Hitler - and Mussolini - and us....

Well, the Irving press DID cover Mulcair's speech on the boardwalk yesterday morning – and a very chilly morning it was. For some reason, though, the photo of it was taken at such an angle that over half of the audience was left out.

The last sentence of the story is intriguing. Conservative M.P. Goguen was asked to make a statement to the press about it. And he didn't reply.

Well, of course not. Harper will not allow any of his candidates to take part in debate. Harper has to be in absolute control. Mind you, in the case of Goguen, that's probably a wise decision.

B3 has a story about anti-shale gas people who say that it's getting harder to find unbiased information in the fracking debate. Well, it's always been hard, especially in a province dominated by Irving news media. As well, we have a new industry lobby group that's targeting us in New Brunswick; and it can count on friendly press coverage. One of the cuter pieces of 'information' from the lobby is that seismic disturbance is not caused by fracking. No. It's caused by wastewater from the fracking – and that's separate process altogether. ….duh...if wastewater is a product of fracking, how can it be a separate process altogether?

Both sides pay amazingly little attention to the greater problem. We cannot go on using fossil fuels. We can't. We're seeing some of the damage now. It's going to get worse And building new facilities to produce these fuels guarantees that we are going to be using them for enough years to be sure they destroy us all.

There are things we cannot have. But fuel billionaires, like the spoiled brats they are, won't see that. Watch next summer for pipelines and fracking. And watch for the boys in camouflage with combat rifles.

A8 has a story about a professor at UNB who says academics are biased against white history. And he says letting in Asian immigrants will change our traditional culture. The university and the department have responded very properly to such an assinine statement.

There is some truth that immigrants will change a culture. There was a time, for example, when British and French immigrants had one hell of an effect on North American cultures. Professor Duchesne should demand we send all them there British and French back where they came from.

Anyway, never listen to anyone who babbles about preserving a culture. For a start, nobody has ever been able to define any culture. Quebec has been trying to define Quebecois culture for fifty years, and is no closer now that it was at start. Anyway, cultures are supposed to change. Culture, partly, is the way we react to a world which is always changing. We have cultural differences with our ancestors, and even with our parents, our neighbours, and in us in the course of our own lives as we grow up.

And there are parts of our 'New Brunswick' culture that could use changing.

The editorial is about the crucial importance of more statues and stuff to beautify Moncton.

Norbert has a column worth reading. Brian Cormier still thinks a commentary is something like a bedtime story. This story tell us that soon the big, ugly winter fairy will come back again. The guest commentary is by Jake Stewart, energy critic for the Conservative opposition. It's a typical political rant of no great intelligence. Even Alec Bruce is pretty vague.

Page 3 of Canada&World has a long, but uninformative story about the arrival of Pope Francis in the U.S.   Republicans are upset that he appears to be 'left leaning”. The pope's response to that is that he is simply repeating church doctrine. It's a point the reporters should pay more attention to.

The pope is not leaning left so much as he is stating what should be obvious to every Christian who is capable of thinking at all. Capitalism is based on self-interest and greed. It is not just unChristian. It is profoundly anti-Christian. And I should think we're well past the time when our churches should be noticing that.

The Bible says 'Love thy neighbour”. Help others. Make sacrifices for others. At no point does it say pay employees as cheap as you can. It does not say fight wars, murder millions, and create tens of millions of refugees so you can get their oil. It does not say condemn countries to generations of poverty so international bankers who are already rich can get richer. I don't recall any passage in which Peter or Paul asked for a quarter million dollar to give a sermon (as "Christian George Bush jr. does. It does not say set up a philanthropy hall of fame so you can hang your picture in it. It does not say build churches so you can name them after yourself. It does not say put your money in a tax haven to avoid paying your share. It does not say buy politicians so they will set a minimum wage that people can't live on.

If I'm wrong...if capitalism is a caring and sharing economic system, then perhaps Reverend Dr. what's-his-name at the Irving chapel can explain how the virtues of capitalism make it Christian.

The pope is one of the few people in this world to have the brains and the courage to state what surely is obvious. Capitalism is based on greed, exploitation, imposed suffering and mass murder.

Nor am I putting this forward as simply religious principle. It's a very practical view that no society can survive the scale of greed and killing and exploitation we are watching with, alas, the blessing of some of our more dim-witted clergy. Nor can we survive what greed and stupidity are doing to the land and waters of our Earth.

As the pope says, capitalism has created mass poverty, especially in South America, Africa, much of Asia. And it has generally imposed poverty in the western world with the returns going only to those at the top. We have, as he says, turned the Earth into an immense pile of filth – including nuclear waste, and discarded materials that are destroying life even in the oceans.

And, of course, capitalists are angry at his claim that we are experiencing climate change. But who are you going to believe – the pope and most of the world's scientists? Or Donald Trump and Jeb Bush?

Capitalism is the most destructive force we have ever seen. I won't even pretend to have a neat answer. But I do know that whatever will work will call for us to focus on all the people, not on just the greedy. Government should not be about putting up statues or building hockey rinks for the few who have plenty of money to pay for their own.

Nor can we just focus on the nation-state because that's a gone goose, too. Most of modern history has been shaped by the wealthy having enormous influence on governments. That influence weakened a little during and after World War Two. So there was a whole generation that grew up in relative prosperity (in North America and western Europe). But that ended with the rise of Ronald Reagan and Margaret Thatcher who began what was called deregulation. That was one of the great turning points of history.

It allowed the wealthy to escape many government controls. (They called it freedom and individualism; but only very rich were allowed to be free and individual.) In the same period, free trade enabled the very rich to move their jobs to any place they liked where they could escape any regulation at all. Thus the collapse of Detroit. The rich could then abuse the people of Mexico and Guatemala with a free hand.

Harper is now in the last stages of wiping out democracy and the nation-state. The Trans-Pacific Trade deal, if completed, will destroy the power of any government that is signatory to it. The very wealthy are to get the freest possible hand to do whatever they like to anybody.

Funny how most of our news media don't talk about it much. But, in effect, this means the end of most of the power of governments, and replaces it with the power of major corporations to do whatever they like. In a related move, bankers have taken over Greece and Ukraine. And there are more to come.

Ask one of the Irving press sermonette writers if this is all compatible with Christianity.

B5 has a misleading headline “Satellite imagery suggests Russia may be stepping up their role in Syria”. That's bad grammar, of course. It's also not what the story says. In fact, there is no doubt that Russia is stepping up its role in Syria. What's going on?

The U.S. wants to “regime change” in Syria by getting rid of Assad. It wants it because Assad is not pro-American enough, and could encourage economic competition – in the shape of Russia - for the jackpot that is the Middle East. (The U.S. is the only country in the world that is allowed to attack other countries because it doesn't approve of their governments.)

But the U.S. has not been successful with its phony 'rebellion' against the Syrian government. Worse, it has now lost control of the various 'rebels' it supplied with money, weapons, and training. They and others have merged to form al quaeda and ISIS and others. So now, the U.S. (with the help of Canadian pilots and Canadian tax dollars) is trying to fight ISIS. But, in fighting ISIS, it is helping Assad to stay in power. Worse, the U.S. is stalemated in fighting ISIS. Its interference and its government-encouraged bigotry, have made it (and Canada) so hated all over the world that the old colonial wars no longer work.

Putin who, so far, has shown more brains that the whole U.S. foreign policy establishment, has actively joined the war on the side of Assad. Russian jets are already in action, and tanks are on the way.

When the war ends so far as ISIS is concerned, will Russia leave Syria? Hey! Putin isn't Santa Claus. Russia has a big stake in a friendly Syria. So these are dangerous times. As well, these are expensive times. The U.S. budget since 1901 has taken a tremendous beating in order to pay for wars that only oil billionaires want. That money comes largely from the lower 95% or so of the U.S. population because the billionaires aren't big on paying taxes. That means more cuts in social programmes, and at a time when social condition in the U.S. are worsening.

In many respect, this is the 1930s and 40s all over again. But this time, we have surpassed the fascists.

Hitler and Mussolini created fascist governments in that the wealthy had easy access to the government, and sometimes automatic membership in it. But we have passed that stage. We are very close to a new form of 'democracy' in which governments don't matter. Only big money matters. It should be easy for New Brunswickers to understand that.

I have just received the story below.  It is devastating. It means the end of the CBC as a news source, and the deliberate destruction of Canada's only radio and TV service  devoted to speak to the Canadian nation. (It was also largely the creation of a much under-appreciated prime minister of Canada who came from New Brunswick - and close to Moncton. But the Irving press probably doesn't know that.)

http://www.cmg.ca/en/2015/09/22/cbc-announces-plans-to-sell-off-all-buildings-in-midst-of-election-campaign/ CBC announces plans to sell off all buildings in midst of election campaign By  CMG  •  Posted on  September 22, 2015 CBC announced today at a town hall for staff that it is selling all its property across the country, including major production facilities in Montreal and Toronto. These buildings were paid for by Canadians to allow the public broadcaster to produce quality original Canadian programming purely in the public interest. The announcement confirms a trend to strip CBC of that ability. “The decision to close down production centres is of great concern for our members as it should be for all Canadians, and seriously jeopardizes the CBC’s ability to do meaningful production in the future,” said Marc-Philippe Laurin, CBC Branch President for the Canadian Media Guild (CMG). ‘Our members believe the public broadcaster can’t only be a distributor, it has to also be a producer. This plan threatens the ongoing legacy of award- winning documentaries, drama and other quality production at CBC and Radio Canada.” These decisions most likely stem from the continuing and tremendous financial difficulties facing our national public broadcaster, a fact CBC President Lacroix acknowledged earlier this month. “It makes no sense to plan this now, when three of the four national parties are promising to restore or increase funding to CBC,” says CMG National President Carmel Smyth. “Just today the Liberal Party committed to increasing CBC funding by $150 million. In recent months the Green Party committed to an increase of $285-million, while the NDP says it will reverse the $115-million budget cut.  Why rush into such an irreversible decision now?” In the words of former CBC President and Canadian cultural icon, Pierre Juneau: “Public television cannot merely be a programmer. The particular ethics of public broadcasting demand that programs be designed with particular care. This requirement implies that the public broadcaster should also become involved in audiovisual production. While public broadcasters may buy or commission some programs, in-house production not only guarantees that programs will adequately meet the purpose of the broadcaster, but also ensures the perenniality of expertise—some would say a “culture” of creativity—particular to the public broadcaster.” And as the Parliamentary Budget Officer pointed out earlier this year, asset sales are only a temporary fix. “Proceeds from one-time asset sales give the CBC a temporary cash infusion, which allows it to defer part of the Government’s operating subsidy until later in the fiscal year.” The CBC has also cut more than 2,800 jobs since 2008 and has plans to cut another 1,600 by 2020. This is a part of Harper's deliberate destruction of a Canadian nation, and the destruction of honest and intelligent journalism. To understand it better, read the site below. continue at      http://www.bbc.com/news/world-us-canada-34321263

Bastard.

Sept. 22: A new world shaping up? You won't hear about it in the Irving press.

The headline story for today is “Jury shown photos of Oland death scene. This is pure, scandal-magazine sensationalism. It's followed a big photo of rocks and heavy equipment on Main Street looking just like every pile of big rocks and heavy equipment I have ever seen. It's a photo that tells us nothing. Then there's the front page story on “New Brunswickers love their moose hunting” Then, there's a story that the province's social development minister loves her job.

There's nothing in any of these stories. The one about death photos of Oland might appeal to readers of a certain type. But it's no major news of the day. The social development minister loves her work? I'd be more interested if she knew something about it. As she makes clear, she not only knows nothing about it, but seems to have no sense of what principles she should work from. She lists things that need attention – like long-term care, mental and physical problems….but seems to know nothing about them. She says first we have to develop a bigger vision – whatever that means. What principles will that vision be based on? Who knows? This is all mindless bafflegab that tell us nothing.

The job of a reporter is to ask questions that push her further. What does she mean by “bigger vision”? She says we're going to get creative. Okay, what, exactly, does that mean? Precisely what values are she and the government working from? They need the business community for this? Why? After all, we didn't elect the business community. And what are her qualifications for the job?

The real message of this story seems to be that the government doesn't have any principles that it's working from, it has no bigger vision, the minister is talking and thinking in a vacuum, and has done virtually nothing since coming to office.

Reporters, real reporters, are not just stenographers to take notes. They should ask the questions that expose the realities.

The editorial favours the development of shale gas. Quelle surprise! Even more, it says the president and CEO of Corridor Resources says it's a good idea. So there!

Editorials in newspapers generally reflect the opinions of the owners of the paper. That's why they so often read like propaganda. Commonly, all the editorial staff will meet to agree on the topic and the viewpoint. The editorial then becomes the official policy of the newspaper.

Why should a newspaper have an official policy? Is it because editors all have great minds, and insights that us ordinary mortals don't have? And if it has an official policy, doesn't that mean biased reporting and discussion of the subject?

Well, I've known and liked a great many editors. But in the course of that, I also learned that few have outstanding minds. (Nor have I seen anything approaching even an average mind in the Irving press.)

As for declaring editorial opinion as an official policy of the paper, it strikes at the heart of what journalism should be. It should be to give us news without bias; it is not to hand down its judgement from on high. Any news medium that has an official policy on any issue is bound to become a propaganda house.

So why do they have such a concept if it's so destructive of honest journalism, and of giving us a full range of opinion?

It's because that's what the owner wants. The owner wants New Brunswickers to be a people who know nothing and do nothing but what they're told. That's why Alan Cochrane (also an editor) has a column on cleaning up the military gear and the steam engine in Centennial Park – a column that wasn't worth reading the first time it appeared (yesterday, I think), and is still worthless.

The Irving press has never done honest and balanced coverage of the shale gas issue. In the language of this editorial, the CEO of Corridor is a great guy who has been listening to the debate over shale gas carefully, and all he wants is to help the people of New Brunswick. Sort of like Florence Nightingale. It ends - “We wish the alliance (Corridor Resources and friends) all the best in this endeavour.) What a kiss-up! And what an insult to all the rest of us!

Now, guess what your chances are of getting honest coverage of the shale gas issue.

Louise Gilbert has a column on the International Day of Older Persons which, in Moncton and area, will include public gatherings. Well, it's nice. But it sounds awfully close to rocking a baby to sleep. 'Older Persons' don't need that. They need intellectual stimulation.

Canada&World opens with the big national and world story that the New Brunswick opposition party is criticizing the government. And that probably is the biggest story in the section. So let's scrap it.

The big story gets no attention at all.

Let's start by dumping a myth – that nations are friendly or unfriendly to each other. Let's get real. Their is no such thing as friendship between national governments. Our great friends of the American nation have invaded Canada many times – in the American revolution, in 1812, then shortly after the American Civil War with sponsored invasions of Canada. It threatened to take the Canadian west shortly after confederation. Remember, that's why we sent an army into the west – but called it the Northwest Mounted Police so the U.S. government would not be offended that we dared to put an army there. It threatened to use force against Canada shortly before the World War One. To this day, it ignores our claims to much of the north, including the Northwest Passage.

It did not join either World War to help us or Britain. In both cases, it entered these wars ( very late) out of self-interest. Particularly on the part of big business in the U.S. And it both cases, it did its best to destroy British economic power.

All countries act for their own advantage – which commonly means the advantage of the very rich. Then the news media spread the story that we're doing it out of friendship. Oh, and the news media also give our side the support of God, while the other side is evil.

Was Hitler evil? Sure. So was Britain in the days when it built an empire that killed, looted, starved millions of people all over the world. So was the U.S. evil in killing of millions of innocent people in Vietnam, South America, Iraq….and on. And all that killing was done to make rich people richer.

Right now, Syrians are evil, and the U.S. has been equipping and training mercenaries to kill them. However, the millions who flee their homes because they've been bombed out by U.S. bombs in a war created by the U.S., are good – unless they want to come to Canada or the U.S. Then they're a threat to security.

Israel is our friend, But the leader of Israel, Netanyahu, just went to Moscow where he had a very friendly talk with Putin. It seems that have a lot in common, and are now friends. Now, Canada and the U.S. are not friends with Russia. Both Canada and the U.S. are even thinking of war with Russia. Cuba was a U.S. enemy. Now, it's a friend. Funny how buddies can switch around so quickly. And, I suspect, we are at the edge of some very big switching.

Nations don't operate on the basis of friendship. That's the drivel you read in editorials – but it's not true. They operate entirely on self-interest – and it's usually economic self-interest.

Now – to the Middle East.

Israel has just made a friendly approach to Russia on the issue of intervention in Syria to help the Syrian government. But Israel's good friend, the U.S., has been trying to destroy the Syrian government for years. So – is Israel trying to annoy its friend the U.S. by supporting Russian intervention to save that government?

And why would Putin even care to intervene? When did Russia and Syria become friends?

And, if the U.S. wants Assad destroyed, why is it helping in the war against ISIS which is now destroying Assad for it?

Well, try this.

Putin is helping the Syrian government because he wants Russia to take part in the great hunt for oil in the region. Syria would also give him a pipeline for Russian oil to go to Europe, thereby providing competition for U.S. oil barons.

Israel's Netanyahu visited Putin because he wants a deal that would guarantee no intervention in Israel, and would also open the door for him to annex more of Gaza and Syria and Lebanon to create the greater Israel he longs for.

He may also be thinking that the 'friendship' with the U.S. is iess useful than it used to be – and he may well be thinking that U.S. power is in decline, anyway – so he needs new friends.

Saudi Arabia is playing games, too. It has been making nice to Russia, for example, while for reasons never explained, it is bombing and starving Yemen with heavy U.S. support. Is it possible that Saudi Arabia is looking at an oil future that will have less to do with the U.S.?

It looks very much as though the Middle East, in this terrible confusion, may be looking at new friends to compensate for a U.S. decline. And we may be looking at a very changed world within a decade.

All this may go down in history as the product of the biggest blunder ever – George Bush Jr's. Invasion of Iraq. (and Afghanistan and his drone-bombings of Pakistan). It was a blunder that not only created chaos throughout the Middle East and beyond to wherever Muslims live. It has killed nobody knows how many; it has created a refugee crisis that Europe can't handle – and that Canada and the U.S. won't handle.

It is creating a social crisis in the U.S. as monstrous budgets are dedicated to the most expensive military in the world, budgets inflated by an equally monstrous corruption in government and the war industries.

Over a trillion dollars has been spent so far just on the Afghanistan war, and with an end nowhere in sight. Nor has anything been gained by all these wars. And there is nothing to spare for the American people.

The world is changing dramatically, largely as a consequence of the greed and stupidity of American oil billionaires who are spending our money on a scale that can never be justified by the profit the billionaires will make. And it's all being spent to produce even more of a product that we know is destroying the world.

“This is the way the world ends,

Not with a bang, but a whimper.”

Hey! Let's hear it for shale gas.

The leaders of the political parties in this election (Minus Harper) held a debate.

Thomas Mulcair was in Moncton today. He spoke on the boardwalk by the river early this morning to quite a large crowd. News media were well represented. I mingled with them, looking for an Irving reporter; but I couldn't find one.

I don't believe I saw an article in yesterday's paper to tell us that he was coming. Will there be a report tomorrow? Something to watch for.

As a footnote to this, Mulcair was speaking in less than a one minute walk from a small street named after Harper's family.

Sept. 21: Should I get off the Irving press and onto news analysis?

Again, there is almost nothing to say about the Irving press. The front page headline “Gallant's lessons after year in office” has nothing in it. It's an interview with premier Gallant in which he drops pearls of wisdom like----like nothing. He says nothing at all except that being p.m. makes him humbled and he's doing his best and it's all for New Brunswick. This is a nothing headline on a nothing story.

The reporter makes a few comments of his own, but does not seem to have pressed any questions.

And the next, big front-;age story is that four objects in Centennial Park – a fighter jet, a tank, a steam engine and an anchor are going to get cleaned up. Must of the rest of section A news consists of big photos.

Oh, and A6 has a weekly column on education which, I would guess, it gets free from the Anglophone East school district. This one is about volunteer support from parents and business. The examples given are not impressive – and some are disturbing. We rely on volunteers to feed children who don't get breakfast at home? And to buy them school supplies? Volunteers?  Look, these things are essential if those children are to get even a chance at education. I can remember many a school day with little, if any, breakfast or lunch. It's an experience that makes the days unpleasant but, more to the point, it places you in your own mind as one of those born at the bottom of the heap and intended to stay there. The education damage is profound, and often permanent.

And our system allows this crucial function to be left to volunteers?

The editorial is a brainless booster for a lobster roll festival. I wonder if this editorial writer will ever write one that isn't inspired by looking out a window of the newspaper office.

Norbert has a decent column, and one which has implications for understanding the history of governments in this province. But the best reading on the page is Letters to the editor. All of them are worth reading and thinking about.

Craig Babcocks “City View” column is only for those----damned if I know who it can be for. It goes beyond trivia.

Steve Malloy raises an important question about our schools. Apparently, they have been sending forms to parents asking them to give certain data, including the child's gender _ male, female, or gender independent. I think Anglophone East School District has questions to answer about this. For a start, how many parents would know? And how many children would even understand the questions? And what does the school district intend to do with those answers? As a teacher, I taught many who were 'gender different' But I never found that required any difference in how I taught them.

Canada&World began with a story that struck me as bizarre appearing as it did in the lead of a section dealing with Canada and World. It's about public school fees in New Brunswick. Apparently, they vary a great deal across the province but, in many cases they are substantial – for books, paper, pencils, pens….

These aren't for special field trips. Most are for basic supplies. Why are students paying for these? The concept of public schools was that they were for all children – and so all children, including poor ones, could have solid educations.

The concept arose in Scotland several centuries ago, primarily to serve the religious need for all Protestants to be able to read The Bible. They were in direct contrast to private schools (which the English, in their contrariness, called public schools) which provided education only to the wealthy. The result was a Scotland that, by the nineteenth century, far surpassed modern New Brunswick in literacy. The result as an explosion of inventors, writers, business leaders, economists, philosophers that led the world. It's no accident that Scots Presbyterians had a profound effect on both Canada and the U.S. Indeed, they were the major force in creating the public schools of North America.

And there were no fees because fees exclude many children and, by university age, even exclude most of them.

Why are we turning our back on all that? Public education is what has made the modern world possible. Public education is why we have all the doctors and technicians and scientists and thinkers and teachers we have today. Very, very few come from private schools.

Public schooling may well be the greatest creator of wealth and the greatest force for creating higher levels of general income than this world has ever known. Why are we sticking fees into it?

Oh, I know. Moncton needs a new hockey rink for a hundred million. And we don't want to embarrass the very, very wealthy by asking them to pay taxes. After all, they work hard for their money – not like those poor people that Norbert refers to as 'lazy'.

I haven't found any "leader" in New Brunswick, either in politics or journalism, who understand that New Brunswick is made up of people. We get very little discussion of what it takes to develop a society, to develop people.  Instead, we get a series of fast buck schemes that are supposed to build our future. They won't. New Brunswick is made up of people. Access to the fullest possible educaton - for people - to public discussion and debate - for people -  to intellectual enrichment - for people- These are what create a society and prosperity.

After that, Canada and World is pretty much a wipeout. B3 has a big story about a retirement party for a cat who has been keeping rats off a ship for fifteen years. B4 has the paper's third story about a student at Memorial University whose teacher refuses to allow him to use a hearing device in class. This third story says nothing that wasn't in the first two.

B3 has a headline “Refugees find relief from brutal ISIS rule”. I have no doubt that ISIS rule is brutal. But have you ever seen the headline, “Saudia Arabia and U.S. make brutal attacks with bombers” or “U.S. and Britain make brutal attacks with drones, depleted uranium shells, cluster bombs, napalm, and Agent Orange” or even "Saudi Arabia brutally executes hundreds every year by beheading, even for minor crimes.”

Of course not. Writing a headline foro the Irvinig press is a deliberate device to make the enemy evil. And there's other loading in here. Note that the story, but not the headline, says it's based on questioning ONLY those refugees who fled from ISIS. But why question just them? Why not question ALL the refugees? If ISIS are the only bad guys, how come all those other millions are fleeing? Could it possibly be they are fleeing OUR bombers? Our hired mercenaries who it pleases our news media to call 'rebels'? Could they be fleeing ALL the gangs and killers that our side trained, equipped, and paid for?

This isn't reporting. This is propaganda. And the editor cooperated in propaganda with that headline.

B2 has similar story about the pope's visit to Cuba. Half of the story is devoted to how some Cubans are unhappy with life in Cuba because they have to live on minimal incomes. And this is propaganda – turning the pope's visit into a chance to attack Cuba.

Of course, Cuba is poor. It has for decades been under trade sanctions imposed by the U.S. It has deliberately been isolated, and cut off from markets. Castro didn't do that. The U.S. did that. When the U.S. controlled Cuba through a dictator and his thugs (with wide use of murder and torture), most Cubans were poor, and were deliberately kept that way to provide cheap labour for American corporations – just like Haiti. But, despite the handicaps imposed by sanctions, Castro Cuba has been able to to offer far better medical service than the US does to its own people. And they have free education all the way through university. This is in a country which had virtually no education at all under U.S. control.

For over fifty years (and all the years of dictatorship before that), the U.S. has bullied, invaded, bombed, and impoverished tiny Cuba. And here we're getting a news item that puts all the blame on Cuba. That is what is called propaganda.

So, why is the U.S. interested in 'normalizing' relations with Cuba? Well, it has nothing to do with good-heartedness. Since the early nineteenth century, the U.S. has sought dominance over the economies in all of Latin America. It stole much of Texas and California and more from Mexico. It has invaded almost every nation in Latin America since then – establishing dictators and puppets, murdering elected leaders, setting up fake revolutions, and impoverishing the people to make them cheap labour in brutal conditions.

That dominance is now being threatened as Latin America is turning against what I can safely call U.S, brutality, murder, abuse…. The example set by Cuba has, for over fifty years, been an inspiration of Latin Americans. Castro won. And the long campaign by the U.S. to destroy him has failed. That's why the U.S. is now making nice, hoping to get Cuba back to the 'good old days' when it was ruled by U.S. dictators.

As I look at the choice of stories and of headlines in this section, I cannot believe the editors are honest journalists. This quality of mixing propaganda and trivia is too calculated to be attributed to stupidity. This is deliberate.

Oh, they also missed a big story connected with the Pope's visit to Cuba. He spoke of dealing with climate change. Many Republican candidates in the U.S. are angry at what he said. They reply that the pope should stick to religion, and leave science to---get this----those scientists who say climate change isn't happening. (The pope, by the way, has a master's degree in science.)

The candidates are saying that because oil money pays them well to say that. We aren't getting much action on climate change because big oil doesn't want it – ever. We are seeing long term commitments to fossil fuel right here with a pipeline deal for the north-eastern US, with drilling planned for the Arctic, and with Corridor Resources and its buddies opening up a campaign in New Brunswick. You don't spend that kind of money if you are expecting world consumption to go down. They're looking for demand to be high for decades to come. And they really don't give a damn what you think.

Watch for them next summer. And watch for those RCMP in camouflage suits and with combat rifles. Welcome to The Fourth Reich.

Oh, there's a sort of amusing story on B1 As Harper argues we need the U.S.F-35 fighter to defend Canada. And Trudeau says we need a better navy. Neither is clear on why we need them – though Harper suggests our 6 fighter-bombers in Iraq are defending us. (If so, why did he send just six?)

Anyway, Harper made a hash of the F-35 deal a long time ago. And that was lucky for him. The F-35 programme is collapsing under design and performance problems so that nobody seems to want it but Harper. It's also one of the most hideously expensive aircraft ever. Worse, there are better aircraft already in service in Russia and China.

As to the navy, before you build ships, you have to decide who they are going to fight, and how. Otherwise, the programme just becomes a boondoggle like the current shipbuilding programme.

Dreadful, dreadful paper.

And, I'm sorry. I meant to get away from the Irving press, and talk seriously about what's going on in the Middle East. It is possible that Putin is outplaying Obama in his handling of it. And Putin may have more allies in the region than we realize. As well, the U.S. is increasing its defence spending which is already the heaviest in the world. Why?

Well, it's possible that U.S. military and industrial leaders have decided the U.S. can only go down from here -----unless it can all be fixed very soon with a world war.

And, for something worth reading, check out the sites below sent to me by a reader.

http://atimes.com/2015/09/peace-in-syria-its-putins-fault-escobar/

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/putins-consistency-syria-has-washington-fuming/ri9839

I'm a bit lost. The Irving press is so bad that most of it isn't worth commenting on. Every copy is mostly trivia and propaganda. And that seems to be quite deliberate. And it takes so long to point that out every day that there's no time to look an analysis. I'm thinking of dramatically reducing the space I give to the irving press, and increasing the analyis.

Sept. 20:The importance of reading - and thinking....

History is a good foundation for understanding this world we live in. I've just finished reading an example or really good history. It's called “Wealth and Power”, and it's by Orville Schell and John Delury. It's a history of Chinese government from 1840, the early years of Britain demanding lavish economic power in China, years when China could be overwhelmed by tiny armies, usually western, from Britain, France, Germany, Japan, U.S., and forced to accept humiliating terms. In fact, in China, the term “the great humiliation” still refers to the years from 1840 to the victory of Mao.

It's a very objective book, and one which also reminds us that our interventions in other countries are as brutal as Hitler's were. (However, with all those unfamiliar Chinese names, it can be a slow read. So – hint – read quickly and don't worry about the details.)

I would also suggest you read September edition of LRC (Literary Review of Canada). You won't find it in most stores. Usually, you have to go to large ones like Chapters. It has a review of Erna Paris' book, “From Tolerance to Tyranny: A Cautionary Tale from Fifteenth Century Spain.” It tells us a lot about today.

As the author says, “Distrust of the other seems to slumber within us, ready to erupt under certain conditions of xenophobia and violence.” In the case of Spain, the departure of Muslim rule some 800 years ago, gave rise to a vicious anti-semitism by the time of Columbus. Encouraged and led by Christians, it led to torture, imprisonment and, often, death for Jews, even for Jewish converts to Christianity. Jews were a good deal of what the inquisition was about.

British history books often brag of how Britain gave them refuge, and how they were known as “the king's people”. In fact, they were protected by the king only because they paid him a large ransom for their shelter. A small number, after the British conquest of New France, moved to what it now Quebec. There, they were accepted because they were few, and had become thoroughly British over the centuries. (There is a very large synagogue in Montreal, still called “Spanish and Portuguese”. I often spoke there.)

But things changed very, very dramatically when Jews who were poor and who came from other Europeans countries flooded into Canada in the late nineteenth century. Distrust of the other does, indeed, seem to slumber within us. And so Canada turned its back on Jews, even in the years following World War Two.

Politicians and the owners of private news media know the human tendency to hate 'the other'. That's why Bush, Obama, and Harper have preached hatred of Muslims. That's why Harper speaks of Muslim terrorists on every corner. That's why he's making a big issue of a Muslim woman wearing a veil. It gives our leaders an excuse to murder 'the other' by the millions, to create refugees by the tens of millions, to destroy whole nations. And it uses our fear to get support for laws and secret police that destroy the rights our countries are supposed to stand for. It gave the U.S. an excuse for the illegal imprisonment and torture of Muslims, the killing of a million in Iraq, the destruction of Syria, of Yemen, the endless killing and destruction in Afghanistan, the drone bombers…. Oh, and it also gave Canada an excuse to go along with most of the above.

I shall never forget the cheers that went up around the western world for those crude and disgusting cartoons of Muhammed in Charlie Hebdo. And then the hypocritical outpouring of sympathy for a 3 year old boy who drowned. (Well, of course, he didn't look Muslim.)

What the hell do people think we've been doing for decades in dropping bombs and napalm on three-year old children – and starving them and denying medical aid?

That's why neither Harper nor the U.S. is going to offer any serious help to these people. With tens of millions of refugees homeless and starving, Canada will accept ten thousand…..over five years or so ...maybe….. And Canada and the U.S. will extend them...maybe… a couple of bucks per person.

Meanwhile, the U.S. needs most of its money for the biggest binge of military spending the world has ever seen – and doing it even as millions of Americans are living in poverty. There are a great many more people, including three year old boys, to be killed before the oil billionaires have absolute control over the region.

And they might never get absolute control. It is quite possible that the Arab oil states are looking for closer ties to Russia. They're no fools. Like our capitalists, they don't do anything out of friendship. And it's quite possible their market of the future is China, Russia, Europe.

Meanwhile, we have become the Naziis of the 21^st century. That's not an exaggeration.

Another review in LRC worth reading is “Canada: A New Tax Haven – How the Country that Shaped Caribbean Tax Havens is Becoming One Itself”. We can be sure the Irving Press will never report on this book.

Another review worth reading in this issue is “The China Model: Political Meritocracy and the Limits of Democracy”. I'm not convinced the author of this book is right. It's true that China's rapid growth of recent years did not happen within a democratic system. It was owing entirely to government by a party that was a dictatorship; but which created a superbly trained bureaucracy. Chinese leaders did not choose democracy because they realized its great weakness as revealed by Americans and Europeans.

Democracy depends on a society which is politically active, well educated, one which actually studies policies and discusses them openly. But what it has done to the West is not a pretty story.

We live in societies which are not politically active, not educated to think, a society in which few understand or even care about policies, and in which anyone who discusses politics openly and honestly invites spies and could cost a job. And, all the news we get from privately owned media is loaded with propaganda and lies. With its illiteracy rate of 50% and its timidity, New Brunswick must be one of the most feeble democracies.

But the general feebleness of all democracies is so bad that governments tend to become simply the puppets of billionaires – who have no competency to develop societies, and no interest in anything beyond their own pocketbooks. That's why the Irving press is devoted to keeping people in ignorance.

The Chinese system of rule by meritocracy has been very effective in recent years. But, it is linked to capitalism, and is now showing the same weaknesses as our system. Corruption at all levels is giving the capitalists control of government in China, just as they control it here.

And, no, I don't have an answer. But if New Brunswick ever hopes to enter even the twentieth century, it has to become a province in which most people can read, and in which nobody has to be scared of having a political opinion.

There's a price for our failure. We're seeing it today in Canada and the U.S. We have two elections going on - the Republican leadership in the U.S., and the federal election in Canada. And what are the big issues? Well, for the U.S., it's them there Mexican racists. And it's not just Trump. Nobody in that race is discussing any significant issue. The U.S. is on the verge of nuclear war, possibly of social breakdown. The rise of poverty and the diversion of wealth to the already rich is evident. It is possible that the whole world is rearranging itself economically and militarily in a manner that will be much to the disadvantage of the U.S.

No - it's all them there Mexicans, and maybe about going really crazy and trying to push Russia and China around.

In Canada, it's not really much different. Harper will, maybe, let in so few Muslims that it won't make any difference. Nobody's talking about the trans-Pacific trade deal. Of course not. Any politician who raised an important issue would lose. The only issues the public really knows about are those in the propaganda we get from our news media. That means the big issues are a tax break for - whoever - or getting a bridge for Moncton, or seeing Justin walking toward a camera with the top two buttons of his shirt undone.

The fault is not the politicians'.  It's ours. Politicians have to discuss trivialities because don't know much about what's going on in the world. A great many of us don't want to. Large numbers of us can't even start on what the issues are because they can't read.   In New Bruswick, I really think people are afraid to publicly raise the real issues.

And a great many of us just don't give a damn.

You want to see a real issue?  Google Canadian Trans-Pacific Trade Partnership.  What we are watching is the disappearance of the nation-state and of democracy. What we are watching is the development of a new world pretending to be ruled by the people, but actually ruled by a few hundred of the very, very rich and very, very greedy.

Sept. 19: WILDTOWN CATFIGHT

Lord, I thought. It's that time of year again. These are the big, screaming letters on the sports page. And they will be the headline for every game in the hockey season. (The Moncton team is called the Wildcats.very clever and quite unique in the world of sport, I'm sure. But this is the most childish headline I have ever seen on a sports page. And they run it week after week, year after year.)

Section A news is more vapid than usual. A3 has a half-page of useless information on the Oland trial. Obviously, the Irving press plans to milk this one. There's really nothing to say about it yet. But this sort of case involving a big name attracts readers who like sensationalism – the same ones are fascinated by stories of which movie star is cheating on his wife.

On A5, our 4 rinks sports centre will now be called Superior Propane Centre at a cost to Superior Propane of $150,00 to $250,000. And, in return for the advertising, the complex will switch from natural gas to propane.

The biggest news is that 'entrepreneurs' are giving each other awards – you know, something like the New Brunswick Philanthropic Hall of Fame. This time the news is an announcement that our Chamber of Commerce has 27 finalists for it Business Excellence Awards. I'm so excited.

And, of course, there are the usual flashes about restaurants opening or closing. And the usual assortment of people charged with minor crimes.

The editorial, also as usual, is petty, soft-core stuff. This time it's a repeat of a very recent editorial about some schools being not quite ready to open in time for the school year. It takes nine paragraphs to say, in effect, “Something must be done.”

And Norbert is both self-righteous and damned disgusting with a column on the failings of New Brunswick's economy, much of which he blames on “...a sense of entitlement and laziness among some of our population. 'They owe us' seems to be the attitude amongst far too many.”

This blaming of the poor for being poor is an old and contemptible theme in the pages of the Irving press. In fact, every North American economic downturn in history has been blamed on the poor. In the great depression, it was the poor who had to take the hit while the rich actually made more profits. In the 'too big to fail' bank and auto crisis caused by unethical and even criminal business practices, it was everybody but the guilty rich who got stuck to pay it off. New Brunswick has a few very wealthy families. Where do you think their money comes from if not from most of the people in this province? And what taxes, in real money, do they pay?

Think back, Norbert, to the early days of premier Alward's government. J.D.Irving wrote a column on the page facing yours. In it, he informed us that he would take over the planning of government budgets. And, though Irving had no right to do that, Alward didn't even whimper – and the Irving press reported his planning meetings and his appointment of the advisors to the ministers of finance as though this were the Second Coming.

This province has lots of poor because they were born that way. And once you're born poor – it's hard to dig your way out. And this province does damn little to help. Half of this province can't read – and we're going to fire teachers and close schools.

Then he writes that our provincial governments have a tendency to divert general funding from Ottawa to spend it on 'other purposes'. But he doesn't say what those other purposes are.

Okay, Norbert, if you know that this money is going to purposes that are wrong –then you must know where they are going. How else could you know that they're wrong?

So where were your columns about that? Where were all your columns about who got that money? And why and how they got it?

This province is, indeed, in a financial mess. But you won't fix that by pouring contempt on the poor and kissing up to the rich. It will never be fixed until the people of New Brunswick take back their own government, and their own land and their own waters and their own lives from the very rich.

Perhaps you might want to discuss that with the pious during coffee and fellowship at the Irving Chapel. Everybody will be there.

Except God.

Good letter to the editor - “Compassion could help MHS through winter.” It's not a sin to help those who need help – just as it's not a virtue to help those who don't need it.

Brent Mazerolle doesn't really have much to say. However, he does say it with excellent style.

Gwynne Dyer is a little disappointing in wasting time and words on playing a 'blame game' on the prime minister of Greece for bad negotiation about its debt to international bankers. The real issue is how to deal with the millions of Greeks who will suffer terribly all their lives to make billionaires richer – and the Greek people who are in this position for reasons that are not their fault.

Alec Bruce has a pretty good analysis of the Federal election in New Brunswick. But there's serious problem in hoping for this province to make a good, political decision. Remember, half of this province is functionally illiterate. That and the political and news media power of the very rich are the biggest problems facing New Brunswick.

In Canada&World News, oh joy! “Alliance forms to foster shale gas development in New Brunswick.”

The alliance is made up of shale gas speculators and their buddies, like the good folk at the chambers of commerce. And they are going to have a web site giving us honest and true stories about how shale gas is good for us. Right! And they're to sponsor public meetings to get the information out there. (Well, of course. Half the population can't read. But they (mostly) can hear a speech, and they can understand videos.)

Shale gas is coming back. Never doubt it.

The should be a wonderful experience. I mean, if you can't trust billionaire speculators, who can you trust? And watch for the Irving press to follow – with hallelujahs.

B3 has a story about the Muslim woman who insists, for religious reasons, on wearing a higab while giving the oath of Canadian citizenship. Her opponent is Stephen Harper. And that gives me an idea. Jewish women who are very orrhodox (Hassidic) shave their heads when they are married, and wear wigs for the rest of their lives. Shouldn't we be demanding that Mr. Harper promise to demand that they appear bald for the citizenship ceremony?

B6 has a breaking story about a Saskatchewan rancher who called a tow truck to get his horse our of a well.

And that's pretty much it. Apparently, people being bombed and starved to death in Yemen is not important. Nor is it important that Japan is in turmoil because many, probably most, Japanese do not want to rearm their country so it can, like Canada, fight American wars.

Violence in Israel involving Palestinian Israelis against Jewish Israelis is on the rise. So is Nethanyahu's determination to treat Obama as an enemy, and create a war with Iran and, possibly, with Lebanon.

Historically, Jews and Muslims have lived in peace in the lands now called Israel and Palestine. They had lived in peace there for thousands of years. The fighting began when the western powers kicked many Palestinians out, and onto that barren land called the Gaza Strip.

So why did they do that? After all, the transition to Britain, Canada, the U.S. would have been easy. Jews have been coming to Canada since General Wolfe. And immigration really picked up in the 1890s. Much the same was true for the U.S. As for having the room for them, even Britain has some room. After all, it accepted large numbers of Poles as British citizens in World War Two. Well into the 1950s, Israel's population was barely one and a half million. And even at that, many of those israelis were Palestinians. So why did the western powers create a new state that was obviously going to be a trouble spot?

Britain, the U.S. and Canada did it because they were profoundly anti-semitic. They had been anti-semitic for at least fifty years before they war – and they were still anti-semitic long after it. They didn't want any Jews coming in.

And, for the U.S., Israel could be a useful place from which to control the middle east and its oil. That's why there is so much turmoil.

“The evil that men do lives after them.”

In much the same way, Britain and the U.S. have been massively interfering in the middle east for a century. Under Bush, that interference expanded into the invasion of Iran, an invasion that succeeded only in massive destruction. Now, that destruction is spreading through the whole region.

Most politicians and news media tell us we are fighting terrorism, and trying to rebuild the homelands of millions of refugees. But we are doing no such thing. If we were, we would rejoice at the Russians giving help to Syria against ISIS. But we aren't rejoicing.

Of course not. The war has less to do with ISIS that it has to do with establishing American dominance over the oil wealth of the region. A Russian presence means sharing that dominance. And oil billionaires don't share.

All of this is helped by the birth of a new kind of anti-semitism. Just like Jews, and in many cases, more than Jews, arabs are semites. We accept the killing and displacement of millions of people because they are semites, and therefore inferior to us. The world hasn't changed as much as you might think since the 1930s. Norbert's contempt for the “lazy and shiftless” in New Brunswick is the same sort of thing in a local wrapping.

Europe is going to get much, much worse. In the first place, it cannot possibly manage the number of refugees it is getting, especially when most nations won't accept them at all. And, in the nations which are accepting, we are likely to see severe unrest, encouraged by the Charlie Hebdos of this world.

And Canada and the U.S. will do nothing significant to help. Anti-semitism in Canada still lives and is healthy.

I grew up and went to school in a district of immigrants. I'm glad I did. I learned the pleasure of knowing friends who were different from me and, as I learned, very much the same as me.

Oh, page B2 has a story about Donald Trump and Hillary Clinton. Don't waste time on it because it doesn't matter which wins. It doesn't matter who, of all those candidates, wins. Whoever wins will be personally owned by big money. And so will the Senate and the House of Representatives – and much of the judicial system. U.S. democracy is a thing of the past.

Canada is going in the same direction. We have a very serious problem with our form of democracy that makes it very, very difficult to get elected without the support of big money. And there's a price for that money.

Sept. 18: Let's start with China...

...because there isn't a whole lot to talk about in the Irving press.

China is the biggest country in the world, and it's (maybe) on track to have the most economic power and, with that, the most political and military power in the world within decades. That being so, it's odd to see it so rarely even mentioned in the Irving press. We've had far more news of a new hockey rink than on something that could shake our earth to its foundations. So, where to start?

Let's start with the word communism. Discussion of communism in China goes back well over a century. But it wasn't until the rise of Mao-Zedong to power after world war two that China had a government that called itself communist. - the CCP, Chinese Communist Party.

The jounalists around the world were upset about that because they understood that communism was evil. You know, like spitting on the sidewalk or enacting medicare.

In fact, communism is heavily based on Christian principles – like love thy neighbour, help the suffering – evil stuff like that. And that shouldn't be surprising because Karl Marx was a convert to Christianity. It's because it's so heavily based on Christian principles that I don't see it as being practical anywhere in the foreseeable future. There is no nation on earth I have ever heard of that is based on Christian principles.  Certainly, the western world has never been noted for its Christian behaviour.

And Chairman Mao had no religious principles of any sort. He called his party the Communist Party. But there was nothing communist about it. Mao was simply a dictator whose main contribution was to destroy all elements of the old, Chinese society, including Confucianism, That was essential because the old China had been too loosely organized and, despite its size, had, for over a century, routinely been beaten with ease by countries far, far smaller, and had been forced to open up its market to a series of murderous, greedy, and capitalist countries. It had been forced to accept the curse of opium. And forced to pay large sums if its sales were not up to the very high demands of the European conquerors.

Mao may be credited with laying the foundation of modern China. He made it a military power able to defend itself against all those nations – including Britain, Germany, the U.S. - who had exploited it through a century of what the Chinese still call “the great humiliation”.

His economic measures (which were neither capitalist nor communist) were a disaster, particularly in agriculture as some 30,000,000 people died of starvation. (But don't get smug about that. In proportion to the number of people available to die, we're way ahead of him, especially in the Middle East.)

His last years were largely wasted on showy but useless excitements like the cultural revolution. I remember older Chinese speaking to me of those years as a time they lived in fear of mobs, dictatorship, and survived on a diet of cabbage. In Guangchou, they took me to the river where, every day, they had watched the bodies floating downstream.

It wasn't until the late 1990s that China decided to copy the methods of western capitalism. It worked well, at first, with the greatest advancement of economic development ever seen. - but

-that was with a capitalism kept under control by a government that was still a 'communist' dictatorship (though the dictators referred to it as a socialist democracy. It was neither socialist nor democratic; but, economically the improvement for China was immense.)

Actually, it wasn't really capitalist, either. That short period of rapid growth was the result of a bureaucracy that kept a tight grip on the capitalists.  (Note that Norbert. The economic growth was created by very able bureaucrats.)

Then the disease of capitalism showed itself. Those who made money used it to corrupt and buy control of government leaders at all levels. Corruption became epidemic. And, as happens with capitalism, the emphasis shifted from the needs of the people to a single-minded desire for more wealth and power for the rich. The millions who had not profited from the brief economic boom were now left in permanent poverty. The wage gap, as happens in capitalism, grew to rival and even surpass that of the west. And now, it has the capitalist illness of a recession.

I have no idea where this will take us – or China. The country could break up – as it was doing a century ago. It could move into one of the most brutal civil wars this world has ever seen. Or it might go back to Mao's China with a government that stirs constant distractions and hysterias like 'the great leap forward' or the 'cultural revolution'.

Nor can we even guess what effect this will have on us – though, in this small world, it certainly will have an effect on us. We may be watching another step in the decline of the very idea of a nation. Already, the existence of nation states is becoming less useful in the eyes of the great corporations and the very rich. It's major purpose now is to provide them with military power whose use makes the rich richer, and using the news media to convince people this is patriotism. But, as the U.S. has shown in Syria, mercenaries can do this – and do it more cheaply.

China should be prominent in our news. But it rarely is.

____________________________________________________________________________

There's really not a whole lot to say about the Irving press. Section A has a big gob of sensationalism about the Oland trial. But little else. A story on B5 is intriguing, though. “New Brunswick sees New England's clean energy needs as an opportunity. That's nice. Clean energy is good. But linked to it is a deal to help New England set up pipelines for a mutlibillion dollar gas terminal to export gas from New England….

….but if you set up such a terminal, then surely the point of it is to burn more fossil fuel somewhere else. Forgive me if I don't see the point of using clean energy to help the world to use more dirty energy.

Justin Ray has a superb column on how we can help refugees. If Ray doesn't convince you, you might like a letter to the editor “NDP leader indulging in pointless opportunism.” The letter makes two, stunning points.

1. we did not create this refugee crisis.

2.Anyway, we are heavily invested in regaining the homelands of these refugees, so other countries should be the ones to help them.

I politely disagree. No, I'm damned if I'll be polite. This is a self-serving letter, and it shows no understanding whatever of what is happening.

1. We did create this crisis. Canada has gone every step of the way in following the U.S. and Britain into creating the chaos of the Middle East. We helped to create ISIS. The U.S. financed and equipped a phony rebellion against Syria long before there was an ISIS. It also created the 'terrorists' al Quaeda. That goes way back to before there was any problem in the region. We have supported the policies that have killed uncounted numbers in that region. We now support the mass murder going on in Yemen. And the US drone bombers have been murdering people there for over 20 years. We're in this up to our necks. We have created those refugees. We are responsible for the drowning of a young boy – and thousands of others. And we've done it all for oil billionaires.

2, We are heavily invested in regaining homelands? You count sending a handful of aircraft to machine gun and bomb helpless people in Libya as a heavy investment? You call sending six fighter-bombers to Iran a heavy investment? Macdonald's spends more than that every day to sell hambugers.

The U.S. with British help and some Canadian help are not fighting to save refugees. We're fighting to create refugees.

Now, go back and read Justin Ryan's column.

Alec Bruce is in top form with a column on the dark side of Harper's budget surplus. Well said.

But that's it for section A.

The only story in B section is on B5 “Ministers want universities to stop paying ex-presidents”. This is a very serious problem. University boards of governors are dominated by people with money. The only thing they know how to run is a business – and so they assume that everything is a business. But everything isn't a business. And universities are not a business.

About 20 years ago, I was surprised to be offered the presidency of my university by the chairman of the board. I didn't want to be an administrator of any sort. I was a teacher. That's when the chairman put his lawyers on me. They talked to me about the benefits of the job, and made me read a book on the application of business practices in universities.

I was stunned. My salary would be tripled – at least. With handsome increases every year. And, no matter what kind of a disaster I might prove to be, I would get that for the rest of my life – even if they fired me. (In fact, the president at the time was being fired for some irregular practices. And I expect he did keep his salary for life.)

I refused though, admittedly, at the same time kicking myself.

And that's only a small taste of the damage that is being done by university boards of governors that are way too deep in business methods (abuses), and quite ignorant of education.

_________________________________________________________________________________

Now, wash that Irving press taste out of your mounts, and read these sites.

The U.S., which just want to help people, has spent $500,000,000 dollars to recruit and train Syrian rebels. So, check this from the New York Times.

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/17/world/middleeast/isis-isil-syrians-senate-armed-services-committee.html?_r=1

Karl Nerenberg, now retired, is still one of the best political commenators in Canada. Here is his take on the leaders' debate.

http://rabble.ca/blogs/bloggers/karl-nerenberg/2015/09/mulcair-was-only-leader-to-speak-seriously-about-environment#.VfwlvGTtKAE.gmail

Despite the dodgy title of this next source, I've generally found it to be intelligent and truthful.

http://russia-insider.com/en/politics/stephen-cohen-ukraine-situation-more-dangerous-middle-east-video/ri9709

There's another report on the world getting warmer. But I scarcely need to tell that to anyone in Moncton You think you're seeing refugees now? Wait  (probably not long) until you see farmland turning to desert, sea life disappearing due to toxic waste and warming water. But don't worry. The New Brunswick government is looking out for you. It's selling renewable energy to New England so it can sell more fossil fuel to Europe.