eyes. And then we began the really hot part. It was heaven. Later, Chinese friends taught me how to boil lettuce without getting it wet - as a sort of balance to all the peppers.

There is also an excellent letter to the editor on a topic the paper never covers, "Better wages needed for working people".

Editorial and op eds for Friday are mostly the regular trivial trash. Norbert is deep into a series, telling us about books he has been reading which are intended to advanced students of the art and science of reading.
Norbert, you are writing for an audience of the most illiterate people in Canada. The books you are quoting are aimed at those who are not just literate, but highly literate. But what your audience needs encouragement to read at all. You might start by raising the point that we have the worst funded libraries in Canada.

The one column worth reading is Gwynne Dyer on Ebola. It's the most concise and the most informative column I have seen on the subject. And it's damned frightening.
____________________________________________________________________________
Both Friday and Saturday have very little world news - and most of the news they do have is trivial. "Cop who watched women have sex in jail not guilty". Alas, there is no photo. I was hoping for at least another picture of road repairs.

Friday's B6 has the news item I expected to see about now - that is, soon after the election. "Mike Wilson named chair of New Brunswick Business Council." But that's not the important part. Who could care less who the chairman of the business council is?

What's iimportant is his very arrogant attitude in saying he looks forward to working with the new Liberal government to bring prosperity to the province. Hey, Mr. Wilson. The people of New Brunswick didn't elect  you. And you have no special right to claim a role in government. This is a shadow, admittedly a pale one, of Mr. Irving's announcement at the start of Alward's government that he was a member of the government - without getting elected.

Mr.Wilson wants to bring prosperity to the province? Like hell he does. He wants to bring prosperity to big business and, the thinking of big business is to make the rest of the people bear the burden of bringing down the debt. He wants to make sure big business does not pay the cost for the damage it has done to our economy and our services.

New Brunswick, Canada, and the United States ARE prosperous. There's lots and lots of money. The problem for the last twenty years and more is that most of that prosperity is going into the pockets of the very rich who don't pay anywhere near the taxes they should, and who are now so liberated by deregulation and free trade they don't have to give a damn what we people or our governments think. Free trade has also made possible the near-destruction of unions and fair wages.

In addition, the "terrorist" scare has been used in Canada and the US (and other countries) to justify domestic spying on all of us. The government and big business are in bed together in this one, and information about us that has nothing to do with "terrorism" is routinely reported to big business - but not to us. Under Hitler, people who did that sort of spying were called Gestapo.
___________________________________________________________________
I read the Faith Page; but now I can't find it.  It doesn't matter. It's just the usual pie sales in a region whose only places of worship are Christian (and Protestant), and whose perpetual sermonette is "Jesus wants you for a sunbeam."

Has it never occurred to these would-be John the Baptists that the moral code of big business is the opposite of any religion I have ever  heard of? All religions I know of emphasize our obligations to each other, are critical of greed and are opposed to killing.

Unregulated capitalism works on a moral code which exalts greed, recognizes no obligation except to the business, and kills people by the millions to get control of resources and markets.  Any thoughts from our clergy?

No. I thought not.
____________________________________________________________________________
As always, the Irving press has big gaps in its news.

Remember how its editorials have supported shale gas as our big hope for the future, and how the certainly of big profits and good jobs is worth the risk? That's probably why it hasn't told us that the world price of oil is dropping like a rock. Beware of impossible predictions and big promises. That advice would work, too, for the new hockey rink (also called civic centre).

Then there is the big, world conference about the World Health Organization. Well, the whole world except Canada. Harper has refused to go because it's being held in Moscow. Does Harper have higher ideals than all the rest of the leaders in this world? If so,shouldn't he criticize the US, Britain, France, etc. for their lack of moral standards?  Well, actually......

....Harper is doing this because Ukrainian Canadians hate Russians - and he wants that Ukrainian- Canadian vote to be all wrapped up for him just as the Zionist vote is.  This is the Harper we know too well - talk tough and do as little as possible. If the conference were going to be in Israel, he'd charter a couple of jets, and offer free trips to every Zionist in the country. And in Israel he would talk tough and do nothing - just like the last time. This time, again, he talks tough without actually doing anything.
____________________________________________________________________________

I'm sorry I had to waste so much space and time talking about nothing. But nothing is close to what these two editions were about. I really do want to talk about the Atlantic Charter (of 1941, and do it before Nov. 11). It can be quite a shocker to learn what they charter was really all about.

I think that one day soon, I'll do an extra blog just on the charter.

My sons are home from university for Thanksgiving Day. Did you know that children grow up? I shall have to adjust.

Oct. 9: the news media and manipulation

Most news media don't tell the news. They create it. For example.......

In the Korean war, UN forces easily beat North Korea - China became very worried that they were looking to an invasion of China. (And the Chinese were right. The UN commander, Douglas MacArthur, had been making it clear, much to the anger of the American government, that he intended to invade China.) So, China ordered the UN troops not to go beyond a certain point. And MacArthur sent them beyond it.

What happened then was chaos and panic as China kept its word, and sent a massive force into North Korea. I knew Canadian soldiers who were there - and they didn't even try to fool anyone. They ran in panic. Everybody ran.  This was more than a retreat. This was a humiliating rout.

Until the news media got hold of it. Then it wasn't even a retreat. It was a strategic withdrawal. Never mind that a strategic withdrawal IS a retreat. And never mind that this one was not a response to orders; it was a panicky escape. The soothing, strategic withdrawal term even became a movie buzzword for a Hollywood film about the retreat, "Retreat, Hell!"

In the final scene, a frightened soldier uses the word retreat. And the hero says, "Retreat, Hell! This is a strategic withdrawal."

The success of that propaganda took us into a journalistic practice that became standard in the 1950s. All Korean war veterans in Canada were called "Korean War Heroes" even when the story had nothing to do with war, as in "Korean War Hero opens new restaurant in Moncton".

I found it odd because I could just remember how we were taught to laugh at Russia for calling all of its soldiers heroes all the time.

So -just a few weeks ago, the American and Canadian publics were completely opposed to any more war. Now, they're in favour. Why?

It was the news of ISIS beheading prisoners. This was evil, unheard of, contrary to all the rules of war. It was so evil, the people who do it must be evil by nature. It's genetic.  That's what the news media told us. And that appeal to our racism was what turned the trick. And it was deliberate.

The first reality is that nobody obeys any rules of war. Every war the US has fought since Korea has been illegal and full of war crimes, including the deliberate mass murder of civilians and the stunning reliance on torture, including torture of child soldiers (with Canadian complicity). If the world had a functioning world justice system, Harper could well be facing a death sentence for his involvement in Afghanistan.

We have been complicit (if only as a small player) in burning innocent people alive, killing civilians by the millions, destroying whole nations.

But beheading? No, us Christians cannot tolerate that. We, a racially superior people, do not have that evil influence in us. (So how come we're allied to a Saudi Arabia that is the world's most severe dictatorship, and a companion of the US and several other countries who financed and trained ISIS, - especially when the Saudis are probably the world champs in beheading?) But don't fret. Our news media will never tell us all this.

In fact, in the Thursday Irving press, B8 "Inaction on Syria frustrates coalition" there is a story about ISIS attacking a town on the Turkish border while the Turks "just watch the slaughter".

Well, yes. It is a slaughter. All wars are slaughter. Slaughter is what war is about - on both sides. But this story is from The Associated Press - and you have ever seen or heard any of our news services referring to an American slaughter as in, say, Vietnam or Iraq or Libya? No, because that's not the way our news media operate.

The reality is that for centuries, arabs and Africans in general have been slaughtered or impoverished by the tens of millions by Turkey, Britain, France, Belgium and now the US so that their resources can be plundered by western big business. Any traditional values have been destroyed. Most arab people have very little of their society left. And, yes, that produces pretty radical and hating people. But killing even more of them is not likely to change anything. We've been there, done that.

So where will this war take us? Almost certainly to its main target, the destruction of Syria - and very likely to World War Three which Obama has been promoting ever since American agents planned the overthrow of the government of Ukraine. In this, he will have the full support of Canadian and American churches, just as the Christian churches of Germany largely supported Hitler.
______________________________________________________________________
B5 for Thursday at last has the story of a 100 car train blowing up in Saskatchewan after a derailment. Though only six cars exploded, they were carrying highly toxic petroleum distillates to - well - they don't tell us. It was sent by - they don't tell us. Was the smoke toxic? Yes. People had to be evacuated. Will it damage the environment and kill wildlife. Almost certainly; but the story doesn't say. Was it the old type of tank car that was responsible for the disaster of Lac Megantic - they don't tell us. All we know is that some twit of a local village reeve said he's sure the government is doing its best the regulate railway companies.

As a matter of fact, it's not doing a damn thing. And it, especially Transport Canada, got roasted just recently for neglect of the most obviously necessary regulation and maintenance.

Is it possible this train was coming our way - and from somebody we know? Could be. But the Irving press never asked. Nor did it ask whether this was a another 1 crewman train, or why the shipper chose this. Nor did it ask the big question - about how such shipments to New Brunswick are expected to multiply.

But, hey, let's look on the bright side. By cutting services, the federal government was able to reduce the national debt.
________________________________________________________________________

B1 on Wednesday carried an excellent story from The Canadian Press on how the report of the Commissioner of the Environment tore one hell of a strip off Harper. She says that Harper has done nothing whatever to meet international commitments he has made to reduce greenhouse gasses - and there is now no hope we will reach our deadlines. (of course not. The oil industry doesn't want to reduce greenhouse gasses. And Harper knows who he serves.) She also said that despite Harper's big talk about Arctic development, preparations like ocean surveys are nowhere close to being ready - nor do we have the ships to do the work. She also came down heavily on his serious neglect of Transport Canada and the Department of Oceans and Fisheries.

This is worth a read. But to get the real fire in it, read Alec Bruce's column  on  the same topic on the editorial page of the Thursday paper. Bruce also has a good one in Wednesday's paper, this time on the economic downside of fracking.
_______________________________________________________________________
If what's happening in the world is too much for you, take a look at the editorials that deal with the real problems of life. Thursday takes a fearless look at garbage collection. Wednesday kissed the boss's ass with how good it is to have a small government   ( It's an article of faith in big business circles that the government that we elected should be too weak to protect us from big business.)

In fact, a government, a real government, needs a large and well-informed civil service and cabinet to be able to control big business (which,  yes, should be controlled. But big business wants to control everything - including us.)

Norbert continues his mindless series on reforming democracy. He speaks of change as coming from "the people". Rosa Parks, for example, he says began the breakthrough for civil rights in the US.  (She didn't Norbert. And African Americans still don't have full civil rights. All Rosa Parks won was the right to sit in a white section of the bus. To this day, American blacks get lower pay than whites - even when both have the same education. Their schools, to this day, are the worst funded. Their chances of getting shot by police are higher. He also refers, on Thursday, to the signing of Magna Carta as a result of a movement of citizens. Norbert, I would flunk you in a first year history course if  you wrote that on an exam. Read some history. Magna Carta was not the result of a movement of citizens.)  This whole series is pure bilge by a man who has no idea what he's talking about. But he shows skill in talking about how to reform our political system without once mentioning the big business that controls it.

Rod Allen tried to write a serious and useful column. He doesn't make it.

Beth Lyons has a useful column"YWCA Week Without violence is a global event with a local focus."
____________________________________________________________________________
Then there are all those things the paper doesn't tell us about, and never will. For example, how many wars are peace-loving Americans fighting right now? Or supporting with money and advice and training?

Well, Iraq, Syria, Afghanistan, Yemen, Somalia, Ukraine (supplies and diplomatic support); drones in Pakistan, Niger, Djibouti, the Seychelles -and an unknown number of countries that have been attacked by special ops or undermined by American agents.

ISIS isn't attacking us. It's shooting back.

Then - a piece of news it might report. (It doesn't like the people on one side of misbehaviour. But it kisses up to the other side of misbehavers.)

My source here is rabble.ca - and this is a sad one.

Rabble.ca is a group of (mostly) retired journalists of the old school - honest, questioning, and ethically as straight as they come. I would trust their news more than that of any news medium I know.  They accuse two, top journalists of unethical behaviour. The two are Peter Mansbridge and Rex Murphy.

Apparently, both have lucrative contracts to perform "celebrity talks" for a wealthy organization. It's called the Oil Council of Canada. Sorry, boys. It's profoundly unethical for a journalist to be in such a conflict of interest situation.  The word is that CBC is investigating it. But, much as it hates CBC, don't expect a report of this in the Irving press. It hates CBC; but it just loves The Oil Council of Canada - which is equally responsible for its unethical behaviour. (Actually, that could be a tricky legal point. I'm not sure the oil industry has any ethics to be responsible for.)

_____________________________________________________________________
I have a note for another topic "The Atlantic Charter of 1841 and the betrayal of our veterans". But I think I'll save that for Nov. 11.

Oct. 7: Canadian values and prinicples - hypocrisy is number one.

It's Monday. I've been watching Harper and his crowd preaching to the House of Commons on TV. It reminded me of graduate school days.

One of my teachers was Arthur Lower, then the author of the standard text for Canadian history. It arose from his experience in World War One and then the increasing independence of Canada. So he called it Colony to Nation. Even as we took the course, though, most of us felt that we had ceased to be a colony of Britain only to become a colony of the United States - so we used to call his book Colony to Nation to Colony. It's now much worse.

In recent years, I have felt that Harper, if he got another term, would destroy Canada. Well,  he doesn't need another term. Everything is in place now to destroy Canada as a nation. One is our commitment to take part in the war in Iraq and Syria (Yes. Both of them.)  The other is the EU free trade deal. We know enough about both to expect editorial and op ed comment. But I haven't see any yet.

Instead, the editorial writers, as always, seem incapable of talking about anything but village affairs. The only person in that whole paper who has the wit to realize something important is happening is de Adder, the cartoonist. He has a cartoon of Harper, holding up his free trade deal while standing on the coat tails of slimeball Mulroney holding up his NAFTA free trade deal. This is important because it's very, very bad news for everybody except billionaires.

Now, I shall lay me down to sleep, and hope somebody finds some intelligent form of life at Irving press who can say something about it.
_________________________________________________________________________
It's Wednesday. Canada will be at war, and we will be under a destructive free trade deal - and there is no intelligent form of life at the Irving press.

There is one news story on the debate in the House of Commons in which Harper says we have to  defend Canadian rights and principles in Iraq and Syria.
1. This claims a right for us to impose Canadian rights and principles on all countries. So we join the American crusade which killed millions in trying to impose American rights and principles on Vietnam, Iraq, Libya and Afghanistan - all at a dead loss - and all  at the price of creating chaotic conditions that have created a worse situation than there was before all these wars.
2. We're all gung-ho on upholding Canadian values? We weren't in 1981 when the CIA, the Guatemalan army. and Israeli special ops murdered 200,000 to 300,000 innocent Guatemalans, making no distinction in killing them all, men, women, and children.
Next time you're in Bouctouche to join the Lord at the Irving Chapel with special music and coffee in the barn, drop by the Catholic cemetery  to visit the grave of  Raoul Joseph Leger. He was killed in Guatemala by the CIA, the Guatemalan army, and Israel special ops. A New Brunswicker, Leger was a lay missionary who had devoted his life to helping the poor. He was murdered at the age of 30.
However, that didn't offend Canadian values and principles. Canada didn't lift a finger to ask for a report on why he died, or even to bring his body home. (That was done by the Quebec Foreign Missionary Society). The Irving press and other Canadian news media never bothered to mention Leger or anything that was going on in Guatemala. In fact, the Irving media were silent even when the NFB released a film about Leger's death, and even when the film appeared on Canadian and US TV.
3. I presume beheading is not a Canadian principle or value. Okay. So how come one of our major allies in this crusade is Saudi Arabia, the world leader in beheading, using it to execute those found guilty of even minor crimes? How come we're not bombing the Saudis?
4. It must be that mass murder of millions of innocent people, and the starvation of hundreds of thousands of children, and the torture of thousands of prisoners are not offensive to Canadian values and principles. If they were, we would long ago have bombed the US - with six jets for six months.
5. In fact, this war has nothing to do with ISIS. In fact, ISIS was created, armed, trained and paid for by the US and Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates. It is meant to be the excuse for a war - a war to destroy what is left of the Iraqi nation and, more important, to destroy Syria.
6. The simplest, common sense should tell us that if this were really a war about the future security of the world, and a war that could last for many years, and is vital to our survival, then only a damn fool would commit six aircraft for six months. Check out the European Union commitments. Most of them are just as timid as Harper's.

That's because they all know that the beheadings are the American excuse for war. After the disasters of Libya, Iraq and Afghanistan, the American people are fed up with war. Obama needed something to get popular support for another war - or series of wars. ISIS is that something.
The governments of Canada and the European Union all know that, and they know where this war will take us. That's why most are making small commitments, with time limits. But it won't help them - or us.
7. What is this war about? It's about staking out the whole middle east as an American colony. It's about closing out Russia, China, possibly India from trade with it. It's about destroying Syria and killing Assad because Assad encourages Russian trade. The war will almost certainly come to include Iran for the same reason. As a bonus for Israel, it will so weaken the Arab states as to allow Israel to take over all of Palestine and, perhaps, a part of Lebanon.
American oil ownership will be safe with American oil companies paying the lowest possible price for the oil they take.

Or - the Middle East will collapse into permanent chaos - and Russia and China will feel they have to step in to prevent an American takeover of the whole region.
This war is being fought for one reason, and one reason only - because the oil industry wants it, and the oil industry owns the US government and the media. So watch for an orgy of hatred from the news media. Oh, and be sure not to miss the Nov. 11 speeches about how Canadians are risking their lives to preserve democracy   in the Middle East.

Enjoy.
___________________________________________________________________________
de Adder's cartoon of Monday had free trade Harper standing on free trade Mulroney's coat tails. Quite so - but worse.

Free trade has done nothing for most of us in Canada and the US -and nothing for poor countries, either. Mulroney spent his whole life as a lickspittle for the very rich. He didn't introduce free trade to help anybody except his very rich friends. (Mila, born rich, played her role as an aristocratic wife - holding lavish dinner parties for the rich to raise money for the poor so Mila could get her name in the news, and hear compliments about the stunningly expensive clothes and jewelry she had bought just for this occasion - and, of  course, to accept praise for her generous commitment to help the poor.)

Free trade so far has done what it was designed to do. It has allowed big business to close North American factories where greedy workers expected to be paid enough to live on for their work -and move to poor countries with no requirement that they pay decent salaries or give a damn about what they pollute.

Free trade is what made Detroit into a wasteland and a battle zone. And it is not a coincidence that the growth of the wage gap between the very, very rich and the rest of us began with free trade. In fact, around the world, the wage gap is now greater than it has been since 1870. (Some authorities say it's the worst since 1820).

Watch for Harper's new trade deal to make it worse because it is almost certain to include new penalties - for us. The trend is for free trade deals to allow companies to evade environmental rules - and to sue countries that impose such rules after the deal is signed - even if the rules are necessary to save human lives.
In the case of Canada, Harper has been quietly removing such rules since he came to office. So we start from a weak position.

To make it weaker, the new trend for such law suits is to send then- not to those fussy, old fashioned courts. No. The new trend is to send cases to a court appointed and paid by the company for hearings held in secret.. And there is no appeal to real courts.

Such free trade deals mean a permanent lowering of incomes for us which is combined with increased opportunity for the very rich to hide their money from taxation. That, of course, means we need to cut government services to balance the budget. (The very rich want to cut them anyway because they think everything should be for private profit.)

The world is changing very, very quickly. The age of democracy is close to being history. Free trade, deregulation, and sheer corruption have taken care of that. And, while it is more obvious in New Brunswick than in other places, the world is increasingly governed by an aristocracy of wealth. We don't control our fates any more. That's why the state requires news media owned by the wealthy to propagandize us. That's why most advanced countries now have secret, domestic police to spy on us and keep us in line.

Of course, the various aristocracies will sometimes confront each other, with each determined to get even more power. That's why we're having tensions with Russia and China. And those aristocracies too small to afford such confrontations will line up under the orders of a big aristocracy - which is what Canada and the European Union are doing for Obama.
________________________________________________________________________
As for the Irving press for Monday and Tuesday - well, it's the Irving press. The local news is trivial. The little bit of foreign news comes from the usual sources - The Canadian Press, The Associated Press,----  It has to because most newspapers can't afford to maintain foreign correspondents. The trouble is the sources the Irving Press buys these stories from are owned  by the same sort of propagandizers who own the rest of the news media in North America.

There are other sources to get news and opinion from, sources like El Haaretz in Israel, Al Jazeera (far better than it gets credit for), The Guardian (Britain)... But I guess our editors don't read them. To make it worse, they don't seem to know much about foreign affairs because the stories they use seem to be picked out at random. And much of the opinion we get from other sources seems to come from propaganda "think tanks". The only good ones we get are ones that seem to be coming less frequently - like David Suzuki and Gwynne Dyer.

Among regulars, Alec Bruce is, as usual, worth reading. Steve Malloy is good with, I suspect, a lot more potential.

As for Norbert, once you've looked his moustache, there's nothing else of substance in his columns.

Tuesday's editorial is the best (and only good one) I have ever seen in the TandT. It's an editorial of praise for Dr. Cleary, our chief medical officer, who has voluntarily gone to Africa to help with the struggle against ebola. The editorial praises her courage and her commitment. And rightly so.

To bad they smothered and derided her report on shale gas.

Oct. 5: Canada's outstanding photo of war...

....hangs in the War Museum in Ottawa. It never fails to move me. It appeared yesterday in Toronto's Globe - and in the National Post and the Star because it's being memorialized this weekend in British Columbia. (Google 'Famous New Westminister war photo to be memorialized' to see it.)

It's early in the war, and a long column of Canadian soldiers is marching to training camp. A mother and her five year old son watch them pass, and the boy breaks away to reach a hand out to his father, who shifts his rifle to his left hand so he can reach back with his right hand to his son. You really must see this.

The mother, left with very little money (a private's pay might buy a couple of plates of beans.) So she had to move, alone, with her son, to find a job at a time when jobs for women were few, and very low-paying. If the father had waited until his regiment (he was in the reserves) was called up, he would have been able to go at his militia rank of Sergeant-Major - at much higher pay. But he wanted to go - NOW. So his wife and his child were left to survive, somehow, on there own. And so it was for tens of thousands of women and their children. Among them were my mother, my sister, and me though, luckily, my father joined the navy as a Chief Petty Officer (equivalent to an army Sergeant-Major).

Was it a burning desire to save democracy? No. My father had been stuck in a hateful job. This was his last chance for adventure. A relative who was my father's age joined up the day the war declared. He was wounded at Dieppe and, again, at D-Day. Was he worried about democracy? No. He simply wanted to get away from his wife and children. For the rest of his life, he talked about nothing but the war. It wasn't about battles, though. It was about the parties and the dancing.

It was much the same all over the neighbourhood. I never even heard of anybody joining up to save democracy. The only place I have ever heard that is at a Nov. 11 ceremony. And, at those ceremonies, you never hear about the women and children left behind, and what they endured..

The Irving press doesn't have the story, of course. I doubt whether most of its people have ever even heard of Canada's greatest war photo.
_____________________________________________________________________________

So. now Canada is entering what is to be the greatest war of the century, the war on terrorism. This is the one we must win to save the world from.....whatever. The enemy is evil, and set on world destruction. And it cuts off heads. How crude.  Not at all genteel like our side which murders masses of civilians of all ages with bombs, nuclear poisoning, agent orange, and napalm to burn men, women and children alive. And, in a refinement of this, the US allowed an estimated 400,000 Iraqi children to starve to death during and after the Iraq war. (Money was voted to feed them. But in the welter of corruption that is US government spending, the contracts to deliver the aid are given to private business friends of the government - and only a fraction of it ever becomes food for the starving.)

 But why think of these ugly things? Go to the Faith Page to read how God inspires us Christians to have pie sales. Then read the sermonette for assurance that God wants you to be a sunbeam for Jesus. Or check out the Irving Chapel which will, tomorrow, have 'special' music, real toe-tappin' time for Jesus.

But - it this is such a huge war - well - how can ISIS be beating Iraq with such a small army? And how did its army get trained and equipped? And who pays its soldiers?  And why did it take Harper so long to act? And if this is the great and defining war against terror, how can we say we're pulling out after six months?

The six months is easy to explain. First, a six-month limit gives us a better chance to get out before this blossoms into a much, much bigger war. As further insurance, sending just aircraft (and only six of them) means that casualties are unlikely. Second, and more important, a pull-out in six months eliminates what could be a very damaging collision between the war and the next federal election - and the damage would be to Harper.

The catch is that this war might well go out of control before the six months is up. Then we are likely to find ourselves in a very big war that we can't get out of.

How did ISIS get trained and equipped? And who pays for its mercenaries? That's easy. It was the US and Saudi Arabia and the Emirates. The US has a long history of going to war against enemies it created. Saddam Hussein got his start as an assassin for the CIA. Later, the US paid and equipped him to invade Iran. Among other things, it supplied chemical weapons. Then they accused him of being such a bad man that they had to kill hundreds of thousands of innocent Iraqis, impoverish the country, and then hang Hussein so he would never tell the whole story.

(I once taught a student who, with his best friend, had been drafted into the Iranian army when Hussein attacked. In their first action, his friend was killed. My student was wounded, and crawled behind his dead friend for shelter from heavy fire. He spoke of the horror of lying there, and feeling the jolt of every bullet that hit his friend's body.)

Incidentally, the president of Argentina just yesterday at the UN delivered a blistering attack on the American government (and Saudi Arabia and the Emirates) for their creation and support of ISIS. She called ISIS their ally. But the Irving press didn't carry that story, either.

And how come a relatively small army could so easily rout an Iraqi government army twice its size that had long and expensive training and was supplied with excellent equipment? It was for the same reason that 400,000 Iraqi children starved to death. Congress voted the training of the Iraq army to be contracted out to private business. The result was that private business made huge profits. But very little training got done.

I wish we had a prime minister with guts like the President of Argentina. She's honest, too.

This war comes at a time when the American Empire is in freefall. Massive corruption and greed have destroyed its economy - along with the help of free trade that has allowed American business to abandon the US, and to invest in foreign countries (often dictatorships) where it can get away with - well -with murder. And does.

It is also losing control of its South American empire where major countries are moving their trade to Russia and China, and where Central America is controlled, but only by American-sponsored dictatorships (usually touted as "democracies") , brutality, and murder.

In short, the US, largely due to the dominance of big business which is concerned only with its own greed, is in serious trouble. It's in trouble with increasing trade competition with China and Russia - and with India about to become a much bigger factor.

Forget Obama. He's a puppet. American (and Canadian) big business may have decided that they have to go for world dominance now or never. And the war on ISIS might really be an excuse to close down Russian and Chinese trade to the middle east and to Africa. The sinners to be punished for trading with Russia and China are countries like Iran and Syria - and that's why Syria is included in the bombing.

It is quite possible that Russia and China will feel they have to respond - now or never. Indeed, the long term purpose of this war might well be to spark World War Three. Certainly, the manipulative tone of the North American press seems to point this way.

Okay. Easy to criticize. But what should Harper have done?

The middle east after years of war has a monstrous problem of refugees. The number? Who knows? Probably in the millions of people walking forever, carrying all they could salvage of their homes, starving, dying of exhaustion and age, risking their lives to get on boats that turn out to be deathtraps or, perhaps worse, owned by traders in human flesh - owners who use the refugees to provide organs at high prices for hospitals, for a sex trade that caters to all tastes, for slaves. Congo, where Canadian companies are very prominent in mining, puts children in the mines from the age of five or six to work until they die. Got a friend who's big on mining stocks? It might be interesting to check why mining stocks can be so profitable.

What Harper could do is to devote substantial help (NOT through private companies) to feed, house, clothe these refugees. Terrorism is the result of years of imposed terror and abuse. Responding with more of our own terrorism will not end it. Canada's record of useful help (and Harper's, in particular) is abysmal. Sending jets might the sexy thing to do. And it's certainly a sweet kiss to Obama's rear. But helping, really helping, is the only way to peace.

Forgive me for not being more gung ho patriotic. But I would take pride in knowing that Canada was leading in helping people. I take no pride knowing that Canada is sending six jets for six months to create more hatreds and killing.
_______________________________________________________________________________
There's really nothing much in the Times and Tribune. It's best summed up by the headline in the Sports section whenever there's a hockey game coming up. "Wildtown Catfight" (The local team is the Moncton Wildcats. Get the subtle humour?)

This is juvenile. Once, just once, it might be cute. But this has been done for every home game for years. It's time to grow up and move on. For a start, they might have a regular column of game analysis -just like real newspapers do.

Then there's the Oct. 4 editorial. Apparently, the collective knowledge of all the editorial staff does not extend beyond their bellybuttons. The editorial is ALWAYS local. This time it's about the fiscal greed of university teachers who have negotiated an increase of 3.5% to 5% over a period of three years.

Oh, horror! What savagery! Should we get six jets to bomb them?

Tell us, editors, what increases did big business execs get? Any comments on how the Irvings did? Are we really being fair to those poor dears? How come you never mention them?

The editorial notes that the president of UNB gets close to $350,000 (plus, I'm sure, some very pleasant perks). I've been that route; and I was astonished at the salary and the perks I was offered (and refused).
That because the Irvings of this world have decided to operate universities on the business model - with ridiculously generous contracts for executives, and starvation wages for the peasantry.

I quit high school teaching to spend five, expensive years in universities, training to be a professor. That was five years in which I had no income except for a $3,000 scholarship in the final three years. And, no. It wasn't enough. I had to borrow to stay alive. Effectively, that five years cost me all of five years' salary - and more with a debt that took me fifteen years to pay. On graduation, I got my first job - at UPEI.

It paid $9000 a year - LESS than I would have been earning if I were still teaching high school.

You editors want to talk about overpaid people? Then talk about the people who own you. Or - you could do a fascinating editorial about what editors make at Irving press - and why.

Norbert has his usual column of utterly useless suggestions to improve government.

Bill Belliveau talks in the usual propaganda tone of saving money by making systems like education and health more efficient. Right. This is the kind of financial advice that corporation bosses just love. More efficient. That choice of words implies you can save money without affecting the quality. But it really just means cutting their budgets- and destroying the quality.

Well, Belliveau has to help Mr. Irving cut the crushing burden of his taxes. Anyway, I'm sure Irvings send their kids to private schools. So what the hell.....
---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
The only column worth reading for either day is Alec Bruce in Section A, editorial page. He begins with a note that 52% of all the world's animals vanished from 1970 to 1910 - and the time we have left to fix that - and climate change - and weather patterns - and exhaustion of resources is running short. This is an intelligent, informed and important column.

There are many things in this world that produce money. But they also destroy animals, plants, land and, ultimately, us. There are (as our parents often told us) things we cannot have. This is a 'must read' column.
___________________________________________________________________________

in passing---
 Sweden has recognized Palestine as a state. Britain, too, will soon vote on it. Obama is not happy. I don't think the story can have met the high standards of TandT editors. Certainly, I couldn't find it.

Somewhere in the paper is a big item (it might be an ad) in full colour of yet another dingbat hall of fame in Wildtown, something to do with three junior achievers (who don't look junior) including Rob Irving. Well, you have to recognize his achievement after struggling against all odds to rise in the world.

And I must say that de Adder, the political cartoonist, is growing on me. His Saturday sketch of Harper as General  "blood and guts" Patton is great.

Finally, sorry to spend so much time on Harper and War. But the TandT (and I suppose the rest of the Irving press) must stand alone in Canada as having no-one with the ability to write some comment or analysis when the prime minister announced we're going to war.









     

Oct. 2: Skip the first nine pages of section A....

....there is nothing in them worth reading.

Then there's Norbert on the editorial page, sounding tough while avoiding the real issues. This one is a part of a series he's done to moan about our lack of interest in voting. His solution? People don't like the political parties - so we need need a box on the ballot to check off  "none of the above". Brilliant Norbert. I can just see the fevered lineups now of people taking time to vote so they can check off "none of the above".

And what a boon for democracy! We might, for example, get a government on the votes of just 20% of the electors.

Norbert, before you can solve a problem you have to think of the cause. But you really don't want to go there, do you?  One cause is your boss who makes no secret that he runs the province no matter who gets elected. Another cause is that New Brunswickers consistently vote Liberal and Conservative despite the fact that both parties have consistently betrayed them to big money.

Then there's you, Norbert, you and your lying paper. There's nothing you can do to change the attitude of your boss. There's nothing you can do to make the Liberal and Conservatives into honest whores. But, all by yourself, you could be a big help by looking at the real problems, and writing about them to stir up public thought. Think about it, Norbert. Or, well,at least think.

Alec Bruce has an excellent column on how determined Harper is to spend money on essential services like health, but he loosens up when it's for himself.  Remember the million or so dollars for his very political trip to Israel?  Well, he's now added perhaps a half million in all with a quiet unnecessary party in Ottawa for European delegates to the European free trade talks. Of course, he had to fly them to Ottawa at a cost of  over three hundred thousand dollars - plus a host of other costs.

Doesn't he have a senator who's facing legal charges for doing less than that?

Bruce's column is the only  item in secton A worth reading.
_________________________________________________________________________
B3 has an example of bad thinking and bad reporting ( though obviously approved by the editors.), "New Brunswick played vital role in Confederation, argues British prof".   Ged Martin, head of Canadian Studies at Edinburgh University gave a speech at UNB to, well, to say UNB was big force in  our confederation of 1867.

In the first place, the big force was the British government and British capitalists who wanted to build a railway across Canada for, among other things, a quicker link to the China market. But he didn't mention them. They needed a united Canada to give them lots of money and favours the project. Then they told John A. MacDonald to get on  his horse and deliver a united Canada.

Then professor Martin dumps on PEI as the birthplace of confederation, saying New Brunswick was more important. So it was. But importance had nothing to do with the title birthplace of confederation. The phrase  means that PEI was the first place that the idea of confederation was put forward to a gathering of colonial leaders. An historian should know that.

To cut a long story short, he concludes that New Brunswick played a major role in creating confederation. Well, it was important in the sense that one could not build a railway to an ocean port of the east coast without NB. But NB was not keen, and finally accepted  it only when it realized that, economically, it had no choice.

So why is this bad reporting? Well, here is a controversial story. A reporter, then, should also question people who might have a different opinion. We have four universities, all of them with Canadian historians. How come nobody was questioned?

As for the statement that the importance of NB is not mentioned in what  he calls "central Canadian textbooks"...........
In fact, everything he says appears in them. The only difference is Martin's spin. Oh - and the fact that "central Canadian historians" know what the word 'birthplace' means.

Is it silly to waste so much space on criticizing such an unimportant topic? Maybe.. If so, it's also silly for a newspaper to waste over a quarter of a page on it.
____________________________________________________________________________
On B7 is "Afghanistan Memorial vigil coming to Fredericton".. This is a large collection pictures of Canadians who died in the Afghanistan war "....combating terrorism, promoting peace,and creating a more secure environment for Afghans".

I can share the sadness. I'm old enough to remember family friends killed in World War Two, and survivors who suffered lives, usually short ones, of terrible illness after Japanese imprisonment. I had an older  friend who was crippled for life in Korea, and who died younger than he should have... But I have nothing but contempt for the self-righteous twit who wrote about how Canadian died to bring peace to Afghanistan.

1. How the hell do you bring peace to a country by invading it?
2, "...creating a more secure environment for Afghans." Really? How many people did you see wringing their hands and worrying about the security of Afghanistan?
3. And what security? The American invasion has thoroughly corrupted the country, killed numbers of civilians that our news media never bothered to report. and made it a paradise for drug barons who are now major suppliers to the world. As well, the US lost the war. That's why US troops have been committed to stay. Afghanistan is not free; it's a country with part of it under armed occupation. And its current government is a corrupt collection of US puppets.
4. How could those who died know what they were dying for? We were never told, ourselves. In fact, when the US invaded, the reason given was that the Taliban had provided a haven for those who bombed the World Trade Center in New York. In fact, there is not the slightest evidence the Taliban did any such thing - and the FBI has frequently said so.
5. If the war was  so vital, why did Harper pull out most of our troops long, long before it ended?
 The US army did not invade Afghanistan to bring peace and security. The US army is not the tooth fairy.

Why did we send those Canadians to die? I have every sympathy for those who died and for those who grieve. But I have nothing but contempt for those who make the Afghanistan war or any other war into a celebration of killing. What we should be talking about on Nov. 11 is how to get around the propaganda of war, and how to avoid wars that have nothing to do with protecting the Canadian people.

Instead, we now seem likely to send our aircraft into a war that has nothing to do with us - or with the American people. It is a war that developed out of a century and a half of western brutality and theft. Most Moslems in the Middle East and Africa hate,us, and for the best of reasons. Killing more Moslems will not make us more loved.

This is a war in which the US and Saudi Arabia are fighting against an army they equipped and paid for from the start. The Iraq army can't handle it because the US, in the best, capitalist fashion turned over the training of the new Iraq army to private contractors - who stole most of the money paid to them. (The same thing happened to most American aid to Haiti after its earthquake.)

This war, with its massive human damage not just in lives but in all the terrors and dangers of refugees by the millions, is a war being fought for the benefit of the greedy who want economic control of the Middle East. And it has implications for Iran, Russia, and China. Whatever Canada decides to do in this war will be immoral by any standard. Whatever it decides to do will contribute to the horror which the west has inflicted on that part of the world for a century. It also is very likely to pull us into a much bigger war..
________________________________________________________________________
For Thursday, the news in section A is, in the best Irving tradition, utterly trivial.

The editorial, well, it's a TandT editorial. It criticizes public service pensioners who are in court to force the government to respect the promised size of its pensions. The editorial disagrees. Of course. Mr. Irving doesn't need a pension. (Though I wouldn't be surprised if the government were to grant pensions to the whole Irving clan.)

Norbert writes the same column he's been writing for a week now - the poor turnout on voting day. As always, he doesn't even think of the cause of it - so what he says isn't worth reading.

Alec Bruce writes off the usual topic - on getting old. Oh, Mr. Bruce. Don't worry.Ninety isn't old.

Rod Allen polishes his ego.

Jody Dallaire has an important column on the "Sisters in Spirit Movement'. There are vigils being held in memory of Native women who have disappeared without much interest from any government authority. One vigil is Friday, 12.45 pm at New Brunswick Community College.

Then there's a letter to the editor, "Entrepreneurs demand...." Can we get rid of this pompous and misleading word? Entrepreneurs - I see that word daily in the Irving press. It's pretentious. And it's propaganda. And it's misleading

First, most people just say small businessman - which describes it very well.

Secondly, it's propaganda used to get small businessmen to think they have many issues in common with people like Irving. They don't.

Thirdly, an entrepreneur is a person who takes risks. Big business doesn't take risks.

Fourthly, the letter talks about how entrepreneurship creates prosperity. Hey - we're living through a bad recession which is a direct result of   big ''entrepreneurs' who messed up and are now making us all pay while they get even richer..Similarly, the US defense industry is run by very, very prosperous entrepreneurs; but very, very little of that money reaches the average American.

Then it gives us the Irving press line that entrepreneurs create prosperity. But they don't create prosperity. They're in business to get money, not to give it away.

Customers create prosperity. By contrast, entrepreneurship has caused massive poverty all over the world. Ask anybody in Africa, Asia or most of Latin America. And, indeed, you can now find the massive poverty in the US.
_____________________________________________________________________________
There's nothing in NewsToday that you can get  more easily (and more of)  on Google News. Well, one exception. B5 has a story on Dr. Cleary, our Chief Health Officer, who is in Nigeria working on the Ebola crisis. She's the one whose report on shale gas was dismissed by the Alward government. There is no word yet on what good works Mr Alward will be doing.
___________________________________________________________________________

Sorry to be late getting this one out. I was giving a class on, sort of, how we think.  It was fun.

Sept. 30: Go to Chapters at the Mall.....

Go in the front doors, and immediately take 7 or 8 steps to the right, then look right to the shelves devoted to New Brunswick books. You will see one in a white slipcover with red print, "Irving vs. Irving:: Canada's family billionaires and the stories they won't tell.

Funny the Irving press hasn't mentioned that book. I mean, you know, they're so keen on improving literacy in the province. Judging from their columns, the editors and columnists of the TandT all read  the book on how the New Brunswick economy is going off a cliff. You'd think a book about the boss would be required reading, too.

The author is a CBC TV reporter, Jacques Poitras and, from what I've seen so far in the book, he's a very good reporter - a real one who asks questions and does some digging. Certainly, Ryerson, an excellent journalism school, has a good opinion of him. You can check their review of his book at jpress.journalism.ryerson.ca   

One of the points that emerges is that the Irvings don't understand journalism at all. They think that, like everything, journalism should be run like a business. But a newspaper that is nothing but a business is useless to most readers. However, this fits into the simple-minded belief that everything - education, health care, government itself - should be run like a business. That's a constant theme in the Moncton Times and Transcript columns which has implied or actually said on many occasions that businessmen should be running the province.

Aside from being wrong, that's a profoundly anti- democratic opinion, and one that shows a profound ignorance of what governments and societies are all about.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Also missing from the news (I'll start with a few of these because there is almost nothing worth reading in yesterday's or today's papers) is a warning not to carry much money when travelling to the US. 

Going back to the panic created by 9/11, American governments have been dismantling the constitution to take away basic rights and freedoms. In one of these moves, police were given the right to confiscate anything, anything at all, from any person they think looks suspicious.

There's no need for a warrant or a hearing or evidence - or even a crime. They can just take. Typically, a car will be stopped for a traffic offense, any offence no matter how minor. The officer thinks the driver looks suspicious because he or she is sweating, or is wearing an unusual hat (I'm not exaggerating) or - horrors- is African-American or hispanic.

At that, the police search the car. In particular, they search for money. You have $200 in cash on you? Very suspicious. So they confiscate it. And it's almost impossible to get it back. The police then turn the money in to the station for the police pension fund or for improvements to the station. In some cases, they simply keep it for themselves. One officer in Texas was reported to have added tens of thousands to his bank account.

Since 911, this form of highway robbery has raised at least 2.5 billion dollars with California leading at 430 million. Maine is relatively light at 2 million. But watch out for New York at 241 million.

This warning also applies at border crossings and airports. You can check all this is the Washington Post for Sept. 6.

.......and all of that is a strong sign of the breakdown of a society....

__________________________________________________________________________

The TandT does have the story of massive defiance in Hong Kong where the Chinese government has refused to permit the continuation of even the limited form of democracy that Hong Kong had. But it leaves the impression that Hong Kong had democracy under the British. It never did.

When the British returned Hong Kong to China in 1997, one of the conditions was that it was to have democracy. The British, in some 150 years of British rule, put all power into the hands of a governor - who was always an Englishman appointed by the British government.

It was an absolute dictatorship. I know that well because I knew  (in fact, was related to) the governor's secretary). The secretary, an arrogant and racist man - like almost all the British in Hong Kong throughout its history - had his own, absolute power. He once banned a movie ("Shampoo" with Warren Beatty) simply because he disapproved of it. When I taught journalism there, I found the English journalism students (already working at one of the two, English papers) to be racially arrogant, paid much more than Chinese for doing the same work, and promoted way over their little heads.

Late in the day, the British permitted an elected Legislative Council to advise the government. But that should not be confused with democracy. It was a government of the rich and well-connected.

The leaders of China are no sweethearts. But neither are those leaders of countries on our side. I fear what is almost certain to happen in Hong Kong. I still have Hong Kong friends that I correspond with by e mail. But I have stopped sending them posts because it might well get them into trouble.

Gwynne Dyer (nice to see him back) has an excellent column on this in the TandT for Wednesday. And it's not an optimistic one.

______________________________________________________________________

The Canadian Security Intelligence Service (the ones who spy on us) is said to spy on Canadian citizens who are environmentalists and other "disturbers" (as police often call them). Most of these, by far, are ordinary, law-abiding citizens. But not in the eyes of our police state. It spends millions spying on them (as the RCMP once spied on Tommy Douglas because he was dangerous man for having introduced medicare.)

CSIS hits on environmentalists, critics of the government, anybody who's not in line as Harper wants them to be. Then they hand over all that information to Canadian big business. Irving, almost certainly, gets that information. Then they hand it over to US intelligence for their police state.

So Harper decided this had to be investigated ( he was under a lot of pressure to do so). So he appointed a committee of investigators. However, it turns out that at least three of them might have been suspected of not being impartial. One was formerly on the board of TransCanada Pipelines. Another was on the board of Enbridge. And the third is a registered lobbyist for Enbridge.

_____________________________________________________________________________

And in Pakistan, something happened that daily happens all over the world - but seldom gets reported.

Five people were killed by an American drone. Were they proven guilty of anything? Or even charged? No. Were they innocent civilians? Quite possibly. It happens every day. But we very seldom hear about it.

It's what is called a war crime under international law. But we never hear about that, either.

_____________________________________________________________________________

Yesterday, driving by the Dumont Hospital, I saw cluster of people holding up anti-abortion signs, advising us all to "Pray to God to end abortions". And I guess many people would call them devout Christians.

Without taking any side on the question of abortion, I would call them self-righteous hypocrites.

Their opposition is based on the commandment "Thou shalt not kill". Fine. That's a good commandment. But it doesn't refer just to placenta in the womb. And to suggest it does, indicates a pretty selective use of the Bible. 

Our society stands on mounds of dead reaching all the way back to Abel. We kill every day. We kill by war, by starvation, we kill by the millions. And right now we're gearing up to kill a lot more.

Those same people with their signs also must have noticed "Thou shalt not covet". But we live under an economic system that rewards coveting and greed. You can find worship of this every day in the pages of the Times and Transcript. You can attend the Irving Chapel to hear the word from an eminent clergyman, and to hear special music (which must please God enormously), all in this temple to greed.

There's a lot to object to in this world. But I really detest self-righteous twits who choose to attack only those sins they see in others, and to ignore the greater, much greater sins that they, themselves, commit.

I think I might make a sign to carry around, "Pray God to spare us from hypocrite fundamentalists"

___________________________________________________________________________

And that doesn't leave me much room for what IS in the TandT.

The paper is still carrying news stories about World War 1, but without much connection to each other or any general outline I can determine. I particularly regret we haven't seen a piece  on Sir Arthur Currie, 

Currie, who took over command of all Canadian troops in Europe in 1917, was arguably the best commander Canada ever produced. That was quite an accomplishment for a man who had never seen battle, who had been a teacher and a businessman, and whose only military experience was as a part-time militia officer.

The British commanders were almost all career soldiers, and with battle experience. Most of them were also pretty awful. Currie, a thoughtful man and a meticulous planner - and a creative man, so distinguished himself that the British prime minister spoke of putting him in command of all Empire troops. At meetings of the high command, Currie would often correct his chief, Earl Haig in order to save lives of allied soldiers. Once, when Haig said that he had a huge artillery force on hand, Haig corrected his number to a much smaller one. "I counted them on the way here", he said. Before battles, he would predict what the losses would be. And he was right.

His greatest victory was over the Germans at Vimy Ridge, a seemingly unattackable position. It's now also the site of a memorial to the Canadians who died there - and one of the most moving memorials I have seen.

In a war of blundering generals with years of experience, Sir Arthur Currie stood out as an inspiring figure. And he had accomplished all that by the time he was barely forty.

___________________________________________________________________________

Then there's the story on B5 that a Canadian businessman in Cuba has been sentenced to 15 years for bribery and corrupting of officials. He's one of a large number of businessmen and government employees caught up in Castro's anti-graft drive. Canadian M.P. Peter Kent is horrified, reminding us all of the horrors of Cuban courts and demanding that Canada bring him home.

Let's seen now. The US took a Canadian in Afghanistan as a prisoner of war - though the Canadian was  underage, and such an arrest illegal. He was tortured - illegal. He was kept in the camp at Guantanamo - illegal.  He was tried by a US military tribunal - illegal. ( And military tribunals are bloody awful courts.)

Canada said not a word. When the US released him to us, Canada promptly put him in a maximum security prison (which is hell on earth). And tough-on-crime Parker will make sure he never gets out.

But this Canadian in Cuba isn't a child, And he's an entrepreneur - so we gotta protect him.

The hilarious part is toward the end. "Foreign business people have long considered payoffs.......to be an unavoidable cost of doing business in Cuba."

Well, businessmen have a choice, don't they? They can refuse to do business in Cuba. Nobody is forcing them to go there.  (Gee, mommy, I have to do drugs to fit in with my friends.)

So that's the price of doing business in Cuba? Well, them there Cubans is iggerant. No company in Canada would ever dream of encouraging corruption or of buying political help by making campaign contributions to political parties. I mean, you look at Irving and Alward and the forestry deal. You know, two gentlemen sitting down to make an agreement that is fair and is the best one for the people of New Brunswick.

In effect, this "news" story becomes an attack on Cuba for trying to stop corruption.
_________________________________________________________________________
On B3 for Monday, Obama (whose nose grows longer every day) tells us that Sunnis and Shiites are the biggest cause of conflict in the world. That must be another very selective interpretation of "Thou shalt not kill".)

Neither Monday's nor Tuesday's edition has any news worth reading.

On the editorial page, Alec Bruce has a good (and important) column on the need for proportional representation. That would give us a much more representative group of MLAs than we now have.

Norbert has a bozo column about how we could improve our political system by making suggestions, etc.to the MLAs. Norbert, proportional representation would do that far more effectively. You also miss the central problem of New Brunswick politics (and not just those of New Brunswick.)

Our political parties - as well as those in Canada and the US - have no philosophy of what kind of a society they want. An election is like hiring somebody to fix up little things around the house -new light bulbs, make the toilet flush, tighten a few screws...... There's no big picture. There's just "neat ideas".

You have to start with philosophy of what kind of society we need. Then you work from that framework.

Lacking that, all you get is Irvingville.

That's why your paper comments only on how he have to get more money  (with the unspoken rule that we must not ask the rich to pay their share.) I see very little general discussion of what kind of a New Brunswick we want. Or what kind of a Moncton.

On op ed,  Craig Babstock writes about an advertising video that appeared in Vancouver. I have no idea why he thought this was worth writing about.

Steve Malloy does his regular, good job.

For Tuesday, Alec Bruce is a (rare) disappointment. He writes about the problems facing the new premier. Please. Decisions in this province are not made by the premier. So he has nothing to think about - a task for which his election campaign showed him to be well talented.

Norbert has another column on the the neat tricks that he thinks are what government is about. It's not, Norbert. It's about the vision of the kind of society you want to see. It's about  morality. It's about concern for all people. It's about a fair distribution of the wealth this province produces.

Craig Babcock talks about the problem of ballot counting - going completely off the point on the implications of the fault. We need a recount of all the seats!!! Until then, the government will never have the full trust that it must have if it is to govern. In turning down the idea of a full recount, Gallant has made his first, big blunder as premier. Brace yourself for more.
____________________________________________________________________________

There is very little foreign news in these papers. So I got some figures together.

The US military has some 1,370,000 serving members.
Saudi Arabia has 200,000.
France has 109,000
Britain has 205,000.

That's just about 2,000,000 in the military strength for the coalition force the US is using to attack ISIS.

But there aren't the only countries. There's Canada, the rest of NATO...The coalition must have close to 3,000,000 members. (Yes, I know some of them are clerks and janitors. But they're still a pretty big force.)

The coalition also represents most of the richest nations on earth, so they are well supplied with the latest equipment for land, sea and air. Their purposed  is to crush ISIS which has no air force, no navy, no air defences, And it has some 20,000 soldiers.

Obama feels it necessary to outnumber them over 1,300 to one. What is going on here? Possibilities -
1. Obama is doing what Britain did in the Boer War when it got the colonies to join in the fight against Dutch colonial farmers who were outnumbered 2 to 1 even just against Britain. The point of it was to warn potential European enemies (and the colonies) that in future, anybody who Britain disliked would be at war not just with Britain, but with the whole Empire. You fight me; you fight my gang.

Part of the concern here is something rarely mentioned. The US is (slowly) losing its grip on South America. The policy of expanding to world domination left it vulnerable not only in its overseas empire, but in its empire next door.

2. Obama wants to crush Syria and Iran and anybody else who wants to develop trade relations with Russia or China. The US wants that market for itself. It is also concerned that such trade links could lead to the abandonment of the US dollar as the standard of world trade. And that would leave the US, the most heavily indebted country in history, in an economic collapse.

3. And perhaps it's all of these combined for the great effort that began almost 20 years ago as The American Century, the conquest of the world.  It's quite insane. But it is taken very seriously indeed by very wealth, and very influential people in the US. It's because of people like that we have the commandment, "Though Shalt Not Kill".

And yes, any war, especially one fought from the air, is going to kill a lot of innocent people. In fact, it is now a general rule that such wars kill more civilians that soldiers.
_____________________________________________________________________________

I apologize for the length of this. I have to learn to write shorter blogs.