Thursday, January 7, 2016

Jan. 7: How time flies when you're having fun.

It is now 2 p.m., and my breakfast copy of the Moncton Times and Transcript has yet to arrive. However, there is enough news around so we can get along without it.

We'll start with an issue the news media rarely mention. Israel as a Jewish state. I dislike the idea of that because the implication is that Jews are not only a nation, but a race. In fact, there is no such thing as a race. And the term is inevitably used as Hitler used it – to make it official that a certain people are intellectually and morally superior to others. In fact, all us white folks in the west – Britain, France, Spain, Italy, Canada, U.S. have used the word 'race' with that meaning. (You have not met really obnoxious arrogance and racism until you meet officials from those countries in places like China. In Hong Kong, I taught reporters, both Chinese and British who worked for The South China Morning Post. The Brits got paid more than the Chinese for the same job – though I found the Chinese to be better students. And it was clear the Brits saw themselves as a superior lot.)

Judaism is a religion. Zionism is the belief that Jews have the right to take over a country on the very flimsy basis of a belief it is a land God gave to them. There's a lot wrong with that.

In the first place, the only people on earth who live in their original homeland are Africans. (I thought my original homelands were Scotland and France – and Canada. In fact, DNA shows that I'm mostly Irish and Spanish with a hint of western Asia barbarian.)

If Canada and the U.S. seriously believed in the concept of homeland, we would go back to where we came from, and leave it to our aboriginal people.

As well, the Jews of the middle east are a different people from most of the Jews of Europe, Canada and the U.S. They don't have the slightly olive skin of the Sephardic Jews who lived in Israel. Indeed, they look quite European. That's because, many centuries ago, some Europeans were converted to Judaism. And they dominated among the ones who came to the Americas. Oh, yes, they commonly commonly have a trace of Israeli origins – about as much as I have of a west Asian barbarian.

This is more important than it seems because the concept of Zionism as a race encourages Jews to see themselves as superior to others. Thus their brutal treatment of Palestinians. Inevitably, the concept of race leads to racism. And modern Israel is heavily racist.

And that puts it quite out of step with the religion of Judaism. I can certainly understand the desire of European Jews of the 1940s and later for a homeland. But it was bad for us, and bad for Judaism, to take the land of other peoples (who included Sephardic Jews) and hand it over to others as Israel. It would have been far better, for us and for them, to welcome them to Canada.

My that's a long lead-in to a group called True Torah. These are Israeli Jews who are very, very orthodox Jews. They would agree with what I have said above. They're included here in a site from PBS.

To reinforce the above, here's a story from Israel's Haaretz.

Israel's Haaretz, unlike our own, dear Irving press, is one of the best papers in the world. So here's its opinion on Netanyahu's treatment of arab Israelis.


Last night, I watched Donald Trump on TV. It was scary. I really couldn't tell whether he was lying, was hopelessly ignorant of American and world issues, or was insane. But it was one of those.

I don't think he'll win the presidency. But it scares the hell out of me that so many Americans approve of him. And it scares the hell out of me that most of the other Republican candidates and Hillary have values and ideas that are not really very different.

The U.S. is a country facing very serious economic problems, dominated by big money, in a very advanced state of racism with all the threat that poses to social order, a country in which the very rich are systematically robbing everybody else (much like Canada), in which every person has been taught a fairy tale of what their history is and what kind of people they are, and in which citizens have more guns than any other country in the world – guns that include machine guns, anti-tank guns, and (quite seriously) artillery.

It also has deep and dangerous social problems including severe poverty combined with lack of help, a crumbling public education system, perhaps the world's highest level of murders, mass murders, police murders, general crime, the biggest prison system in the world (and a very bad one)….it goes on.

And of all the leadership candidates, only one (Democrat Bernie Sanders) has noticed these problems exist.

I wrote a long time ago that the American empire is in danger of collapse. And I fear the collapse may come even earlier than I had expected.

Then there's a story about the Keystone XL project, the one to send Canadian oil by pipeline through the U.S. Obama, as you will remember, refused to allow it. (I don't know whether the Irving press will have it. It's now 3:10 pm. And I'm still waiting for my breakfast paper.) The American government is getting sued for that by Canadian big oil. For $15 billion.

But that's not the important part of the story. The important part is that Canadian big oil is……

….USING THE TERMS OF THE NAFTA FREE TRADE DEAL TO SUPPORT ITS CASE.

Of course. Free trade deals have been a way for major corporations to close down factories in their homelands, the re-open them in really cheap salary countries. That's been obvious. But they are also designed to kill the power of governments to protect their own people. To put it another way, they are designed to take away the power of all of us to protect our own people and ourselves against irresponsible business practices.

That should have been clear when Mulroney put this deal forward. Mulroney spent his whole life kissing up to the very rich. That's why he now lives in a huge mansion in Montreal. Oh, he did get caught for accepting bribe of a suitcase full of money while he was prime minister. But Stephen Harper was gentle. He accepted Mulroney's apology for using 'bad judgement'. And no more was said about it. After all, if you can't accept a bribe, what's the point of being in politics?

Obama turned down the pipeline because he thought it too dangerous for the nation that had elected him president. Most of the American people seem to have felt the same way. But NAFTA makes it possible to punish Americans for wanting to control their own country. $15 billion.
5:06 p.m. Just got my Irving press paper. (I went out, and bought it.)

The only parts worth reading are the commentaries by Alec Bruce and Justin Ryan – as well as Aurelie Pare's health column on C6. The editorial continues with its usual fretting about how to make a buck for some business, while ignoring what the people of this province need.

World news is both limited and trivial. There's a story about North Korea's claim to have an H bomb, but it doesn't really say anything – except that Canada can't do anything. (Ever notice that when our side has a bomb like that, it's a 'deterrent'? But when the other side has one, it's a 'threat'.)

Skip the story, and just read the last sentence. “Activists suggested a very specific role for Canada: lobby hard to push NATO to give up its own reliance on nuclear weapons as a strategic deterrent.”

It doesn't (not even on the sports page) have the story that Kingston, Ontario and Windsor, Nova Scotia are fighting over which is the birthplace of hockey.

Forget it.

Hockey was being played before there was even a Canada. In Britain, it was a popular game called 'shinty'. When I was a kid, we still called a pick-up game shinty or shinny. There are 18th century paintings of Dutch children skating and with sticks on the canals. The name hockey, incidentally, comes from the French hoquet. And some form of the game probably goes all the way back to a caveman walking on a frozen creek, picking up fallen limb and wacking a small rock with it.

The modern game, with standard rules, the one which has a continuous history as an organized sport, was first played in Montreal in 1875. It was, like almost all organized sport of the time, to be played only by gentlemen (rich people who didn't take money for playing.) Lord Stanley saw an early game in Montreal. That's why his Stanley Cup was dedicated to amateurs only.

Canadians are the best hockey players in the world. Most of the Swedes in the World Cup were actually Canadians.

New Brunswickers might be interested in an article that Paul Bennett of coalition of rural schools/la coalition des ecoles rurales sends on. It might come as a spark to light up the New Brunswick confusion. There is hope.



It might also be useful to read this opinion about the monarchy of Saudi Arabia, our very good friends, and the ones we are selling $15 billion of armoured cars to. And the author, Robert Fisk, is among the greatest of journalists.
(By the way, I could use guidance here from a weapons expert. As I understand it, armoured cars are rarely much use on a battlefield. Their guns are feeble; their armour is thin; and they are poor at going crosscountry. What they are good at is attacking civilians on the paved roads of a city. If so, is it possible the king is worried about uprisings in his kingdom?)

http://www.independent.co.uk/voices/comment/saudi-arabia-has-nothing-to-worry-about-no-state-has-the-moral-authority-to-attack-this-butchery-a6795006.html


I have more. But I think it's time to quit for the day, and turn on the TV for Thomas the Tank Engine.

Wednesday, January 6, 2016

Jan. 6: A very ugly world

“Grandmother in poverty lives with no heat, power or water.” That's the front page, lead headline in the Irving press. And so it should be. The provincial government hasn't answered her requests. The local MLA will contact the government department on this—um-- when he has time in a few days.

I wonder how long premier Gallant would wait to return a call from JDIrving?

The story is an important one. In this province, a senior executive with a large corporation already had almost $50,000, the average yearly salary in this province – and got it by working from nine to noon hour just yesterday, the first day of work for the year. In this province, we can afford a hundred million dollar hockey rink – but we dither about serious problems of malnutrition and homelessness – and we leave most of these problems to charities (which are supported, mostly, by private companies for advertising by getting their pictures and company names into the paper while smiling and holding up big cheques.)

Of course, times are tight, so we don't want to tax our rich (who are already some of the most lightly taxed people in the world.) We gotta fire teachers, and invent new taxes for the common slobs, and cut services for them.

The story doesn't say all this. Nor should it. It's a news story, not a commentary. It's a good news story and, in fact, the only one worth reading in section A. But, damn, there should be a commentary on this.

However, the big lesson preached in the editorial is we should not let our homes burn down. Brian Cormier's column says much the same. A woman has to live with virtually no money in a shack that has no heat or electricity or water? Yawn.

Norbert has a quite decent column on converting the old Moncton High into a museum – though I hope it would be a better one than the Resurgo museum.

Alec Bruce has a thoughtful and thought-provoking column on attracting refugee families to New Brunswick. For a start, I know that refugees who speak a different language, and who are fleeing horrors are not going to cheer for a school system that has oversized classes and is firing teachers.
These are children who have missed years of school and years of any sort of normal life. This is not a time for the government of New Brunswick to do its usual half-assed job of dealing with a challenge.

What I fear will be the major story of the year gets only a brief mention in the four-page Canada and World section – and it really tells us very little. I'm not surprised. I don't think that this casual treatment of an important event is trivial. No. I've come to the conclusion that the responsible news editor simply doesn't know enough about the news to know which stories are important.

The king of Saudi Arabia executed a leader of a religious group which is the minority religious group in Saudi. But it is the majority group in Iran. Nor does there seem to have been much reason to execute him or even to imprison him. (Saudi Arabia quite possibly has the worst human rights record in the world.) Infuriated Iranis stormed Saudi embassies in Iran. The Iranian government immediately acted to break up the rioting. And it immediately apologized to Saudi Arabia.

Result? The king ignored the apologies, and severed relations with Iran. The U.S, Britain and France (I don't have a complete list) immediately followed to sever their relations with Iran, an act which threatens retaliation, possibly even invasion. Our press will show the Iranians as evil.

There is a reason why Saudi Arabia executed that, particular cleric. It wanted a reaction from Iran. The execution (or murder) of a religious leader highly regarded by a large majority of Iranians who shared his religious views was intended to get a reaction from Iran that would give the Saudis an excuse for war.

Even more disturbing is the fact that the U.S., Britain, and France reacted so quickly. That suggests they knew, even before the execution, what this is all about. And it suggests they, too, want a war against Iran.

That's nothing new. Britain and the U.S. joined hands to destroy the democratically elected government of Iran about fifty years ago. They then installed a brutal (and stupid) dictator, The Shah. And they did it all satisfy the desire of American big oil to control Iran. After years of suffering, of poverty, of torture, the people of Iran kicked out the Shah, and re-established an elected government, this time, not surprisingly, with much of the leadership coming from Muslim clerics.

Ever since, big oil has wanted another dictatorship in Iran. They especially want it now as Russia is showing signs of being competitive in the middle east. The U.S. government works for big oil. And Britain and France work to kiss up to the U.S. This is a war, if it comes, that will pit capitalists around the world against each other; it probably will pit the U.S. and NATO against Russia (and China), and it could create the bitterest of wars within Islam, itself – and that bitterness would run all the way through Africa, much of Asia, and into Russia.

And there is really only one motive – to make oil billionaires richer.

This is kind of an important piece of news. Too bad there's nobody at the Irving press who understands that. And there's another implication in all this. Big oil has no interest whatever in encouraging renewable energy. That means, for New Brunswick, that premier Gallant is going to approve fracking.

Oh, yes, there's also a story worth reading on B3. “At least 2,250 (Canadian) veterans are homeless, report says”. You remember veterans? These are the ones everybody claps for on Nov. 11, and everybody says we must never forget them. In fact, the forgetting begins every Nov. 12, and it's been characteristic of any Canadian government I have ever heard of. (Ditto the the U.S. and Britain.) And it's always been that way. Try this poem by Kipling.


I think we should remember on Nov. 11. But I think we should remember the truth and the whole truth. Soldiers may well believe they are going to war for God and country. But the reality is that God and country rarely have anything to do with war. Almost all wars are fought to satisfy somebody's greed. That's what caused the Boer War, World Wars 1 and 2, Vietnam, Iraq, Afghanistan, Syria.

You think we had to fight Hitler because of his murder of Jews? I can agree with that. But that's not why we went to war. The reality is that Canada, in 1939 and later, much later, was as anti-semitic as Germany was. So was Britain.

What was the glorious, patriotic and noble cause ordained by God in Afghanistan? The cause was for Canadians to die in order to make the American government seem to be on a righteous cause in that war. Righteousness, patriotism and God had nothing to do with it. The American government invaded Afghanistant because that's whatAmerican big money wanted. And Canadian big money had to be on good terms with American big money if it wanted big profits. That's why Canadians died in Afghanistan.

Some day, I wish Canadian military historians would tell the truth instead of kissing up to whoever is running The Legion at the time.

Gosh, it's already a long post – and I haven't even started on the material I've saved.

Yesterday, the CBC had a story that, I guess, the editors at Irving press didn't think was important. Greenland ice is melting far more quickly than was expected. That has created thousands of new rivers, carrying their waters to the sea, there to bring us higher tides. But, hey, it's only water. And it'll give us extra water to dump our fracking chemicals into.

A reader sent the following site to me. I haven't yet had time to read as much of it as I want to. But it looks promising. It certainly has a socialist bias, but that's not a sin. And we cheerfully, every day, read news that's so far right wing it's way beyond capitalism. It's just the gospel of greed.

Then, this one was sent to me by the same person. And I know this one is the truth. Empires, all of them, are not about glory. They're not about “….make her victorious, happy and glorious…). They're about greed, murder, torture, impoverishment to enrich a few… That was true of the Greek Empire, the Roman Empire, the British Empire, The French Empire, the Spanish and Portuguese Empires, Hitler's Empire, the Russian Empire, and now the American Empire.

http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/the_american_empire_murder_inc_20160103


And, from the same reader,


I also try to do some reading on my own. This one caught my eye. (Alas, I didn't write down the source.)

Canada has a contract to sell 15 billion dollars worth of armoured cars to Iran. These would be useful for killing Yemenis, of course, as well as for calming down any, you know, unfortunate situations in Saudi Arabia, itself. The deal was completed under Harper, of course, but---

Canada, with other countries has long pledged not to sell weaponry to nations with bad human rights records. Now, Egypt is at least a contender for the worst human rights record in the world. So the smiling and charming Justin Trudeau with his lovely wife said, “The sale must go ahead.” Well, yeah. I mean, there a lot of profit in their for some eager businessman. I think my first assessment of Justin was the right one.

And where is the story about the 150 or so armed 'militia' who have illegally taken over a government building in Oregon? Isn't that kind of serious? I mean, if I illegally took over a Tim Horton's, and waved my nail clipper, shouting that I would kill any cop or soldier who bothered me, I'd be knocked down immediately by the cashier girl. 150 heavily armed men have taken over a government building, have said they will shoot if police or the army intervene, and the Irving press editors sit around with their faces hanging out?

Gee. I wonder what would happen if they were Muslims? What would happen if they were African-Americans?

There are many and varied versions of a story about Michele Obama floating around. It's true, sort of. She does have a huge and very expensive staff as president's wife, bigger by far than any predecessor. (Most presidents have made to with one secretary for the president's wife.) She also just loves expensive hotels, government jets, flying to Paris to get her hair done. It's quite possible that she and her husband in the past year have spent over a billion dollars of tax payers' money on personal entertainment.

Something serious is going on. But many, far too many, of the sources are gossip mags. I've known for a while there is a story there. But a trustworthy one is hard to find.
Then there's The Guardian that has an excellent story on Donald Trump.

And add this one.

http://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/video/2016/jan/06/dont-let-trump-fool-you-rightwing-populism-is-the-new-normal-video


The Irving Press continues to think the wage gap is narrowing around the world. Duh… The reality is that the wealthy around the world are robbing the poor and giving themselves money at a rate never before seen. That's why premier Gallant is looking to cut costs and services in an 'austerity' budget. Of course. That takes money from everybody but the wealthy. It's robbing the poor to give to the rich. And it's a sure fire recipe for an economic depression.

If you want prosperity, you don't get it by hammering the poor, and kissing the rear ends of the rich. That's what caused the great depression. You can't build prosperity on the base of a low income population. You have to distribute money to the poor. They then spend it – and that how real entrepreneurs make money. You're not going to see any 'resurgo' in Moncton or New Brunswick when it has a minimum wage of 10 bucks an hour . The Kings, Queens and aristocrats of Imperial Britain had piles of money which they took from China and India and South Africa – but damn little ever found its way into the pockets of miners or factory workers. The slums of Imperial Britain were as vile as any in the world. And the lives of slum-dwellers and the homeless were just as short as they had always been.

But don't worry. If New Brunswick gets so poor it begins to smell bad, the wealthy will move somewhere else.
_______________________________________________________________________________

This is getting long – and I have a whole bunch of items from Information Clearing House to list.
This one appears in The Guardian, but was reprinted by ICH. Have you seen anything about Bernie Sanders in the Irving press.? Not likely. Read the item below, and compare Sanders to all the other leadership candidates for both parties.


The next source is by Paul Craig Roberts – and he's one of the best sources in the world.


And I have piles of others. But it's getting late. The reality is that New Brunswick and Canada have very serious problems that are not going to be solved by voting Liberal or Conservative or NDP (at least, not the NDP as it is now.) The reality is that the people of New Brunswick and of Canada have to start thinking now and they have to start talking to each other now. If we drift along in dreamland, next summer we may well be remembering those who died for God and Queen and country in Syria or Libya or Iraq or Afghanistan or even China.

Oh, there's another story that the eagle eye of the news editor at Irving press missed. North Korea has tested a hydrogen bomb.
And a thank you to columnist Louise Gilbert. On the advice of her column, I went walking at the Coliseum. I breathed a little heavily, but did a couple of kilometres as a starter. The only bad part of it was so often being passed and left in the dust by little, old ladies using canes, crutches and walkers.


Can they be asked to leave?

Tuesday, January 5, 2016

Jan. 5: Just thinkin'

Norbert Cunningham, the noted columnist and education authority who writes for the Irving press, has read a book. I'm so happy. It's a book by Stephen Pinker on how the level of violence has been declining in the world for centuries. (Actually, Norbert, Pinker spells his first name 'Steven'.) 

Hitler wrote a book, too. So did Mao. I can't wait for Norbert's column on those.

Now, Professor Pinker undoubtedly has a first-rate mind. But even first-rate minds can have failings. That's why good newspapers have book review sections. People read those to get a general idea of how experts feel about a book. Pinker's book has some excellent reviews. It also has lots of quite critical ones. Read the book, Norbert. Read the reviews, good and bad. Then think about it all. Don't confuse publication with fact. (I have to admit that I am not an admirer of Pinker's theory about the decline of violence. Just for a start, there are not, even today, accurate and reliable statistics on war deaths. And for most of the wars of history, there are no statistics at all. And, even if violence is in decline, remember that these days just one act of violence could wipe out the world.)

And what is violence? It's not just war. It's also condemning people to live in slavery or under crushing poverty as is happening all over the world. Don't just read, Norbert. Think.

Then he thanks Pinker and Gwynne Dyer (regarding Gwynn's column of last week in the Irving press.) He congratulates both for 'noting the facts'. The fact, Norbert, is that neither of them noted what you call 'the facts'. Both expressed opinions, using information that might or might not be factual or complete. Life is not simply a game of true and false. (I also have to admit I thought Dyer unduly optimistic in that column.)

Then he quotes The Atlantic which carried a front page story about how the income gaps between the developed and the undeveloped world have shrunk. I'm not even sure what that means. Nor do I know what it means to the western world. The undeveloped world is still many, many years from providing decent life. And the income gaps in the western world have been growing.

Then he's critical of a CBC panel of what he calls 'so-called experts'. They were critical of the story on wage gaps that appeared in The Atlantic. (When he says 'so-called experts', all he means is that he doesn't agree with them.) The CBC panel said, for example, that the prosperity of China skews the world balance. Norbert says this is laughable because there were rises in countries like India, too. Then, a sentence later, he says later that we cannot disregard a China that contains 19.24 percent of the world's population. Read carefully. Those two sentences contradict each other.

And we need to look at the 'facts' about New Brunswick issues. His first 'facts' are 1. New Brunswick schools are inferior and 2. it is not necessary to have small classes.

Norbert – New Brunswick schools are rated among the best in the world – and not just in relation to the third world but in relation to the U.S. The fact that children are low in literacy is not because of the schools. It's because of the high proportion of parents who see no value in literacy, and who therefore tolerate underfunding of libraries, and who discourage their children from any sort of thinking at all. This is a province of parents who will gladly spend a hundred million – essentially for a hockey team – but will happily cut spending for public education.

Norbert, like most people, begins with his opinion (or prejudice), then cherrypicks the evidence to find the 'facts' that justify his opinion. There are lots of people all over the world who do that. For example, the Bible says 'Thou shalt not kill'. And you will see the devout bearing signs to that effect standing outside places that perform abortions.

Well, “Thou shalt not kill” is a fact ---- unless you're killing a foreigner for your government. Then you are a patriot and a hero. We are part of a section of the world that has killed over (some say over twice that many) fifteen million foreigners in the last 40 years. Most of them were civilians right down to babies. It has also dreadfully tortured huge numbers. It was all done by heroes. That's why we don't see our fundamentalist neighbours carrying signs denouncing that kind of killing.

How would you put those facts together, Norbert? How would you get past the contradiction in them?

Oh, I know. Most of the people we killed weren't Christian. We are patriotic. Fact. Conclusion? God wants us to kill non-Christians.

Fact. Mr. Irving built and maintains a chapel for all of us at his own expense. Conclusion? Mr. Irving is a man of God, motivated primarily by the tenets of his faith. (Do I have to explain the falsity of that argument?)

Norbert, the biggest problem in New Bruswick, as a province, faces is that it does not think. I don't know whether that's a hangover from rural days of fear of offending neighbours or of being 'different'. Or maybe it has something to do with the historic dominance of those who have always controlled the job market in New Brunswick.

Whatever the case, I have lived in four provinces, and three countries. I have never seen a society as lethargic in its thinking and as unwilling to engage in open discussion. Even the China of the 1980s was intellectually freer than New Brunswick is. And I see very little engagement of the universities with the general public. And the most popular churches actively discourage thinking by making people believe that religion is all about faith.

The whole world is changing rapidly – economically, politically and socially. But New Brunswick is still stuck in 1867, and with only propaganda newspapers to inform it. The lack of principle on the part of the major political parties is stunning – but people still plod to the polls to vote for the old parties. And even the NDP in this province is rapidly becoming just one of the old parties.

In discussing government or economics or the society, we don't start with the 'facts'. It's not a science like chemistry in which one can mix two tablespoons of hydrogen and one of oxygen, stir them in a glass, and then drink it as water. (I think.)

To think, we have to start with fundamental principles and values. That's not quite the same as starting with an opinion. We need to determine what principles or values we have or want to have; then we gather information, share it, discuss, maybe change our minds to a greater or lesser degree based on that information, sharing and discussing.

Notice I did not mention facts. It's too easy (as Norbert unintentionally shows) to believe in 'facts' that are not facts at all, or are only partial facts, or are just the ones we choose to be facts.

The problem in New Brunswick (and in some other places) is very, very serious. This society is not functioning very well even as it is. In a very few years, we shall watch a massive rise of robots in industry. What will happen then?

Will big employers retain their human work staffs at livable wages and benefits, but with much shorter working hours?

Or will they hire much smaller numbers of humans – and also cut salaries and benefits because the high rate of unemployment makes it possible to do that? And will that give us another book on The Edge of the Cliff that advocates even more austerity?

What will be the effect of trade treaties that make it possible for companies to ignore our laws? That's what's happening now.

With our aircraft in Iraq, we may well find ourselves trapped into an escalating war in the middle east. Why is Trudeau so slow to honour his election promise to recall those aircraft ? Six aircraft are scarcely crucial to the war effort. Nor it is any business of Canada. (It must be of no business to Canada. That's part of what Canadians decided when they elected the Liberals. It's exactly like the situation when Harper recalled Canadian troops from Afghanistan.)

And if Canada enters a war, do we appeal to young people to fight for God and country? If you believe in God, do you seriously believe He wants us to kill people? In World War Two, Canadians fought for God and country. So did the Naziis. Hitler was a devout Christian. Harry Truman, who dropped two, nuclear bombs on Japanese, civilian cities, was also a Christian. And in all countries, the churches and other religions largely supported the war.

God and country. But you can't serve two masters. That's what Norbert would call a 'fact'. So, sometimes, we have to choose – one or the other.
Alec Bruce has written a column suggesting that fracking can be quite safe, and would create jobs. Obviously, he has not heard about the monstrous natural gas spill that's still happening in Texas. It's been going on for two months pouring billions of litres of greenhouse gas into the sky. And the engineers still don't have any answer to it.

Apart from that, there's the problem of cleaning out wells filled with poisonous chemicals mixed with the water. How do you keep those chemicals from leeching into the soil before they've been pumped out.? And where do you dispose of all that poisoned water that is pumped out?

And why are we putting another fossil fuel into our atmosphere when the ones we have are already causing enormous damage? In fact, in a country that has made pledges in Paris, I see little action on renewable resources in Ottawa or Fredericton or any place in New Brunswick. We probably (almost certainly) spend more on hockey than we do on renewable resources.
In the Seniority Rules column, Louise Gilbert orders us seniors to walk 10,000 steps a day at say, our Coliseum arena. Can you imagine the horror of having to walk 10,000 steps a day in a circle just to live longer with TV that has become really boring?

Tell you what, Louise kid, what if I just cut down a bit on bacon and chocolate bars? What are you? Some kind of a sexual bondage freak?

Okay. I'll try the walking.

The Canada and World section is, as always, slim pickings. Again, there is no mention of the killing and starvation of the people in Yemen – most of it by the Saudis with the thoughtful help of U.S. bombs. But there's an even greater problem.

News stories are not very good at conveying the meaning of the news. To understand what's happening, we need informed opinion. The columns by Gwynne Dyer were good. But they were only once a week – and I suspect we're going to see even less of them. The Irving press should have comment on foreign affairs every day. It should also have a good commentary on the federal government every day. (Trudeau, for all his charm, doesn't seem to have any idea of where to take this country.) We need reports not on just what's in the news, but also what ISN'T in the news.

A news story does not give us much understanding of what events mean to us. You need some good columnists to do that. And you need some variety in the outlooks of the columnists – something that is now painfully lacking.

The most important news stories of today are probably the two about the tensions between Saudi Arabia and Iran. What the stories tell is true enough – but they leave an impression that I think is misleading. Saudi Arabia executed a cleric from the minority Shiite group in Saudi Arabia. The impression, then stated, is that Saudi Arabia did it to warn Iran (with its, large Shiite population) that it was losing patience with Iran. That's pretty simplistic.

I suspect it was warning all right. But more than a warning, it was intended to get the western world behind it for a Saudi attack on Iran. As the Muslim world falls into chaos, the Saudis seem determined to conquer as much of it as possible. The public execution of a Shiite cleric is intended, really, not to warn but to be an excuse for a war. Like Turkey, Saudi Arabia is using the disarray within Islam to crush the “wrong kind” of Muslims, and to make Turkey and Saudi Arabia the dominant powers (until they fight each other.)

So far, it's working. The U.S., Britain and France have, predictably, rushed to the side of the Saudi royals.

Oh, the story also mentions that infuriated Shiites in Iran attacked Saudi embassies. Well, of course they did. The Saudis executed the Shiite cleric to provoke exactly that reaction. Iran immediately apologized for the attacks. But the apology was ignored and the Saudis and the US and Turkey cut diplomatic ties with Iran.

This is all a display of drama to justify a war on Iran by countries that want to destroy it – notably, the U.S. and its chief sucks, Britain and France.


And Canada?

Monday, January 4, 2016

Jan. 4: Time's a'wasting.

The lead story in a wretched four pages – count them – four – of what is grandly called the Canada and
World section – and the lead is “Christmas never came for victims of massacre”. It's very heart-wrenching.

The reference, of course, is to the 14, good Americans killed by those terrible Muslims at a Christmas barbecue in San Bernardino. True. Christmas never came for them. Nor did it come for the thousand or so Americans killed by American Christians all over the U.S. in the past year. But they don't get a mention. Nor is there mention of the thousands killed by American bombers all over the world – nor of the hundredds of thousands killed by weapons supplied by the U.S.( which exports more weapons to just about anybody than any other country in the world).

(Hey. Look on the good side. War and terror are good for the U.S. arms industry. Britain does well at it, too. And, like the U.S., it's not choosy about who it sells to.)

Then there's the uncounted thousands who have drowned or died of hunger as they fled from the horror we have made or the middle east. And there's the millions, hungry and cold, in refugee camps. But they don't observe Christmas, so who gives a damn?

A lead story in such a section is about something important happening in the world. It is not a place for self-righteous sentimentality Yes. Fourteen people got killed. Yes. It was terrible. But they are not the only ones who have been killed in this madness. And, think hard now, most of the innocent people killed in the last 15 years have not been Americans. And, for that matter, far, far more Americans have been killed by Americans over those years.

This is a pretty stinking piece of journalism. In fact, it really is propaganda. Other side bad. Our side good. But I don't think it's deliberate propaganda. It's just the way us humans think. The other side is always animal and evil and vicious. We are always good.

The reality is that our side is effectively led by some of the most vicious and greedy people this world has ever seen. The lords of the weapons industry just love wars, and they spend big money on candidates like Hillary Clinton and Tony Blair who get personally wealthy by making sure there's a constant demand for their weapons. The oil barons love war as a way to control world oil and world oil prices. The trick is to make the taxpayers pay for and fight in the wars that benefit only the oil barons. To get suckers on that massive scale, you have to make them believe they're doing it for God and country.

It's not hard to make people believe, not when big oil and big mining own all the private news media. And that's what brought us that asinine lead story in the Canada and World section.
There is still no mention of the slaughter and starvation of the people in Yemen, no mention of which civilians and children the U.S. drones are bombing these days, nothing about constant U.S. interference and murder in Central and South America, nothing about the behaviour of our mining companies around the world. In fairness, there is a story that a hotel in Dubai which was damaged in a fireworks display will be repaired. This is important news for those New Brunswickers who have a reservation at that hotel in Dubai.

The Guardian has an interesting opinion column about the current US political debates. In brief, it says that Americans are looking to preserve their ideal of what the U.S. is and stands for. The reality is that such ideals never really existed. Various groups in the U.S. have always been bigoted. And they can't even agree with each other on who they should be bigoted against. The U.S. has a vision that it stands for freedom and democracy. It never has. For over a century after the revolution, Africans were still slaves. And they never did get full freedom or equality. American women didn't get freedom and the right to vote until more than a year after the slaves were 'freed'. It has actually destroyed democracies in Latin America and Africa to impose dictators. It sees itself as a land yearning for peace. The reality is that it has been at war for most of its history. And it is surely one of the most backward countries in the western world when it comes to equality of opportunity and of education. And one of the most backward in social programmes.

Nobody even mentions the problems of its economic system. The first problem is that the economic system runs the country. It's supposed to be the other way around. As well, the economic system and the people who control it have also run up the biggest national deficits in world history. So it is that a tiny number of Americans are getting very rich while tens of millions, probably something close to a hundred million live in wretched poverty. But, with the exception of Bernie Sanders, none of the candidates is even mentioning this.

Preserving the U.S. as it is – well – it's beyond stupidity and approaching insanity. But with the help of mythical history and cooperative news media, the country which has more secret police than any other, that tortures on a massive scale, that has given its presidents the right to imprison and even assassinate American citizens, that has more prisoners than any other country in the world still sings “God bless America, land of the free...”

The U.S. desperately needs fundamental changes if it is to survive. It is most unlikely to get them.


It's also nonsense to say, as Norbert often does, that easing taxes on the rich will attract investment and general prosperity. The reality is that lowering taxes on the rich has made all of us poorer. (That's even leaving aside the reality that so many of the very rich pay no taxes at all.)


I'll quote the end of Alec Bruce's column to get at the only solution of our problems.

“...if we, the people, don't run New Brunswick's democracy – if we cede it to special interests and political expediency, then we risk becoming another state in crisis.
And then, what are our choices?”

I am not suggesting that Bruce and I would be in agreement on economic matters. I have no idea what the details of his views are. But I think the principal of the statement above is true. However, I would go further to say we already have ceded our democracy to special interests and political expediency. The Liberals and Conservatives do not represent our interests. They never have. Both of those parties in Canada were created to serve the rich. And Canadians have supported those two parties in almost every election, federal or provincial, that has ever been held.

And it's the Canadian people who have had the flabby minds. New Brunswickers, in particular, really don't like the think. And they're terrified of expressing an opinion in public. That makes them easy meat for a newspaper that tells them nothing but trivia.

The rest of Canada is not much better. That's why the old CCF party (which was a party of genuine change) had to water itself down to become an honest version of the Liberal party. And that's not enough. As for the Greens, they are tackling a serious and neglected issue. But that's not enough to govern a country on.

We have to do some thinking. We have to make it a point to get and make known information that we all need to make decisions. We have to get back a real democracy in this country.

And we don't have much time to do it.

For a full page of intelligent stories and opinions of Bernie Sanders' campaign for the democrat leadership, check out the site below. (There certainly hasn't been much of it in the Irving press.)

Page A9 has the story of an addition to St. Thomas University's department of journalism. She's Ros Guggi, a jounalist of considerable experience. She speaks in this story of the purpose and ethics of journalism. Generally, journalism schools across Canada teach to a high standard of ethics. Alas, too many graduates learn that to get a job, they have to be flexible in their ethics. (I could do many blogs about highly paid and well-known journalists who willingly write propaganda instead of news.)

You may remember the story of the American army truck driver, a woman, who was serving in Iraq (I think. Maybe Afghanistan). Her truck crashed at an enemy roadblock, and she was seriously injured.

That night, a U.S. special ops squad carried out an attack on the hospital to save her, it was implied, from rape and worse. I remember it well because I saw the attack on TV. I saw the troops storming the hospital, pushing hospital workers aside. I could see them well because a row of powerful lights had been set up for the cameras, and for the dozens of reporters – who were telling the story to us as it happened.

They told us that she had fought hard, shooting a dozen or so of her attackers. They told us the special ops raiders had scared the enemy off, so they could whisk the injured woman to an American hospital which was much better, of course, (and in which she wouldn't be raped.)

The story was everywhere. She was promoted as a heroine for holding off the enemy despite her injuries; and the U.S. special ops were praised for their – oh – their Americanism. A park was named after her. Publishers wanted her to write a book. But….

She was also honest. Despite tremendous government pressure, she told the truth. She hadn't shot anybody. She couldn't even if she wanted to because she was badly injured. Nobody had mistreated her. She was immediately brought to a hospital, and she was well-treated – probably saving her life. There were no soldiers guarding the hospital. They left as soon as they brought her there. The American command was notified of all the facts, was invited to send an ambulance for her, was told their were no guards and that the enemy would not interfere in any way.

Anybody watching the TV programme should have realized this was a set-up. You don't bring reporters with cameras and super lights to cover a surprise raid. The news media must have known this was a set-up. But they all went along with it.

And the woman? As soon as she told the truth, she because a non-person to the news media.

Oh, the new Journalism chair at St. Thomas is funded by a generous donor. It's called the The Irving Chair in Journalism. I wish her luck.

Finally, the Gallant government's treatment of Dr. Cleary in firing her as chief medical officer is contemptible. And the failure of the news media in digging on this story is contemptible. And the failure of New Brunswickers to respond is the reason why so many contemptible things happen in this province.

The government says it can't tell us why she was fired. But it has told us. It has told us she was fired because she didn't fit the skills profile required for the job. An honest and ethical press would answer, “Okay. Exactly what are the skills she doesn't have? And why has it taken so many years for governments to learn she doesn't have them?” To that, we might add the question of why the Irving press has not been more active in collecting the opinions of leading medical authorities across Canada who seem to have a very high regard for her skills? So all those leading authorities know less about medical skills than Mr. Gallant does?


Wake up, New Brunswick. You don't have much time.

Sunday, January 3, 2016

Dec.3: a very general sort of day...

This is a day of odds and ends with no news that really stands out.

As I first watched the American leadership debates, I was struck by the lack of any sense of economic policy, social policy, or even of social concern. All the things an election should be about were ignored. It was entirely about fears and hatreds, feelings that had been encouraged by the government and the press. With the sole exception of Democrat Bernie Sanders, the candidates are talking only about which of them hates more and is willing to kill more.

The U.S., itself, does not exist in these speeches. The startling rise in poverty in the U.S. is rarely even mentioned. Nor is defence spending, though it is now the highest in the world by far, so high that is makes social spending almost impossible. The U.S. is also the world's largest exporter of weapons – with no way of controlling who gets them in the end. No-one (but Sanders) has said much about racism in the U.S., or about domestic crime with an extremely high murder rate. Your chances of getting killed in a mass shooting in the U.S. carried out by Muslims are very small. But your chances of getting killed in a mass shooting carried out by American citizens are over four hundred times higher. And your chances of being killed by U.S. police are far, far higher than that.

But, no, the big issues are hate and fear and killing.

What makes that possible is private news media (which means most of them) treat foreign affairs as a very simple matter. When Bush invaded Iraq, and killed over a million people, he said it was because Iraq had weapons of mass destruction. None of the private news media even bothered to ask what a weapon of mass destruction is. (Nor did they ask anything about U.S. stocks of weapons of mass destruction.)

And when we learned that there were no such weapons in Iraq, it was still okay that Britain and the U.S. killed over a million people. After all, Saddam was a bad man, said our news media. Then it emerged that Blair and Bush had lied in the first place. But the private news media scarcely mentioned it. Nor did it have the wit or the integrity to ask WHY Bush and Blair had lied. Why did we kill over a million people? Was it just to get one, bad man?

Almost 5,000 Americans, British and others died to get that 'bad man'. There were also the thousands who would suffer battle damage for life, and those who have committed suicide – and are still committing suicide at record rates.

But Tony Blair became a multi-millionaire as a result of that war. And George Bush routinely collects tens of thousands of dollars (and often much more) for giving a short and brainless speech.

Then there was the invasion of Afghanistan. That was, we were told, because Afghanistan was sheltering Bin Laden and the people who had planned 9/11. But, actually, it wasn't.

9/11 was not planned by or even in Afghanistan. It was planned by Saudis living in Europe. And when the U.S. demanded that Afghanistan hand over Bin Laden, Afghanistan took the reasonable position that this should go to an international court – as international law requires. But American Exceptionalism meant that the U.S. could do whatever it liked (under God). So the U.S. invaded.

So far, the number of dead for the U.S. Canada, Britain, France and Spain are well over 4,000. Those for the other side (soldiers and civilians) about 100,000 plus the uncounted number tortured and the unkown number still in prisons around the world, and still being tortured.
And they didn't get Bin Laden because he wasn't in Pakistan, anyway. Does it make sense that over a hundred thousand people should die to catch one bad man?

Our news media seem to think so because none of them has ever questioned what this war was really about. And the war is still going after fifteen years of fighting – and after bin Laden is dead.

Wars usually have very complex reasons. Commonly, they are fought for the benefit of whoever makes up the dominant class in a society. For centuries, wars were for the benefit of kings and aristocrats. Now, they are commonly fought for the very wealthy. But the news media never say that. In their view, the U.S. has had to fight wars almost every year since 1775 because other countries – like Canada, Mexico, Guatemala, Cuba, Haiti,The Phillipines, almost all of the countries of Central America, Libya. Iraq….those bullies are always picking on the U.S.

That's the way American history books tell it. That's the way the press tells it. And that's what the American public, for the most part, believes. In short, the press in the U.S. deliberately keeps Americans ignorant of what is going on, and why. That is why we are watching a parade of clowns looking for the presidency.

And Canada is not nearly so different as we might think.

In fairness, it can be very difficult to figure out the reasons for each war – because the reasons can be very complex, indeed, chock full of secret meetings, deals, pay-offs, pretending to fight one country (as in the case of ISIS) while actually using that other group to fight for you (as using ISIS against Assad).

Here's the site that started me on this rant. It was sent to me by a reader. And its complexity as an article reflects the complexity of figuring out what the war is all about.


But there is a lesson to be drawn from this. American democracy has collapsed. I don't know where the U.S. goes from here; but it's not likely to be good. Look at those candidates. They all want to lead a country. It's obvious none (except Bernie Sanders) has ever given any thought to what a democracy is, and what a democratic country should be like. And they can get away with it because the whole country has been kept in that state of ignorance that many people like to call 'patriotism'.

Our press usually overlooks another result of our constant interference with societies shattered by that interference.

Afghanistan, for example, is a young country, not yet two hundred years old. It was a region inhabited by tribal and family groups. The work of knitting these groups into a nation and modernizing that nation has been a difficult job and still very incomplete – thanks to Britain, Russia and now the U.S. who invaded and destroyed all the progress made many, many times. Over the years, these countries have blackmailed Afghanistan, invaded, and abused it. That's why it has advanced so little in some two hundred years of trying. It's still a place in which family and tribe count for more than state.

Afghanistan is what it is because of us. The Taliban who have been fighting the U.S. were trained and equipped by the CIA to fight a proxy war for the U.S. against a Russian invasion. The CIA also formed al Quaeda for the same reason. Everything the Americans and British and French are fighting against are creations of Americans and British and French over the past century. Today, in much of the world, groups are fighting not because they're evil, but because their hatreds were created by us.

67 years ago, there was a Palestine in which Jews and Muslims and Christians had lived together for centuries as neighbours and friends. Then we decided to kick out most of the Muslims, and create an Israel. We didn't even do it as a favour to the European Jews. We did it so the European Jews wouldn't come here – and so we could have a country in the region that would be our foothold for oil barons.

And forget the bilge about the homeland. In the first place, Israel wasn't the homeland of the Jews. When Moses arrived, it was already populated as a region of very small, tribal states. The Jews conquered them, and took it. (I know, God gave it to them. But there are lots of Muslims who aren't convinced about that. Go figure.)

I don't know where the Jews lived before the years of slavery. But I know where they originally came from. Like every human on this earth, their original homeland was Africa. (Yes. You, too.)

Planting European Jews there destroyed the religious harmony between Jews, Christians and Muslims that had been the rule for centuries. And it destroyed the social structures that had kept the region in peace. It even angered the Sephardic Jews (those who had lived there for centuries. To this day, they quite often dislike the European Jews.)

Then there are the African Jews, not many but they have existed as Jews for a very long time. But the Israeli government is reluctant to accept them as Jews because of their colour. In short, the Israeli government seems determined to define Jews as a race, and not just a religion.

Think now of the last man who defined Jews as a race. (It was Adolf Hitler.)

Capitalism isn't the only cause of war. But it is probably the commonest. It can work. But it has to be controlled – or it destroys us. Capitalists, today, are pulling out all the stops to make 2016 the year almost all the regulations are pushed aside. Democracy will become, as it is in the U.S., unworkable.

That is a reality that our news media give no hint of.

But there may be some good news. I can't quite believe this story. But there's a new poll…



Who knows? This could be the year that JDIrving will lead a protest marching across the province to demand action on climate change.

Saturday, January 2, 2016

Jan. 2: Watch for the subtle differences...

In this case The Guardian and the Moncton Times and Transcript (via The Asssociated Press) were reporting on exactly the same story at the same time. But the starting point in The Guardian was, in fact, the starting point of the incident it described. President Erdogan of Turkey cited Hitler's Germany an example of any effective state – and the kind of state he wants Turkey to be.

Then it said that his office told the press that Erdogan had been misunderstood.


In the Irving press, the story appears on B3, but the headline is “Turkish office denies advocating Hitler-style rule”. If you read both stories and think a little bit, it's clear he did advocate Hitler-style rule. And it's very hard to imagine that he didn't mean it. Why else would one come up with Hitler as the example?

The difference is subtle. But note – The Guardian headline told the whole story, just as The Associated Press did. But The Associated Press reported it almost dismissively as no big deal. The Guardian gave an honest report.

As usual for the Irving press, foreign news is pretty meagre. Syria and Yemen don't exist. U.S. drome bombings doesn't exist. China and India don't exist. The one story worth reading is on B5. And if you aren't worried about it, get worried.

An Oregon rancher has been grazing his cattle for years on government land without paying. He now owes a million dollars. He has also been setting illegal grass fires. The case, much to the rancher's displeasure, has been taken up my militias across the U.S. Now, militias does not mean government troops. It means quasi-military gangs, very right-wing, who assume the right, as free men, to take up arms against the government. The have already had a confrontation with U.S. troops, and they're looking for another one in Oregon today.

And this is in a country with the world's highest gun ownership – with submachine guns, heavy machine guns and even anti-tank guns easily available. No wonder Obama wants to move on tougher gun laws.

All of this rests on the bizarre notion that Americans, by virtue of the revolution, have the right to take up arms against the government – and the fact that it's an elected government makes no difference.

A lot of this sort of thinking comes out of western films which portray the real American as someone who can shoot his Colt Peacemaker .45 fast and straight. That's why in Texas and some other states, it is now legal to wear your Colt in public, ready for a quick draw on the steps of the saloon. This cowboy flick scene has probably been the single greatest influence on American social thought. It's also largely myth.

The wearing of guns in public was banned in Texas in 1871. The Colt .45 peacemaker, seemingly the only one western film makers have ever heard of, wasn't invented until 1873.

Saturday's section A, as is commonly the case with cheaply run newspapers, was probably written days ago. Much of it is about the top stories of the year…. None of it is worth reading. The no. 1 news story of the year is –wait for it---the building of the 'Events Centre' (hockey rink.) And I guess that was the top story for those with their noses in their bellybuttons. In my own view, it was beaten by the second-place finisher – the weather. That's a really important change, with more changes to come.

A REAL news story would be one about how the city and the province plan to deal with those changes – or whether they are even yet at the stage of guessing what the changes might be.

The closest anybody comes to seeing the consequences of our inactivity is Norbert Cunningham on A8. Yes, climate change is real. We are going to have to deal, among other things, with the greatest refugee problem in human history. And some of those refugees could well be us.

Time is short. That's clear in a story that appeared in The Guardian.


One generation. The Irving press has been pretty indifferent to the floods in the U.S. and Britain, and to the deaths. (Nor, obviously, has it followed the al Jazeera story that this el nino attack is not over yet – so the worst may be still to come.) I see little sense of urgency in New Brunswick, no sign of planning to determine what our problems will be, no desire to cut back on the oil industry. On the contrary, we are prepared to applaud for an oil pipeline and massive improvement of the oil refinery in St. John owned by what's-his-name.

Have you heard anything from city council or the provincial government to suggest they are working on this? Or for that matter, from Ottawa? Have you seen oil billionaires in the streets demanding that action be taken, and offering their help in reducing emissions?

The Irving press also missed a huge story that has been going on for a couple of months. A natural gas well has been spilling natural gas at billions of litres a day in California. And this is raw natural gas that pollutes worse that oil. Scientists are trying to figure out how to stop it.



Let's see now, isn't this the sort of thing that premier Gallant will be deciding on in a very short time? How come the Irving press hasn't covered this story to make us better informed about what we could be dealing with? How come the owner of the paper hasn't demanded that we be better informed on this issue?

There's a reality here we're missing. The time to deal with climate change is short. We can't afford to pamper oil billionaires on this. And we can't afford to fight wars and pour money into 'defence' spending while doing the massive job we have to do. This has to be full time, and a spending priority. It's going to call for massive effort and massive international cooperation. We're not ever close to that.

It's interesting that no news medium has attempted to explain the reason for ISIS terrorism. Oh, I know. It's because they're evil while we are good. Proof of our goodness is shown by the U.S. mass murder of millions of Vietnamese, then of Iraqis and Afghanis in wars that have never been explained. And the Afghanistan War, still on after all these years, is now going against our side – the good Christians.

Anyway, consider the possibility that ISIS is both evil and smart – that they have a reason for terror attacks in the U.S. and Britain. Now, they know they aren't going to conquer either Britain or the U.S. So why the terror?

It's to produce the extreme reactions they're getting. Donald Trump is a model of what they want to achieve. They want disorder and turmoil – and hatred and fear. They want our world in chaos. And we are obliging them.

Finally, there's an interesting site on education. It's produced by Paul Bennett. He's the retired principal of a large, private school – and a very good one. (I don't like private schools. But I'll make an exception for Paul.) Here's the section dealing with the year 2015 for education in Canada.


The site also includes a story from the Washington Post that deals with education in the U.S. It's not a pretty picture. The school system actually encourages racism. As well, private business has poked its nose in with Charter Schools. These are paid for by profit-producing fees from the parents – and government subsidies paid in taxes by those who can never afford to go to a Charter School. I have seen no reason to believe that these are better than public schools – but they are essential for anyone who wants a diploma with job or higher education appeal. And they have been very destructive in their effect on public schools.

The URL for the whole site is --------------



Oh, you might want to keep an eye on Israel. A former premier just went to prison on a corruption charge. And premier Netanyahu and his wife, it seems, will now suffer similar charges. Gee! Why does that make me think of Ottawa and the senator from Prince Edward Island?